If you plan on adopting a pet, you must consider the following conditions:
-Responsibility. That's the most important thing. A pet is not a toy, but a living thing with feelings. It's not just about being able to feed the creature and meet it's physical needs, but also emotional needs.
When you give birth to a child or adopt one, are you not obliged to give the attention and meet their emotional needs? The same is true for a pet.
-Commitment. It's a different thing from responsibility. It's about holding on to that responsibility no matter what. Unless of course there is a list to you and your loved ones such as disease or aggressive behavior form the pet.
-Desire. Life teaches us you cannot succeed most of the time in things that you do not desire. If you do not desire to be a pianist, it is unlikely you will become a successful one.
Likewise if you do not enjoy always having the company of pets all the time, you must not even consider being a permanent pet owner/guardian.
Those are the most obvious points that most people would expect, but now I want to mention things that are not carefully considered in most cases.
If you have children who have regular "sibling wars" over new things that are meant to be shared by them such as toys or house gifts, beware of pet adoption. If both are fighting over a pet's attention and responsibility, it could be an extremely difficult situation for the pet to cope with.
Children in general also lack responsibility due to their young age. It is best children are not given the responsibility of a pet until an older age just before their teenage years begin.
It's also understandable that a pet with a diagnosed long-term illness is a burden to take care of; hence it is extremely important to ensure the pet does not have any diseases or illnesses if you do not wish to be burdened by it.
Also it is advisable to adopt and care for one pet before deciding to adopt another. Too many pets can result in over time consumption on caring for them. If your experience with one pet gives you assurance that you can care for another or a few more, only then should you opt for more pets.
Also if you wish the least responsibility with pet ownership, it is advisable to adopt a cat instead of a dog as cats are generally more independent and less social than dogs.
These are important thing you need to know when considering adopting one or more pets.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Get a shallow aquarium if you have small fish
Like humans, most fish have a limit to how deep underwater they can go without succumbing to water pressure.
That's why under the sea, most fish no matter what breed/species live close to the coastal areas of the Earth in relatively shallow waters.
Even to get vegetarian food they must swim deep to the ocean floor- again in shallow waters. The same applies to fish in an aquarium.
If you have fish that are small like goldfish, then place them in an aquarium not more than one foot or meter deep as they'll have difficulty reaching the bottom to search for dropped food.
An aquarium this size should be suitable with not too many fish:
Also avoid putting fish in a bowl as they have limited space to move around. An aquarium would be more desirable. There is also the concern of the aquarium being too small. If you have fish that are large such as those that people eat, then get a larger aquarium that is deep and spacious.
That's why under the sea, most fish no matter what breed/species live close to the coastal areas of the Earth in relatively shallow waters.
Even to get vegetarian food they must swim deep to the ocean floor- again in shallow waters. The same applies to fish in an aquarium.
If you have fish that are small like goldfish, then place them in an aquarium not more than one foot or meter deep as they'll have difficulty reaching the bottom to search for dropped food.
An aquarium this size should be suitable with not too many fish:
Also avoid putting fish in a bowl as they have limited space to move around. An aquarium would be more desirable. There is also the concern of the aquarium being too small. If you have fish that are large such as those that people eat, then get a larger aquarium that is deep and spacious.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
If I had the choice of living in any place in the world it would be...
ICELAND here's why:
1) Most sparsely populated country in Europe with comfy-looking homes in the countryside:
2) A large but pleasant metropolitan city/town with less traffic and noise which is a common annoyance in most capitals:
3) Cold weather enough to kill germs, but nevertheless pleasant and enjoyable compared to continental winters:
4) Open sea with hot summers:
5) Safety. Most of the crimes such as murder and theft are almost unheard of in Iceland with less than a thousand people working in law enforcement or so I read.
My only reason for not living there would be different language which an immigrant is most likely required to learn.
But regardless, the great conditions of Iceland are all made possible due to having a small and sustainable population, something the rest of the world can learn from.
1) Most sparsely populated country in Europe with comfy-looking homes in the countryside:
2) A large but pleasant metropolitan city/town with less traffic and noise which is a common annoyance in most capitals:
3) Cold weather enough to kill germs, but nevertheless pleasant and enjoyable compared to continental winters:
4) Open sea with hot summers:
5) Safety. Most of the crimes such as murder and theft are almost unheard of in Iceland with less than a thousand people working in law enforcement or so I read.
My only reason for not living there would be different language which an immigrant is most likely required to learn.
But regardless, the great conditions of Iceland are all made possible due to having a small and sustainable population, something the rest of the world can learn from.
Friday, December 10, 2010
With cheaper prices, always expect cheapest quality
With higher pay comes better quality of what you pay for. People who seek easy shortcuts and buy discounted items weather food or other items are better off not buying anything at all.
If you buy cheap fast food, you know it's not as healthy as buying expensive organic food. When you by a cheap electronic device, you're better off not buying one at all.
As an example, I once got a cheap discounted DVD player at Walmart for less than forty dollars. With it came a whole bunch of problems such as the picture quality deceasing and returning every few seconds. The DVD jamming and resuming also every few seconds. No sane person I can think of would want to watch a movie in happiness with such trash quality.
I was better off not getting it at all. The same goes for everything. I bought a PC desktop for only $100 because the other computers got stolen. But these cheap PCs weren't that good and had pirated copies of windows running on them.
People who look for ways to save money by buying such cheap products are actually wasting more money than saving.
Every dollar you spend on getting a decent quality item comes in the quality suitable for the consumer.
If you buy cheap fast food, you know it's not as healthy as buying expensive organic food. When you by a cheap electronic device, you're better off not buying one at all.
As an example, I once got a cheap discounted DVD player at Walmart for less than forty dollars. With it came a whole bunch of problems such as the picture quality deceasing and returning every few seconds. The DVD jamming and resuming also every few seconds. No sane person I can think of would want to watch a movie in happiness with such trash quality.
I was better off not getting it at all. The same goes for everything. I bought a PC desktop for only $100 because the other computers got stolen. But these cheap PCs weren't that good and had pirated copies of windows running on them.
People who look for ways to save money by buying such cheap products are actually wasting more money than saving.
Every dollar you spend on getting a decent quality item comes in the quality suitable for the consumer.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Taking courses on subjects you think you're good at
Have you ever thought of yourself being good at something such as science or language or any other subject with the good mind to take it as a course in school, college or university thinking you shall sail through it with success?
It's an illusion many including myself often fall for and at times get too over optimistic.
Taking a course on a subject that you had a general interest in and had a vast knowledge of is not the same as what you learned about it in your own independent research or by learning from others.
Courses can become extremely technical and can often cover every aspect/detail of the subject especially when studied at college/university.
Take for example civil aviation which I have a vast knowledge on through personal interest. Though not necessarily studied at college by professional pilots, it is available there or can be learned through private flying clubs or other institutions as well.
Just as mentioned, my knowledge in civil aviation was very vast. I even knew more about wide-body planes than one of my pilot instructors!
But all this didn't help much in my pilot training aside from giving me an idea of what to expect. I had to learn all the technical aspects into training to be a pilot and it proved to be very difficult.
The same can be said for any subject or field that you'd chose to study and perhaps pursue as a career. The massive background knowledge that you have will most likely not be much of use.
This is not to say that you won't succeed at what you choose to study, just that it will most likely be the hard way. I was and still am struggling with my pilot training course. Even at university my knowledge in comparative linguistics does not help much in my study of the introduction to linguistics.
On the other hand we can be successful at courses we had no idea on. For instance it was mandatory to take civics in high school where I live.
I had no idea what the course was about. Yet I scored such high marks at it and by the mid term of the course when marks were being shown, I had the highest mark in the class of 85% and was issued a small certificate of recognition.
My marks fell to 55% because I didn't do my final assignment but that's a different story.
The point is background knowledge usually does not affect your performance in a course. You cannot assume to be good at something because of strong background knowledge or assume you'll succeed in that subject due to that background knowledge.
So when taking a course at college/university, I'd advise readers to first try and learn from people who have taken it about their experiences or try and consult with people who teach that subject or field.
It's an illusion many including myself often fall for and at times get too over optimistic.
Taking a course on a subject that you had a general interest in and had a vast knowledge of is not the same as what you learned about it in your own independent research or by learning from others.
Courses can become extremely technical and can often cover every aspect/detail of the subject especially when studied at college/university.
Take for example civil aviation which I have a vast knowledge on through personal interest. Though not necessarily studied at college by professional pilots, it is available there or can be learned through private flying clubs or other institutions as well.
Just as mentioned, my knowledge in civil aviation was very vast. I even knew more about wide-body planes than one of my pilot instructors!
But all this didn't help much in my pilot training aside from giving me an idea of what to expect. I had to learn all the technical aspects into training to be a pilot and it proved to be very difficult.
The same can be said for any subject or field that you'd chose to study and perhaps pursue as a career. The massive background knowledge that you have will most likely not be much of use.
This is not to say that you won't succeed at what you choose to study, just that it will most likely be the hard way. I was and still am struggling with my pilot training course. Even at university my knowledge in comparative linguistics does not help much in my study of the introduction to linguistics.
On the other hand we can be successful at courses we had no idea on. For instance it was mandatory to take civics in high school where I live.
I had no idea what the course was about. Yet I scored such high marks at it and by the mid term of the course when marks were being shown, I had the highest mark in the class of 85% and was issued a small certificate of recognition.
My marks fell to 55% because I didn't do my final assignment but that's a different story.
The point is background knowledge usually does not affect your performance in a course. You cannot assume to be good at something because of strong background knowledge or assume you'll succeed in that subject due to that background knowledge.
So when taking a course at college/university, I'd advise readers to first try and learn from people who have taken it about their experiences or try and consult with people who teach that subject or field.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Why do people think of Pakistan as a "hot country?"
Many people including ignorant Pakistanis think of Pakistan as a "hot, humid" country only. They look on the world map and see how close Pakistan is to the equator and judge the country's entire climate from that.
In reality, certain areas of Pakistan can get colder than many European countries during the winters.
Areas of northern and western Pakistan are at very high altitudes that temperatures can fall to minus twenty degrees Celsius. In the Pakistani city of Quetta in the Balochistan province the average temperatures is minus fourteen which is comparable to winter temperatures in North American cities.
In the winters of 2007, the temperatures of Quetta were said to have fallen to minus seventeen degrees Celsius.
The Kashmir province of Pakistan, being far away from the equator and having a high altitude at the same time can bring temperatures as low as minus twenty degrees Celsius.
Even in warmer areas of Pakistan, temperatures can fall to less than ten degrees Celsius and with no indoor heating most of the time, it feels far colder.
I remember being in Skardu, Northern Pakistan during the summer of 1992 and people including Western tourists wore sweaters at night and sat around fires.
In reality, certain areas of Pakistan can get colder than many European countries during the winters.
Areas of northern and western Pakistan are at very high altitudes that temperatures can fall to minus twenty degrees Celsius. In the Pakistani city of Quetta in the Balochistan province the average temperatures is minus fourteen which is comparable to winter temperatures in North American cities.
In the winters of 2007, the temperatures of Quetta were said to have fallen to minus seventeen degrees Celsius.
The Kashmir province of Pakistan, being far away from the equator and having a high altitude at the same time can bring temperatures as low as minus twenty degrees Celsius.
Even in warmer areas of Pakistan, temperatures can fall to less than ten degrees Celsius and with no indoor heating most of the time, it feels far colder.
I remember being in Skardu, Northern Pakistan during the summer of 1992 and people including Western tourists wore sweaters at night and sat around fires.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
The inferiority complex of non-white third world people towards the white first world
Many people from the third world hold an inferiority complex towards white people and the first world (by white in this case I mean someone of European descent).
These people eagerly gain citizenship in European and North American countries. They deny any links to their country and deny their culture.
They pretend having a foreign country's citizenship will change their DNA. They use the argument that living in another country for a long time makes them a native of that country.
This is probably the weakest and silliest argument. Living in a country for ages doesn't automatically change your ethnicity. The other argument "I was born there" can also be ridiculed. Being born in a country doesn't change your ethnicity either anymore than being born in a lion's den doesn't make you a lion.
Being a citizen of a country is one thing and calling yourself a citizen of that country is normal.
But when you pretend that your citizenship somehow makes you "white" or changes your country of origin, you clearly have an inferiority complex.
I know people who lived in the USA and seem to be extremely proud of it. People who vigorously claim "We threatened nuclear war, we this we that..."
Many also try to pass off as whites or try to act like Anglo-Americans.
In Western countries the politically correct way to determine where a person is from is by their nationality. Anything to the contrary is "racist."
And this is something that makes the white wannabe third world immigrants extremely happy and their denial in who they are.
On the contrary, a person's ethnic origin has always determined on their ancestors and science has never allowed citizenship or language in classifying one's race.
What these third world white wannabe immigrants don't realize is they are only making themselves look bad.
They pride in knowing the languages of Europe weather French, Spanish, English or any other, thinking it will make them superior.
Not realizing it won't make them special. Their quest to hide their true ethnicity and origin will only be ridiculed by those who notice.
These people eagerly gain citizenship in European and North American countries. They deny any links to their country and deny their culture.
They pretend having a foreign country's citizenship will change their DNA. They use the argument that living in another country for a long time makes them a native of that country.
This is probably the weakest and silliest argument. Living in a country for ages doesn't automatically change your ethnicity. The other argument "I was born there" can also be ridiculed. Being born in a country doesn't change your ethnicity either anymore than being born in a lion's den doesn't make you a lion.
Being a citizen of a country is one thing and calling yourself a citizen of that country is normal.
But when you pretend that your citizenship somehow makes you "white" or changes your country of origin, you clearly have an inferiority complex.
I know people who lived in the USA and seem to be extremely proud of it. People who vigorously claim "We threatened nuclear war, we this we that..."
Many also try to pass off as whites or try to act like Anglo-Americans.
In Western countries the politically correct way to determine where a person is from is by their nationality. Anything to the contrary is "racist."
And this is something that makes the white wannabe third world immigrants extremely happy and their denial in who they are.
On the contrary, a person's ethnic origin has always determined on their ancestors and science has never allowed citizenship or language in classifying one's race.
What these third world white wannabe immigrants don't realize is they are only making themselves look bad.
They pride in knowing the languages of Europe weather French, Spanish, English or any other, thinking it will make them superior.
Not realizing it won't make them special. Their quest to hide their true ethnicity and origin will only be ridiculed by those who notice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)