TO CENTER STUFF:
HTML: <center> </center> CSS: text-align: center;
TO BOLD TEXT:
HTML: <b> </b> <strong> </strong> CSS: font-weight: bold; (if you're font comes in different weight you can use that instead: font-weight: 700;)
TO ITALIC TEXT:
HTML: <i> </i> CSS: font-style: italic;
TO UNDERLINE TEXT:
HTML: <u> </u> CSS: text-decoration: underline;
TO PUT A LINE THROUGH TEXT:
HTML: <strike> </strike> CSS: text-decoration: line-through;
SHOW FONT-SIZE AS BIGGER:
HTML: <big> </big> CSS: font-size: larger;
HTML: <font color="#ff0000"> </font> <font face="arial"> </font> CSS: font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #ff000;
ADD IMAGE (HTML):
<img src="DIRECT-IMAGE-URL" alt="Descriptive Text">
ADD A LINK 9HTML):
<a href="URL"> </a>
Primitive Hardware Store Toolbox & Tools
This listing is for a primitive early style toolbox with tools. It has an aged paper label on both sides that reads “James Longshore Tahama Trunk Manufactory, Trunks, valises and bonnet boxes always on hand, wholesale and retail. San Francisco.”
The toolbox contains hardware for working on trunks including old pliers, a glass bottle with rag and cork stopper, a natural bristle wooden handle brush, a copper bristle wooden handle brush, a leather polishing rag, and a 10 inch painter style brush. All the brushes have been sanded and aged, as well as the wooden toolbox itself. There is also some rusty keys and lock tied to the handle with grubby twine. It is a perfect addition to your log cabin, potting shed or covered wagon.
The toolbox measures 11 inches long, 6 inches wide and 9 inches high.
my locked toolbox
I develop software for a living…and a lot of tools are available to me…most of them are free..but the best ones are not
my company purchased the best tools in the business to help me develop..bigger..stronger..faster applications quickly…
however the system administrator has not given me access to them…
I find this analogous to a mechanic’s toolbox that contains all the tools needed to fix a flat tire on a car. But everytime he needs a different tool he must call another mechanic to unlock his toolbox
Carl Sagan’s “Skeptical Thinker’s Toolbox”
- I originally posted this back in may before this blog had many followers, I felt it was worth another look.
The following is an excerpt from Sagan’s book “Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark” on tools for skeptical thinking.
Where ever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.”
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight- “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
Spin more than one hypothesis. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof in this Darwinian selection among “multiple working hypotheses,” has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will.
Quantify. If whatever you’re explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging.
If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise)- not just most of them.
Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler.
Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are untestable, unfalsifiable are not worth much. Consider the grand idea that our Universe and everything in it is just an elementary particle- an electron say- in a much bigger Cosmos. But if we can never acquire information from outside our Universe, is not the idea incapable of disproof? You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.