Spuddaccino

Definitely not on copyright grounds, since almost all state flags (except Georgia, Mississippi, and soon to be Utah) are old enough to have entered the public domain.

Any soup is cool enough to eat on a first date. If your date gives you crap about something as inconsequential as what kind of soup you're eating, your date should be discarded at your earliest convenience, because they have shown themselves to be an opinionated twat that will bitch about things that don't matter in the slightest.

Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!

when there's not a recognised disability involved but just health issue/s (which could be "disabling").

From the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, in regards to the ADA:

Under the ADA , you have a disability if you have a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity.

Essentially, if you are disabled, you have a disability, whether recognized or not. If you are not disabled, then you do not have a disability.

Under this definition, something like asthma, which is fairly common, can be a disability when it comes to strenuous activities, but isn't something that is immediately obvious to someone just passing on the street.

As far as it being ablist to assume that someone not showing signs of disability isn't disabled? No, that's silly. Not believing them if they tell you they can't run a mile because they have asthma? Still no, that's skepticism.

Ablism would be something like planning a company outing, and choosing the location up a tall, steep hill when other options were available, specifically because you don't like the fact that your coworker has asthma.

It's not.

"Hey, look at that girl/car/tree/Chihuahua" isn't a left nod. It's eye contact, then you look at the thing.

"Come here/go there, let's talk" isn't a right nod. It's a weird neck movement where your head is kind of sideways and you're nodding in the direction of the place you want them to go. You usually use "Hey, look at that tree" first before you try to get them to go to the tree to talk.

Can confirm up and down are correct enough, though. Up is for people you know, down is for people you don't.

Neither count thou two.

We'd need to find exactly where it "passes over", which could depend on who you ask.

No, we don't. It doesn't matter when that is, because you and I both agree that it's out there somewhere, and that at the point in time referenced, a non-chicken laid an egg and a chicken hatched out of it. That's all we need out of that point, and neither of us are disputing that part of it.

If you define a chicken as hatching from a chicken egg ("every chicken must have hatched from a chicken egg"), then the egg came first. If you define a chicken egg as an egg that was laid by a chicken ("all chicken eggs must have been laid by chickens"), then the chicken came first.

Agreed. I, personally, use the broader egg definition you reference in the last paragraph, but a definition of "chicken egg" would put the whole thing to rest, and I propose this: Not every chicken egg contains a viable chicken. We all agree that these eggs are still chicken eggs when we buy them at the supermarket, though, so my proposed definition is that a chicken egg is laid by a chicken. Otherwise, we end up with unclassified eggs in our omelettes, and we can't have that.

In such a case, we would simply need to look backward in history until we find an ancestor that doesn't meet the chicken criteria. Fowl as a clade were separated from other bird clades before the K-T Extinction Event, and many such species before the event had teeth, which means they weren't chickens.

I see what you're saying, and I agree with it, but the question isn't asking "Which egg was the first chicken egg?", it's asking "Did the egg come before the chicken?" Determining the exact point is a way of answering the question, but is a lot of work that isn't strictly necessary to do so.

We can use the Theorem because we don't care when that point actually was, the question doesn't ask that. We just need to prove that there was such a point, and the Theorem does that.

To use that text as an analogy, we don't care which is the first purple or blue word, we just know there is one because the gradient starts from red, passes through purple, and ends up blue, so it must have a first purple word and a first blue word.

chicken would also be able to defined as it’s ancestor

This isn't the case, and there's a mathematical theorem describing this called the Intermediate Value Theorem. Basically, if you have a function describing a line you can draw without picking up your pencil, at some point along that line the value takes on every value on that line. Makes sense, right?

If I draw a line separating Chicken-birds from Not-chicken-birds, and show the evolutionary path leading from non-chicken to chicken, at some point it crosses that line. We don't have to know where that point is, we just know it crosses the line at some point.

At that point, wherever it is, we have a bird that meets the criteria of "chicken" hatching from an egg laid by a bird that doesn't.

Besides, this is all pretty moot. We actually know when and where chickens originated. They originated about 3000 years ago in China and India after being domesticated from Southeast Asian Red Junglefowl.

The part between the corners of the image. It's white and has grey and green blobs on it. You can't miss it.

Close, but not quite. PC stands for paper cassette, e.g. the tray you load the paper into. You're right about it referring to the paper size, though. PC LOAD LETTER just means "Put more letter-size paper into the tray."