dropin685

> " [...] neither revealed any information that was not either included in media accounts about the case or already known to the police. "

My brain is short-circuiting over the two parts of this snippet from The Innocence Project. Presumably both are intended to suggest unreliable individuals and an unjust guilty verdict, but I find a mismatch between the two. It's one thing to suppose the individuals revealed some details that were featured in media accounts. But it's quite a different thing to suppose the individuals revealed some details that were known only to police. The former point is of no consequence, but the latter point, if true, supports the reliability of the individuals and the guilt of the accused.

Not that I support the death penalty anyway. But I'm leaning toward nemo44x's personal take mentioned above. And the snippet was presumably written to coax us that the man was innocent. Am I missing something? They seem like weasel words, as another poster put it. :(

Here (below) is a quote from the article, on the subject of calcium. (I suppose some of us may be reluctant or unable to have calcium levels monitored. But it seems all of us should be taking vitamin K2 along with our vitamin D.)

>The authors explicitly point out that each vitamin D supplementation must be accompanied by sufficient vitamin K2. This certainly prevents the rise of the calcium level in the blood, which is often seen as a risk for the supply of vitamin D

>adding weight [...] being electric doesn't change physics

Unlike Internal Combustion vehicles, electric vehicles typically feature regenerative braking. Therefore any added weight is much less of an efficiency handicap (compared with IC).

> This solution is not a solution.

No, not a complete solution, but it's a step in the right direction. One of the reasons advertisers as well as ordinary users come to FB is to be in contact with you -- to have your attention. Stop using FB and you take that away. FB ends up with less of an audience with which to entice others.

Nice work! And I have a modest suggestion. I'll illustrate with an example. Let's say I'm browsing scales. I select scale type "classic," and I choose C as the tonic then hit Go. The screen changes, and I see a bunch of scales, including C major (which has no accidentals). Okay, say my theory is rusty (it is, actually!) and I'm thinking about modes. I want to verify that A natural minor also has no accidentals, and likewise D dorian. To do that, it seems I have to back up to the previous screen so I can change the tonic from C to A, then hit Go again. Then I back up to the previous screen so I can change the tonic from A to D, then hit Go again. Can that be streamlined a bit so the tonic can be changed without going back to the previous screen? Something to consider adding to your to-do list! :-)