Scovillain Laboratory

Scovillain Laboratory - Quotes

Biology topics
The difference between ice and snow - is a matter of architecture.
If the police should not spank your kids, then you think the police should not spank other people's kids?
I don't get women who say no woman should have to feel like a murderer, from having an abortion. What's wrong with having an abortion, but still feeling like a murderer?
When people tell you doing y is better than doing x, therefore, you should only do y, or, you should do x and y?
Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change.
Stress is what causes people to be organized.
Life is about finding a contingency plan.
The whole point of being a Republican is being able to survive in capitalism environments.
I never understood the connection between being a Christian, and not wanting to pay taxes.
Not all Democrats are intelligent enough to start their own business.
People change the topic tend to do it only when it benefits them.
If they try to strike fear in you, then you're worth it to them.
Gangs want to be able to kill your kids or and family, and set up an environment where you're afraid to snitch on them.
No raindrop considers itself responsible for the flood.
Animals have no concept of time.
If you like your ex like you do a sister, then you can be happy that she found someone else.
Families are for people who can't take care of themselves. Or in other words, if you can take care of yourself, you don't need family.
But unfortunately, family is the main reason why people defend criminals.
Insecurity: if men were surprised by something, should they hide being surprised? Or should they not be ashamed to show being surprised?
I'm a firm believer that when debating racial crime statistics, you should never compare mentally ill people of a race, with the non-mentally ill people of another race.
If you make a mistake and forget to fix that mistake, then that is another mistake.
I firmly believe, and have seen it all the time, that people will value their policies more than even if it causes others to be emotionally hurt. For example, suppose there's 2 companies Group A and B, and an incident happens between the 2. And when you go to Group A, they will say "Unfortunately, we can't give that info out. You are welcome to go to Group B to try to get that info, but you can't get that info from us."
Nothing is free in life, except conversations with Democratic homeless.
Are people more likely to answer a question, if you gave them multiple choice answers, than if you did not?
I think when you meet people for the 1st time, try not to develop a personality that if something offends you, you would seem like you would take offense to it. After all, there's this belief, "if people can't handle the truth then you don't tell them the truth."
(To homeless solicitors that insist you answer their question) don't ask questions you don't want the answers to.
Multi-variable thinking: When a White person makes a 9-1-1 call that led to a Black police officer killing a Black person, who do Black people hate more - the person who made the 9-1-1 call, or the officer that killed the person?
Should people who are against snitching, be happy when the police solve murders?
Emotional arguments: can we have a police board, that votes on police misconduct, where it doesn't matter if the members have family killed by the police before?
Who has it worse: people who grew up where daddy was cheating on mommy, mommy doesn't know about it, and the kid has to decide to tell mommy about it, or where mommy was cheating on daddy, daddy doesn't know about it, and the kid has to decide to tell daddy about it?
Who would Republican women rather make bets against, Republican men, or Democratic women?
I believe in attempting to try to improve someone, even if it means they will take offense to it, or make it a racial thing.
Would you rather associate with people who are actions speak louder than words, or words speak louder than actions?
(This was a common quote in the mid-2000s) Having a smoking and non-smoking section in a restaurant, is like having a urinating, and non-urinating section, in a swimming pool.
(This was due to the Calabasas, California law, that took effect on March 17, 2006.).
Multi-variable thinking: If a law office were inside an abandoned factory, would that make it an illegal law office?
(The answer is generally no, to the extent that law offices are not bound by zoning requirements.).
Multi-variable thinking: How do families of Blacks that were murdered, feel when someone snitches on who killed their family, but, that person was tortured by White police officers, in order to snitch on the unsolved murder?
Karma is a double-edged sword. Karma means God can send a White police officer to kill a Black person, for particular crimes he could have done, and we call it "karma."
Double-edged sword: What are some examples where some people say X is good, because they're not thinking of Y, so if you told them Y, now they remain silent about X is good.
Perspective: how often does a Black or Hispanic person get pulled over by White police officers for a traffic violation, and when the officers arrive, the drivers say "Greetings officers, I hope you guys are Republicans, as Republicans believe in gun rights."
Complementary pairs:
If apologizing is not a big deal then asking for an apology is also not a big deal.
If it's impossible to determine accuracy, then it's also impossible to determine inaccuracy.
Multi-variable thinking: when a White police officer kills a Black person (or beats the case for it), should Black women cry to Black men about it, should Black men cry to Black women about it, or should they both cry together about it?
Risk aversion: If there are 2 parts to an instruction, and I did part A, I would not ask someone else to do part B because there is a possibility that they will do a mistake. And if someone else did part A, I would not do part B without their knowing because there is a possibility that I will do a mistake.
Don't reply to a comment you took offense to and can't disprove, otherwise you're emotionally hurt by it.
The difference between an emotionally hurt person and a non-emotionally hurt person, is that the non-emotionally hurt person can say you're wrong and show why you're wrong, or say your example sucks and can provide a better example, whereas the emotionally hurt person can only say you're wrong.
What we learn from history is that people don't learn from history.
As they say in the jungle, we don't call the police here in the jungle.
The difference between a forest and a jungle, is that people call the police in the forest, and people don't call the police here in the jungle (kill or be killed). In the forest, people want to regulate meme stocks, to prevent hedge funds from losing money, but in the jungle, people don't believe the stock market should be regulated. Forests believe in minimum wage laws and may even try to support maximum wage laws, whereas jungles don't believe in minimum wage or maximum wage laws. Forests are socialism whereas jungles are capitalism.
Would you trust a gang leader, who installs surveillance cameras on his property?
When the police kills someone, I think the real question the women want to know is what was the officer's birthday, and then make judgments based on the officer's astrological signs.
(Insecurity 2: corporations) Suppose a lawsuit between Company A and Company B was reported, Company A lost however many millions, and that stuff is documented. And in another lawsuit between Company A and Company C, Company A also lost however many millions. But if you go to Company A and ask "what's the biggest amount of money you guys ever lost in a lawsuit?" you find it positive if Company A is insecure and refuses to disclose that kind of information?
Relative perspective: Gangs can care more about their members than churches do to their members. When a gang member is killed or arrested, the gang uses gang-money to pay for the members funeral fees, or lawyer fees. Churches don't seem to pay for their members hospital bills (using church money). When a gas station clerk is murdered, the gas station shortly reopens up, hires a replacement employee, and does not contribute to the deceased employees funeral bills.
(Continued) Police departments however, care more about their members than gangs, churches, and corporations do. When police officers are killed, police departments, or the memorial part of them, offers ransom money to find the killer, which is not something gangs or churches do when their members are killed, or gas stations do when their clerks are killed. However, this is still a bit apples and oranges comparison, as police departments are solely paid on tax payer money, while gangs, churches, and corporations are not.
The 2 sides of a story: when a gang member is killed, whether by rival gangs or by the police, the Republican-like people will ask the family to send a photo of him holding guns, while the Democratic-like people will ask the family to send graduation photos. Should the family do both?
If you walk into a business, such as a restaurant, in which the business is within a gang's territory, and the color of your clothing is offensive to the gangs, even if the nationality of the staff of the business are the same nationality as the gangs, should the business be morally obligated to tell you that the color of your clothing is offensive to the gangs in that neighborhood?
(Insecurity 3): What if a Muslim likes blue and white more than green and red, or a practicing Jewish person likes green and red more than blue and white, should they be insecure about that, or should they not care what others think?
In the Internet environments, you still have 2 different schools of thought: the capitalist and the socialist. 1 believes in if someone posts something that is only offensive to some people, their post should be deleted and they could be banned from it, while the other does not. 1 believes in banning people, in which you know you are banned, while the other believes in shadow-bans, which is where you aren't notified that you're banned, and only you can see your posts. And, depending on the architecture, that when you are unbanned, it is okay for others to notify you you're unbanned, while the others are willing to ban someone for notifying you that you were unbanned.
A battery in equilibrium is a dead battery. So the most important thing in electrochemistry, is to know the voltage of the battery. Figuring out how efficient a reaction is, is not as important.
People who get bullied by corporations, then cry to the government about it, tend to end up as socialists. People who were bullied by the government, then got saved by corporations, tend to end up as capitalists.
Republicans and the BLM people have something in common when they both support capitalism. For corporations, capitalism means no government intervention. For the streets, capitalism means no government intervention, though in this case by government, we mean the police. So the streets are free to rob and murder each other, without police intervention, as corporations are free to do as they please, without government intervention.
Here's an article on how private equities are destroying the U.S.
When the CEOs of competitor corporations, such as oil companies, collude with other CEOs to keep prices high, only the Democrats complain the most. When the government raises taxes, or forces the utility fees to go up because of an incentive where they want you to convert to solar panels or electric vehicles, only the Republicans complain the most. But aren't these 2 in the same good-evil spectrum?
The fun part of being a victim is when you have the intelligence of a scammer. You see how scammers are victimizing people like you, you see how they profit, and so you learn from observations and get ideas from it.
If Group A is against X, but when X happens, causes Group A to do X more, and if Group B is against Y, but when Y happens, causes Group B to do Y less, then, without knowing who Group A and B are, and without knowing what X and Y are, who are you more sympathetic to and supportive of?
1 of the differences between upper-class people and lower-class people is, when you're riding the public bus, and the bus operator stops the bus because someone skipped paying their fare, the lower-class people blame the bus driver for stopping the bus more, while upper-class people blame the person who didn't pay their fare for slowing down the bus more.
The people who are responsible for not getting rid of a plague, are just as responsible as the people who created the plague.
The vast majority of people in this world are the usual "if you know, then you know" type of people.
If on the Internet, you were a Republican debating with a liberal, or a liberal debating with a Republican, and you made a spelling error, and they reply back with only pointing out your grammar, then if you deleted your post, and this time reposted the same thing, only without the spelling error, what percent of the time will they reply back and continue the conversation? What ever happened to the idea of "I know you made a spelling error, but I can still continue the conversation."
(Insecurity 4 and emotionally-hurt 3): You don't argue A to then argue B, and you don't argue B if pointed out that A is fallacious. If you wanted to say B, you say B directly, don't say A, and then wait to later say B.
I'm not 1 of those people who mingles on a smartphone while I walk. I have to constantly look at the ground, to make sure I don't step on dog doo.
(Insecurity 5): Can you ask an employee a question that is so good, that not only will the employee just redirect you to another employee that they think might know the answer to your question, but they will ask the other employees themselves the question, for both of you?
Suppose in a coachhouse there's a common public dining area, and with a social gathering, a 12-pack of beer was noticed to be missing. And so, the person who bought the beer may suggest that we check on everyone's refrigerator for the possibility of finding out who stole it. So, 1 type of guy will go "Sure, you can check my room and fridge" and another type of guy will go "No, this doesn't give you the right to check my room or fridge." So, which type of guy do you associate with the Democrat type of guy, and which did you associate with the Republican type of guy?
Just because you are offended, doesn't mean you are right.
In most lawsuits in civil court, if the lawsuit is filed before the statute of limitation, they deny your claims, and if the lawsuit is filed after the statute of limitation, then they argue your lawsuit expired and should be dismissed, without denying your claims.
(Insecurity 6): Sometimes when replying to people on the Internet, you're better off taking it more personal. Instead of replying "Here are the 3 reasons why you're wrong," you can reply "There's 3 reasons why you're wrong, would you like to see the evidence on why you're wrong?" and if they don't respond, keep tagging them occasionally until you quit, or until they block you.
When someone commits a crime in an office building or college campus, should people be more outraged of the crime they committed, or more outraged that the person illegally trespassed into the property?
(Insecurity 7): Should there be a point where a person is so bad, that they are not ashamed to acknowledge being the aggressor? (What about if that person is representing a political party?).
(Insecurity 8): If an outsider or customer reported an employee of a company or government, and the company or government eventually reached a decision and disciplined that employee, should they notify the outsider or customer about their decision? (This is in regards to a 911-operator not taking a call seriously, and the person later commits murders, and people want to go after the 911 operator.).
There's nothing wrong with poor people having pride. That is, they refuse service to their customers, and suggest their competitors. (From the 2002 movie Summer Catch.).
What kind of category should we classify people who tell you your ideas or examples suck, and when you ask them for their ideas or examples, they don't respond?
(Insecurity 9): Insecurity is a deep issue. Imagine if someone openly tried to advertise and negotiate on someone else's platform (such as a Reddit forum or Facebook group), and they made lots and lots of money from it. Will the platform moderators take offense? Will they restrict, arguing "you made too much money." This is of course, an example of a prank to play to such a community, where personA and personB both join the community, personA offers money for something, and personB immediately offers to buy that something, then do we expect both personA and personB to be banned, when their discussion is in line as to what that community is about?
About.Us

Microbiology
Biochemistry
Botany
Genetics
Anatomy
Nutrition
Research Trivia

Chemistry topics Quotes

Chemicals
Reactions
Liquids
Geometry
Polymers
Environmental Chemistry
Photochemistry
Gemology
Cosmetics
Research Trivia

Physics topics Affiliates

Electricity
Electronics
Materials
Particle Physics
Auto technology
Astronomy
Field Theory
Hydraulics
Research Trivia

Biology-Chemistry

Toxicology
Pharmacology
Medicinal Chemistry

Chemistry-Physics

Colligative properties
Spectroscopy
Material Science
Magnetism
Quantum Physics

Physics-Biology

Photometry
Photobiology

Other

Meteorology
Computer Science
USA-Finance
Mobile technology
Mathematical concepts
USA-Crime
Telecommunications
Quantum computing

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_

Biology topics	The difference between ice and snow - is a matter of architecture. If the police should not spank your kids, then you think the police should not spank other people's kids? I don't get women who say no woman should have to feel like a murderer, from having an abortion. What's wrong with having an abortion, but still feeling like a murderer? When people tell you doing y is better than doing x, therefore, you should only do y, or, you should do x and y? Intelligence is the ability to adapt to change. Stress is what causes people to be organized. Life is about finding a contingency plan. The whole point of being a Republican is being able to survive in capitalism environments. I never understood the connection between being a Christian, and not wanting to pay taxes. Not all Democrats are intelligent enough to start their own business. People change the topic tend to do it only when it benefits them. If they try to strike fear in you, then you're worth it to them. Gangs want to be able to kill your kids or and family, and set up an environment where you're afraid to snitch on them. No raindrop considers itself responsible for the flood. Animals have no concept of time. If you like your ex like you do a sister, then you can be happy that she found someone else. Families are for people who can't take care of themselves. Or in other words, if you can take care of yourself, you don't need family. But unfortunately, family is the main reason why people defend criminals. Insecurity: if men were surprised by something, should they hide being surprised? Or should they not be ashamed to show being surprised? I'm a firm believer that when debating racial crime statistics, you should never compare mentally ill people of a race, with the non-mentally ill people of another race. If you make a mistake and forget to fix that mistake, then that is another mistake. I firmly believe, and have seen it all the time, that people will value their policies more than even if it causes others to be emotionally hurt. For example, suppose there's 2 companies Group A and B, and an incident happens between the 2. And when you go to Group A, they will say "Unfortunately, we can't give that info out. You are welcome to go to Group B to try to get that info, but you can't get that info from us." Nothing is free in life, except conversations with Democratic homeless. Are people more likely to answer a question, if you gave them multiple choice answers, than if you did not? I think when you meet people for the 1st time, try not to develop a personality that if something offends you, you would seem like you would take offense to it. After all, there's this belief, "if people can't handle the truth then you don't tell them the truth." (To homeless solicitors that insist you answer their question) don't ask questions you don't want the answers to. Multi-variable thinking: When a White person makes a 9-1-1 call that led to a Black police officer killing a Black person, who do Black people hate more - the person who made the 9-1-1 call, or the officer that killed the person? Should people who are against snitching, be happy when the police solve murders? Emotional arguments: can we have a police board, that votes on police misconduct, where it doesn't matter if the members have family killed by the police before? Who has it worse: people who grew up where daddy was cheating on mommy, mommy doesn't know about it, and the kid has to decide to tell mommy about it, or where mommy was cheating on daddy, daddy doesn't know about it, and the kid has to decide to tell daddy about it? Who would Republican women rather make bets against, Republican men, or Democratic women? I believe in attempting to try to improve someone, even if it means they will take offense to it, or make it a racial thing. Would you rather associate with people who are actions speak louder than words, or words speak louder than actions? (This was a common quote in the mid-2000s) Having a smoking and non-smoking section in a restaurant, is like having a urinating, and non-urinating section, in a swimming pool. (This was due to the Calabasas, California law, that took effect on March 17, 2006.). Multi-variable thinking: If a law office were inside an abandoned factory, would that make it an illegal law office? (The answer is generally no, to the extent that law offices are not bound by zoning requirements.). Multi-variable thinking: How do families of Blacks that were murdered, feel when someone snitches on who killed their family, but, that person was tortured by White police officers, in order to snitch on the unsolved murder? Karma is a double-edged sword. Karma means God can send a White police officer to kill a Black person, for particular crimes he could have done, and we call it "karma." Double-edged sword: What are some examples where some people say X is good, because they're not thinking of Y, so if you told them Y, now they remain silent about X is good. Perspective: how often does a Black or Hispanic person get pulled over by White police officers for a traffic violation, and when the officers arrive, the drivers say "Greetings officers, I hope you guys are Republicans, as Republicans believe in gun rights." Complementary pairs: If apologizing is not a big deal then asking for an apology is also not a big deal. If it's impossible to determine accuracy, then it's also impossible to determine inaccuracy. Multi-variable thinking: when a White police officer kills a Black person (or beats the case for it), should Black women cry to Black men about it, should Black men cry to Black women about it, or should they both cry together about it? Risk aversion: If there are 2 parts to an instruction, and I did part A, I would not ask someone else to do part B because there is a possibility that they will do a mistake. And if someone else did part A, I would not do part B without their knowing because there is a possibility that I will do a mistake. Don't reply to a comment you took offense to and can't disprove, otherwise you're emotionally hurt by it. The difference between an emotionally hurt person and a non-emotionally hurt person, is that the non-emotionally hurt person can say you're wrong and show why you're wrong, or say your example sucks and can provide a better example, whereas the emotionally hurt person can only say you're wrong. What we learn from history is that people don't learn from history. As they say in the jungle, we don't call the police here in the jungle. The difference between a forest and a jungle, is that people call the police in the forest, and people don't call the police here in the jungle (kill or be killed). In the forest, people want to regulate meme stocks, to prevent hedge funds from losing money, but in the jungle, people don't believe the stock market should be regulated. Forests believe in minimum wage laws and may even try to support maximum wage laws, whereas jungles don't believe in minimum wage or maximum wage laws. Forests are socialism whereas jungles are capitalism. Would you trust a gang leader, who installs surveillance cameras on his property? When the police kills someone, I think the real question the women want to know is what was the officer's birthday, and then make judgments based on the officer's astrological signs. (Insecurity 2: corporations) Suppose a lawsuit between Company A and Company B was reported, Company A lost however many millions, and that stuff is documented. And in another lawsuit between Company A and Company C, Company A also lost however many millions. But if you go to Company A and ask "what's the biggest amount of money you guys ever lost in a lawsuit?" you find it positive if Company A is insecure and refuses to disclose that kind of information? Relative perspective: Gangs can care more about their members than churches do to their members. When a gang member is killed or arrested, the gang uses gang-money to pay for the members funeral fees, or lawyer fees. Churches don't seem to pay for their members hospital bills (using church money). When a gas station clerk is murdered, the gas station shortly reopens up, hires a replacement employee, and does not contribute to the deceased employees funeral bills. (Continued) Police departments however, care more about their members than gangs, churches, and corporations do. When police officers are killed, police departments, or the memorial part of them, offers ransom money to find the killer, which is not something gangs or churches do when their members are killed, or gas stations do when their clerks are killed. However, this is still a bit apples and oranges comparison, as police departments are solely paid on tax payer money, while gangs, churches, and corporations are not. The 2 sides of a story: when a gang member is killed, whether by rival gangs or by the police, the Republican-like people will ask the family to send a photo of him holding guns, while the Democratic-like people will ask the family to send graduation photos. Should the family do both? If you walk into a business, such as a restaurant, in which the business is within a gang's territory, and the color of your clothing is offensive to the gangs, even if the nationality of the staff of the business are the same nationality as the gangs, should the business be morally obligated to tell you that the color of your clothing is offensive to the gangs in that neighborhood? (Insecurity 3): What if a Muslim likes blue and white more than green and red, or a practicing Jewish person likes green and red more than blue and white, should they be insecure about that, or should they not care what others think? In the Internet environments, you still have 2 different schools of thought: the capitalist and the socialist. 1 believes in if someone posts something that is only offensive to some people, their post should be deleted and they could be banned from it, while the other does not. 1 believes in banning people, in which you know you are banned, while the other believes in shadow-bans, which is where you aren't notified that you're banned, and only you can see your posts. And, depending on the architecture, that when you are unbanned, it is okay for others to notify you you're unbanned, while the others are willing to ban someone for notifying you that you were unbanned. A battery in equilibrium is a dead battery. So the most important thing in electrochemistry, is to know the voltage of the battery. Figuring out how efficient a reaction is, is not as important. People who get bullied by corporations, then cry to the government about it, tend to end up as socialists. People who were bullied by the government, then got saved by corporations, tend to end up as capitalists. Republicans and the BLM people have something in common when they both support capitalism. For corporations, capitalism means no government intervention. For the streets, capitalism means no government intervention, though in this case by government, we mean the police. So the streets are free to rob and murder each other, without police intervention, as corporations are free to do as they please, without government intervention. Here's an article on how private equities are destroying the U.S. When the CEOs of competitor corporations, such as oil companies, collude with other CEOs to keep prices high, only the Democrats complain the most. When the government raises taxes, or forces the utility fees to go up because of an incentive where they want you to convert to solar panels or electric vehicles, only the Republicans complain the most. But aren't these 2 in the same good-evil spectrum? The fun part of being a victim is when you have the intelligence of a scammer. You see how scammers are victimizing people like you, you see how they profit, and so you learn from observations and get ideas from it. If Group A is against X, but when X happens, causes Group A to do X more, and if Group B is against Y, but when Y happens, causes Group B to do Y less, then, without knowing who Group A and B are, and without knowing what X and Y are, who are you more sympathetic to and supportive of? 1 of the differences between upper-class people and lower-class people is, when you're riding the public bus, and the bus operator stops the bus because someone skipped paying their fare, the lower-class people blame the bus driver for stopping the bus more, while upper-class people blame the person who didn't pay their fare for slowing down the bus more. The people who are responsible for not getting rid of a plague, are just as responsible as the people who created the plague. The vast majority of people in this world are the usual "if you know, then you know" type of people. If on the Internet, you were a Republican debating with a liberal, or a liberal debating with a Republican, and you made a spelling error, and they reply back with only pointing out your grammar, then if you deleted your post, and this time reposted the same thing, only without the spelling error, what percent of the time will they reply back and continue the conversation? What ever happened to the idea of "I know you made a spelling error, but I can still continue the conversation." (Insecurity 4 and emotionally-hurt 3): You don't argue A to then argue B, and you don't argue B if pointed out that A is fallacious. If you wanted to say B, you say B directly, don't say A, and then wait to later say B. I'm not 1 of those people who mingles on a smartphone while I walk. I have to constantly look at the ground, to make sure I don't step on dog doo. (Insecurity 5): Can you ask an employee a question that is so good, that not only will the employee just redirect you to another employee that they think might know the answer to your question, but they will ask the other employees themselves the question, for both of you? Suppose in a coachhouse there's a common public dining area, and with a social gathering, a 12-pack of beer was noticed to be missing. And so, the person who bought the beer may suggest that we check on everyone's refrigerator for the possibility of finding out who stole it. So, 1 type of guy will go "Sure, you can check my room and fridge" and another type of guy will go "No, this doesn't give you the right to check my room or fridge." So, which type of guy do you associate with the Democrat type of guy, and which did you associate with the Republican type of guy? Just because you are offended, doesn't mean you are right. In most lawsuits in civil court, if the lawsuit is filed before the statute of limitation, they deny your claims, and if the lawsuit is filed after the statute of limitation, then they argue your lawsuit expired and should be dismissed, without denying your claims. (Insecurity 6): Sometimes when replying to people on the Internet, you're better off taking it more personal. Instead of replying "Here are the 3 reasons why you're wrong," you can reply "There's 3 reasons why you're wrong, would you like to see the evidence on why you're wrong?" and if they don't respond, keep tagging them occasionally until you quit, or until they block you. When someone commits a crime in an office building or college campus, should people be more outraged of the crime they committed, or more outraged that the person illegally trespassed into the property? (Insecurity 7): Should there be a point where a person is so bad, that they are not ashamed to acknowledge being the aggressor? (What about if that person is representing a political party?). (Insecurity 8): If an outsider or customer reported an employee of a company or government, and the company or government eventually reached a decision and disciplined that employee, should they notify the outsider or customer about their decision? (This is in regards to a 911-operator not taking a call seriously, and the person later commits murders, and people want to go after the 911 operator.). There's nothing wrong with poor people having pride. That is, they refuse service to their customers, and suggest their competitors. (From the 2002 movie Summer Catch.). What kind of category should we classify people who tell you your ideas or examples suck, and when you ask them for their ideas or examples, they don't respond? (Insecurity 9): Insecurity is a deep issue. Imagine if someone openly tried to advertise and negotiate on someone else's platform (such as a Reddit forum or Facebook group), and they made lots and lots of money from it. Will the platform moderators take offense? Will they restrict, arguing "you made too much money." This is of course, an example of a prank to play to such a community, where personA and personB both join the community, personA offers money for something, and personB immediately offers to buy that something, then do we expect both personA and personB to be banned, when their discussion is in line as to what that community is about?	About.Us
Microbiology Biochemistry Botany Genetics Anatomy Nutrition Research Trivia
Chemistry topics		Quotes
Chemicals Reactions Liquids Geometry Polymers Environmental Chemistry Photochemistry Gemology Cosmetics Research Trivia
Physics topics		Affiliates
Electricity Electronics Materials Particle Physics Auto technology Astronomy Field Theory Hydraulics Research Trivia
Biology-Chemistry
Toxicology Pharmacology Medicinal Chemistry
Chemistry-Physics
Colligative properties Spectroscopy Material Science Magnetism Quantum Physics
Physics-Biology
Photometry Photobiology
Other
Meteorology Computer Science USA-Finance Mobile technology Mathematical concepts USA-Crime Telecommunications Quantum computing
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _