Tanya

I have loved Celine Dion's song "Terre" for years now, and when I hit the line "Si tu savais combien je t'ai manqué" I just always translated "how much I missed you", cause being english, that makes sense.

The problem is, (and i've known this "forever", but just never said 'huh' before) manquer isn't gramatically the same in french and english, so the line reads "if you knew how much I was missed by you", which makes no flipping sense at all.

Terre is written by Eric Benzi, so it's a real french dude, writing real french lyrics for real french people! help!

Terre, J'ai passé trop de temps sur la route

A espérer les faibles traces que tu as semées

Terre, Si tu savais combien je t'ai manqué

Ces journées sans boussole,

je l'ai souvent prié

and all the lyrics:

http://www.metrolyrics.com/terre-lyrics-celine-dio...

I'm writing a character for a story and need her to be fully lost, unable to find "easy" help. Frankly, I've lived in Germany, France, and mexico, and you can almost always find someone who speaks English well enough to get you to your hotel.

Suggestions for a city (it needs to have airports, taxis, etc., so not some small out of the way place), where a person is not likely to find english speakers easily? I thought maybe the middle east, other than tourist sites like Cairo - but having never been there, I'm not sure how common English is.

In the song "Plus que tout au monde", obisop sings:

"plus que tout au monde

j'aime te l'entendre dire"

I'm curious if anyone fluent in french can help me break down the pronoun "te". I get that someohow he "likes to hear HER say it", but in english that would be J'aime entendre TU le dis" (I like to hear you say it). "te" being a direct object makes me think it should be translated "I like to hear it said (to you), but clearly, lyrically that is just stupid.

any help appreciated.

I'm curious how biologists deal with naturally selected changes in a species that makes "sub species", and when we will officially decide that a dog is not a dog.

Mayr's definition is typically "pecies are groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations, which are reproductively isolated from other such groups” (9), now commonly known as the “biological species definition” or the “biological species concept.”....

I would ask how a Great Dane and a tea cup Chihuahua could possibly be a breeding species, if only cause the parts don't exactly match.

Isn't a significant part of biological species definition, the actual natural ability to reproduce? or does a mere biological ability (ie., test tube dogies) count? and if so, why are lions and tigers who can produces viable offspring, not considered the same species?

Is the "?!" or "!?" correct punctuation to use is semi formal writing, like a novel for kids/teens? I know it's fine online, and not fine in business/educational writing...

and if so, what is the proper order.

I'd like to say "I sent you 8 (of them)" - but can't remember if the vous comes before/after then "en".

Je vous en ai envoye 8.

I just watched a show that countered the Big Bang with something called "Steady State Cosmology".

Wikipedia says it's pretty much a dying theory, and that most scientists agree with Big Bang.

My question is: Are believers in Steady State truly "outsiders" of science, like those who claim Evolution is not real, or are they true scientists who just have different ideas, or somewhere inbetween.

as in, are these guys talking about Steady State, Kooks, or just "we don't know everything yet".

Help, I need a good google wiz to help me formulate a search for games my husband and I can play on our home network.

"network games" gives a billion hits for everything BUT what I want, and I don't know the lingo well enough to know what a good search term would be.

I don't want things "online", just on our local home network. (LAN)

What is the most important message *Jesus* (vs. Paul or the OT) brought to the world; and what is the most important message he brought to you, personally - if different.

(Yes I'm an atheist, but no judgment is initiating this question - I'm curious believers see differences in the teachings of Paul v. Jesus v. OT. Nothing sinister. :-)

I am addicted to the show "The Universe" on Discovery. Last night, I watched a Docu called "draining the oceans", where computer graphics were used to generate landscapes of the underwater world - with discoveries we've only had since 2000, 2002, and even a few that are more new than that.

Professional, we are learning things about language via MRI that blow our minds - who knew the rewards centers of our brain were stimulated when we are understood by others.

The scientific tools we have are opening up so many new discoveries, and I'm thrilled to watch new shows, read science articles, or simply browse the newest "yahoo science news".

Is anyone else this excited to see what we are learning, and where we are going?

(or this interested to see how religion deals with this all?)

I'd like to understand something about Noah, about God's reaction to human evil, etc.

I've yet to see anyone who is a beliver, give me a valid reason for this:

God, who is all powerful and could wipe out humanity with a snap of his fingers, decides that since humans have become too evil, he will destroy them. But his plan to destroy them, is to also kill - violently, painfully, every breathing thing on earth, and the fish in teh salt water seas that will die from exposure to rain water.

He will do this, because *humans* are evil. Yes, humans had free will, but animals do not.

Please explain this story? Why did your loving god, kill in such violence, things that have no free will? When it is fully in his power to just kill the humans and leave noah and his family to survive.

So i know this is something I should know like the back of my head, but IR verbs are my enemy -- too many syllables and SSSSS i gues. ;-)

But seriously, does the verb in these two forms sound identical?

Je choisis, j'ai choisi

Je salis, j'ai sali

and then when you say 3rd person plural, it carries a very soft "s" sound, correct? Je salissent

I know it's stupid... but it's an easy 10 point. :-)

That Ceiling Cat made the world in 6 days? And if so, should rational cats reject science? or just that huumuns who make the science?

So, I'm taking the bus home the other night, and these two youngish (20-25) men were on the bus signing to eachother. Like most young people, they were lounged out in that "I'm too sexy for my shirt" style of total ease and lazyness. ;-)

This meant that one of the guys who had his hand over the seat, was predominiatly signing one handed - which had me thinking that you would probably need to do that quite often in day to day life of a deaf person. You have kids to corrall, groceries to carry, coffee in your hand as you move to work.

So I was curious if there are standard "short hand forms" of signs people learn over time, of if it's more of a "fake it, don't break it" mentality - try to sign, hope your audience gets it or you can put down what's in your hand.

(I'm a beginning signer - and study the historical development of language).

Someone here has been saying that atheists are like children, cause we don't accept the torture of our children.

Here's my question:

Is it really a RATIONAL answer to one woman and one man's "sin", to punish all of humanity with suffering?

It is really a RATIONAL response to condem the entire world, including plants, and animals to a miserable death by drowning cause HUMANS suck? can't you just kill off the humans?

Is it really a loving parent's response to your child lying to you, or your child having an affiair, or your child daring to say "I love billy's mom more than you", to kill not only your own son, but Billy, his family, and the entire town.?

Is it rational to say to a child you love, who's made mistakes, that they will BURN IN MISERY for the sin of denying you? Cause even as i love my child - even if seh looked at me and spit at me, i would not make her burn in hell for an etenrity for hating me, denying me, or loving some other "Mom" more then me.

i think the god here, is a bit, well, psychopathic. But I"m asking you Christians if you think that level of response is warranted.

I'm looking for the title of a book by an atheist jewish rabbi (yes, he went to school and everything - grins), that I think is called something like "Morality without god". It's a book that is supposed to help atheists explain their points of view to a predominately theist world.

I heard the guy speaking on National Public Radio, but can't remember any more than this vague sense.

anything anyone can offer to help me find this author or his book?

So I'm quite curious about the idea that *some* Christians have that one "should not read harry potter cause it's dangerous".

I find this attitude strange. I hold the position that *more knowledge* and more reading can never be harmful for an intelligent person. I do not think that it is a danger to read Carl Marx, or the writings of Hitler, though I suspect i'd not agree with a single thing in them. It would not even shock me to find that there are some truths in those books, simply because a still clock is correct 2 times a day.

But the predominant religious attitude I've seen, is that one should not read things that one disagrees with. It is dangerous to read harry potter, but also, to read scientific texts *with a truly open mind*, or to read biblical criticism (literary not religious - as in, what words were used, what style was this written in, when is this likely dated, who might have written it, etc). I've also heard it stated you shouldn't read texts on buddhism, taoism, or other religions.

Comments? am I wrong and most Christians are quite willing to read things that are from a large section of beliefs other than their own?

The Bible says you should not kill, but it does not actually say you should not have an abortion - you have to infer that.

yet is does say, specifically, you should not eat shellfish - it's an abomination, and you should be put to death for doing so.

So my question is - Why are Christians not out picketing Red Lobster?

What is the official creationist position about:

Homo heidelbergenis (600,000-400,000 yrs ago)

Homo neanderthalas (600,000=300,000 yrs ago)

Homo Floreniensis (the 'hobbit' 600,000-100,000) years ago, etc

are these frauds? are they beings made by God that died out? and if so why? are they part of god's humans who had to follow his laws?

Tool maker. Probably had fire, sexually mature by 10 - biggest question though, did he have language?

Where does Turkana Boy (found by the Leakeys) fit into your picture? Did he die out with the floods? Was he god's child?