What if we use the little fetus bones to replace some of the smaller adult bones, and take those smaller adult bones to replace some bigger adult bones, and so on until we have a big ol’ femur?
The word average can technically refer to arithmetic mean, median, mode, or range. That’s why you were probably taught them at the same time. That’s also why tests like the ACT tend to have a * at the top that says something along the lines of “Unless otherwise stated, the word average indicates arithmetic mean.”
Because mean is the most common form of average. But, for example, when referring to salaries, the words median and average are often used interchangeably.
Pregnant women as well. Now their human body contains two skeletons, thus raising the average number of bones in a human body by a considerable amount. I would guess there’s probably more pregnant women than there are people missing limbs.
Traditionaly when talking about the skeleton, we refer to the adult skeleton seeing as an adolescent skeleton have more bones that then fuse. I agree that we need to take that into account, but I don’t believe the statement would be referring to an adolescent skeleton.
I appreciate what you’re saying here - people come in all shapes and sizes, with different abilities, limb counts, etc. Every one is a human being deserving respect and dignity.
But OP didn’t say “a complete human being” - it said “a complete human skeleton.”
If an individual is missing a limb, by birth or by accident, they don’t have a complete skeleton. It’s a plain fact. Doesn’t mean they are any less human.
Half the bones in a adult human are in the hands and feet. I don’t know if there’s enough missing limbs to offset fetus skeletons but I there’s a whole lot of bones missing in a double amputee.
Babies have up to 270 bones at birth (instead of 206 in an adult), which makes up for at least one double amputee (hands have 27 bones and feet have 26 each).
I read (and sleep) on my side. I prop up the Kindle with a pillow and have it tilted something like 35° so it’s more comfortable. So far it’s the best setup I’ve had.
i like to make sequels every year or so. i’m currently on “liked songs 4”. it gives me the chaos of a liked songs playlist, but with the comfort that only recently liked songs will play. (i will never unlike a song)
This is my strategy too, except I make new playlists every January and seperate the songs by year. So I have 2017, 2018, 2019, etc playlists of songs that came out that year. Then I go through the songs from that year and add the absolute bangers to an ultimate playlist. I also never unlike a song.
When I was first developing my music taste I did this too. I had “songs I like 2018 edition”, “songs I like 2019 edition” then discovered Spotify and everything morphed into a singular “liked songs” playlist :D
They’re definitely cringe, but there is a healthy dose of self awareness usually. Also, like any group, some will be “karens” and they give the group a bad name.
I don’t think dubious scrappers taking obviously stolen copper are paying fair market value. You’d have to throw in a vcr or two amd haggle a bit to get enough for a dub.
I know. I never traded scrap, but I guess many or most won’t trade in so low numbers, I’d assume professional scrap traders have a minimum amount to not waste their time.
A pile of speed camera guts, 10 meters of 900-pair phone line, a grounding grid from a substation, and some coils from an orphanage’s air conditioner, probably.
lemmyshitpost
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.