Iamforever
Banned
im confused. is this an admission or what? if this is in fact your real age, you are not allowed to be on a porn forum.
Dean's List
- Thread starter Ichigo
- Start date
im confused. is this an admission or what? if this is in fact your real age, you are not allowed to be on a porn forum.
member006
Closed Account
Thats what I said in my above post. :dunno:
While your posts might be all knowing Prof. His age is my point, he shouldn't be here. Not that his age makes him know more or less.
LL
Iamforever
Banned
I only know what I know ... plus, confused kids ...
And as I always say, don't believe a word I say, but ask others who are also engineers if I am indeed true.
Although don't ask merely technicians or technologists who did not study traditional engineering when it's a factor.
E.g., the prior thread on the moon landings being faked -- unless someone studied traditional engineering, they typically haven't ever studied dynamics (engineering mechanics).
I don't hold my engineering degree over anyone, and God knows now that I'm not doing aerospace work anymore, I don't use 95% of what I learned in college.
You don't have to have an engineering degree to do technical work and I've known technologists who were much better hires than degreed engineers.
In fact, many only had high school diplomas and didn't even go through a BSET (engineering technology) program.
But I've dealt with many his age in late high school.
They hear many things from many people, but most don't consider their circumstances.
The problem with kids are never the kids, but all the endless, confusing advise they have to sort through, much of which is often not applicable to them.
No, no, I only know what I know in certain areas.
And as I always say, don't believe a word I say, but ask others who are also engineers if I am indeed true.
Although don't ask merely technicians or technologists who did not study traditional engineering when it's a factor.
E.g., the prior thread on the moon landings being faked -- unless someone studied traditional engineering, they typically haven't ever studied dynamics (engineering mechanics).
I don't hold my engineering degree over anyone, and God knows now that I'm not doing aerospace work anymore, I don't use 95% of what I learned in college.
You don't have to have an engineering degree to do technical work and I've known technologists who were much better hires than degreed engineers.
In fact, many only had high school diplomas and didn't even go through a BSET (engineering technology) program.
Well, he is a bit naive.
But I've dealt with many his age in late high school.
They hear many things from many people, but most don't consider their circumstances.
The problem with kids are never the kids, but all the endless, confusing advise they have to sort through, much of which is often not applicable to them.
Well Prof. V I didn't read your essay of a response, especially since LL made a good point : "but do you really think arguing this on a adult porn forum is the answer?". Which is true, why should I sit here and argue with someone who doesn't know what they are talking about? Not alone where I'm on the internet and don't even have to read peoples responses, which just waistes their on time.
I'm 17 now (turn 18 in t minus 5 days). Good luck to you though Prof. V on your life. Looks like you will be getting a lot of places with that mind set.
I'm 17 now (turn 18 in t minus 5 days). Good luck to you though Prof. V on your life. Looks like you will be getting a lot of places with that mind set.
Obviously! But then, why oh why did you choose to differ with me?
Explain to me ... really, I mean ... WTF? :rofl:
If you really are 17 and considering engineering, I hope you learned something.
After you already started arguing.
So, I'm sorry, you look like an ass right along with me! :rofl:
So no ex-post-facto re-writing of the thread dude, YOU decided to start the debate.
So then WHY did you start debating me?
It's takes 2 people to argue or haven't you matured to the point that you recognize that yet (I find it takes many people to age 21)?
Sound like you want it to continue?
Dude, I helped dozens upon dozens of young, confused people like yourself about a decade ago.
And I still for the kids of people I work with today.
Your choice.
Let people decide for themselves what they will do or how they will react.
That's yet another tell-tale reason you are 17.
I'm in my mid-30s, and I already have.
I'm one of the top consultants in the US for my field, even though I only use about 5% of my degree now for it.
Sigh, how I do miss the the more pure, engineering days of NASA and military primes though ... sigh.
Who keep on saying that I'm interested in engineering? Where did this come up?
"After you already started arguing.
So, I'm sorry, you look like an ass right along with me!
So no ex-post-facto re-writing of the thread dude, YOU decided to start the debate."
Actually, you are the one going off babbling about engineering, I never said anything about engineering. I asked for any ones GPA if they are still in college, which I hope you aren't, right? Oh wait.... :rofl:
"So then WHY did you start debating me?
It's takes 2 people to argue"
I didn't start debating with you, your lack of communication skills developed viscous through the first posts about me wanting to be a engineer, also you say it takes two, no? So why did you stoop so lo to a 17 year old and debate? Oh wait... :rofl:
"Dude, I helped dozens upon dozens of young, confused people like yourself about a decade ago.
And I still for the kids of people I work with today."
That's great, but I'm not confused, your statements sound confused, I can get thousands of engineers, and profs to agree.
"Your choice.
Let people decide for themselves what they will do or how they will react.
That's yet another tell-tale reason you are 17."
Doesn't make sense, wait aren't you supposed to be the bigger man... and just go to a new URL?
"I'm in my mid-30s, and I already have.
I'm one of the top consultants in the US for my field, even though I only use about 5% of my degree now for it.
Sigh, how I do miss the the more pure, engineering days of NASA and military primes though ... sigh."
So that means you are most likely double my age, no? Shame on your part. Getting places? As in getting on a porn forum, and starting senseless irrelevant debates with 17 year olds? Yeah... how old are you again?
Oh, and for the record. The internet is the home of lies, so trying to assemblage corporal words to boast your non imaginative "online status", it's worthless. NASA, and military primes, ooohhhh.... *cross fingers*
Oh, and don't assume I'm enticing another debate, which is what you just did. Consider this my enclosed "Have a nice day" Oh wait... :rofl:
So, I'm sorry, you look like an ass right along with me!
So no ex-post-facto re-writing of the thread dude, YOU decided to start the debate."
Actually, you are the one going off babbling about engineering, I never said anything about engineering. I asked for any ones GPA if they are still in college, which I hope you aren't, right? Oh wait.... :rofl:
"So then WHY did you start debating me?
It's takes 2 people to argue"
I didn't start debating with you, your lack of communication skills developed viscous through the first posts about me wanting to be a engineer, also you say it takes two, no? So why did you stoop so lo to a 17 year old and debate? Oh wait... :rofl:
"Dude, I helped dozens upon dozens of young, confused people like yourself about a decade ago.
And I still for the kids of people I work with today."
That's great, but I'm not confused, your statements sound confused, I can get thousands of engineers, and profs to agree.
"Your choice.
Let people decide for themselves what they will do or how they will react.
That's yet another tell-tale reason you are 17."
Doesn't make sense, wait aren't you supposed to be the bigger man... and just go to a new URL?
"I'm in my mid-30s, and I already have.
I'm one of the top consultants in the US for my field, even though I only use about 5% of my degree now for it.
Sigh, how I do miss the the more pure, engineering days of NASA and military primes though ... sigh."
So that means you are most likely double my age, no? Shame on your part. Getting places? As in getting on a porn forum, and starting senseless irrelevant debates with 17 year olds? Yeah... how old are you again?
Oh, and for the record. The internet is the home of lies, so trying to assemblage corporal words to boast your non imaginative "online status", it's worthless. NASA, and military primes, ooohhhh.... *cross fingers*
Oh, and don't assume I'm enticing another debate, which is what you just did. Consider this my enclosed "Have a nice day" Oh wait... :rofl:
Iamforever
Banned
i loved math. i would do the homework while the teacher was explaining it. thats easiest thing in the world to learn. no shit, but i once passed a college level math class in three weeks. i only got a b, so i could have applied myself more, but i wasnt in a legal state of mind back then.
its all the other subjects, besides p.e., that were hard. especially english. i couldnt stay awake!!! science was taken from me. we had just the low level stuff. not even a dissection.
eyoowhatup
Banned
good looks kid...3.25 is mad good
Dude, you believe whatever you want to believe, I could care less. For those that followed several other threads, there's a better chance than not that I actually have the background I profess. But I really don't care if you believe me or not, my posts will do the talking for me.
Yeah, physicists even get more "geeky" with the derivatives than engineering. For me, it's gotta have some "practical application" to get me somewhere in the end, I like to know what it should look like.I could never slog through college grade math - I loved Physics (the only "physical" science I ever liked) but the math was a constant sore spot. Hence why I never took up engineering. Quite happy with the way life has turned out though
GPAs, and my points (again) ...
And I think it's great that many of you guys are striving for good GPAs. Your respective fields will vary on where that will place you, and if you need additional support on your resume for your first job or not and beyond.
I just pointed out that in my major, it didn't matter unless I got a 3.9 or perfect 4.0 (not weighted). If I did, then HP, IBM or some other, major US R&D firm would have picked me up. If not, then I was in the boat with most everyone else. I merely pointed this out for those of you considering going engineering, or possibly if someone else here has a traditional engineering degree.
In reality, as I pointed out, I had to study a crapload just to get a B average (and it was actually just under a B) -- typically 4 hours for every 1 hour in class, as did most everyone I was in these classes with. There were a few people who didn't, but they were very rare in my major. They could absorb something and just see how to get to the solution without having to learn, practice, learn, practice, and then go back and realize the common techniques they were using that they were applying over and over.
Probably one of the most ignorant statements I've ever heard with regards to engineering is that "it's easy, you memorize some formulas." WTF? No, you describe systems by deriving formulas, not memorization -- in fact, that's what our engineering references are for (and we are often allowed to use them during exams because of such -- let alone something like my HP48 that does all sorts of crap). Maybe some Calc I or II math instructor was big on memorizing formulas, but after those first few semesters of math and physics, it's quite the opposite! It's application, and you aren't learning from a book, you're learning from application with the tools (books, instructors, each other, etc...) you are giving to solve problems and, better yet, come up with solutions.
All this wasn't to be "arrogant." That was just pointing out the reality of my major. In fact, I even said you don't have to be "smart" to major in engineering. I even pointed out that most people who are very gifted often take extreme issue with writing things down and going through a process -- and that starts from algebra in middle school on-ward. Those who do have an IQ of 125+ with the added patience and ability to dedicate themselves to a methodical, applied approach are the ones that make 3.9/4.0 GPAs (unweighted) and don't have to study like the other 90+% of us. They are truly blessed in both regards of being gifted and people who absorb "common application" as well, not a common tandem.
It's just the reality of my major. Traditional engineering it's not offered at over 75% of American universities, because it is often a separate college, with completely separate base classes. The Anglo-American (which includes Canadian and other Commonwealth/former Commonwealth) nations tend to have this approac, although some nations are far more "technical" and don't get the socio-economic studies. Not engineering technology or computer science (CS), traditional civil (including environmental, materials, etc...), mechanical (including aerospace, etc...) or electrical (including computer-semiconductor/analog, but not CS)-based engineering disciplines.
Especially former Soviet-bloc, they were often very technical, and some programs were clearly engineering technology. Because from an engineering standpoint (taking the economies and politics out of it) -- socialism seems more efficient. During the Soviet, engineers were very highly respected, and often held major communist positions -- and it was quite a "mind shift" after the fall of the wall. I worked with several, absolutely brilliant Russian engineers in the '90s and shifting them to western project management and microeconomics was "starting them from scratch."
And I think it's great that many of you guys are striving for good GPAs. Your respective fields will vary on where that will place you, and if you need additional support on your resume for your first job or not and beyond.
I just pointed out that in my major, it didn't matter unless I got a 3.9 or perfect 4.0 (not weighted). If I did, then HP, IBM or some other, major US R&D firm would have picked me up. If not, then I was in the boat with most everyone else. I merely pointed this out for those of you considering going engineering, or possibly if someone else here has a traditional engineering degree.
In reality, as I pointed out, I had to study a crapload just to get a B average (and it was actually just under a B) -- typically 4 hours for every 1 hour in class, as did most everyone I was in these classes with. There were a few people who didn't, but they were very rare in my major. They could absorb something and just see how to get to the solution without having to learn, practice, learn, practice, and then go back and realize the common techniques they were using that they were applying over and over.
Probably one of the most ignorant statements I've ever heard with regards to engineering is that "it's easy, you memorize some formulas." WTF? No, you describe systems by deriving formulas, not memorization -- in fact, that's what our engineering references are for (and we are often allowed to use them during exams because of such -- let alone something like my HP48 that does all sorts of crap). Maybe some Calc I or II math instructor was big on memorizing formulas, but after those first few semesters of math and physics, it's quite the opposite! It's application, and you aren't learning from a book, you're learning from application with the tools (books, instructors, each other, etc...) you are giving to solve problems and, better yet, come up with solutions.
All this wasn't to be "arrogant." That was just pointing out the reality of my major. In fact, I even said you don't have to be "smart" to major in engineering. I even pointed out that most people who are very gifted often take extreme issue with writing things down and going through a process -- and that starts from algebra in middle school on-ward. Those who do have an IQ of 125+ with the added patience and ability to dedicate themselves to a methodical, applied approach are the ones that make 3.9/4.0 GPAs (unweighted) and don't have to study like the other 90+% of us. They are truly blessed in both regards of being gifted and people who absorb "common application" as well, not a common tandem.
It's just the reality of my major. Traditional engineering it's not offered at over 75% of American universities, because it is often a separate college, with completely separate base classes. The Anglo-American (which includes Canadian and other Commonwealth/former Commonwealth) nations tend to have this approac, although some nations are far more "technical" and don't get the socio-economic studies. Not engineering technology or computer science (CS), traditional civil (including environmental, materials, etc...), mechanical (including aerospace, etc...) or electrical (including computer-semiconductor/analog, but not CS)-based engineering disciplines.
Especially former Soviet-bloc, they were often very technical, and some programs were clearly engineering technology. Because from an engineering standpoint (taking the economies and politics out of it) -- socialism seems more efficient. During the Soviet, engineers were very highly respected, and often held major communist positions -- and it was quite a "mind shift" after the fall of the wall. I worked with several, absolutely brilliant Russian engineers in the '90s and shifting them to western project management and microeconomics was "starting them from scratch."
