THURSDAY, 2 OCTOBER 2003
Nothing unbelievable - PERSPECTIVES - THE COMMENTARY
By Marlon Richmond
Unbelievable: I'm sick of people using the word unbelievable to describe events of less than average occurrence. According to the American Heritage Dictionary, the word means: adj. Not to be believed; incredible: unbelievable luck.
But really, when you deconstruct the word, it means that it is impossible to believe that the event/occurrence actually happened. That means that somebody would extremely doubt the event he/she witnessed actually happened.
If I saw dead people walking, dogs teleporting, or pigs flying, I would say that what I saw was unbelievable, since no one would believe me if I told them. The problem with the usage of the word is that people use it to describe slightly unusual events that always occur. One common example is during a sports match, one competitor will make a great save/catch/shot of low probability. The announcer will say that the save/catch/shot was "Unbelievable!!" and people will concur. In reality, the save/catch/shot was just of low probability, and things of low probability will occur, and are more likely to occur when dealing with talented individuals.
It also applies to anything else in life. If somebody says that something that happened was unbelievable, just use the following test to determine if the word has been misused: If you heard of the occurrence through gossip or in the newspaper, is there a possibility that you think that the occurrence could have happened? If you would answer yes to the gossip/newspaper test, the occurrence was definitely not unbelievable, since you believed it could have occurred.
I never use the word unbelievable, and I encourage no one else to use this travesty of the English language.
NFL Overtime system: An unfair system. The system is fundamentally unfair, as it only tests one team's offence and the other team's defence. In effect, just by winning the coin toss, all the offensive team has to do is gain around 40 yards and kick a field goal on the first possession. This does not test the winning team's defence, as the losing team could have scored a touchdown on their possession and won. Therefore the system is unfair because it extremely rewards the team that wins the toss.
In both College Football (NCAA) and the CFL (Canadian Football League), there is a shootout style overtime where both teams get the ball deep in their opponent's territory. Each team gets an equal chance at trying to score and defend in the overtime session, and if they remain tied, they play another session. The only thing the coin toss determines is who gets the ball first, not who gets a chance to score and end the game.
Since the NFL doesn't give both teams an equal chance to play both offence and defence the system is unfair. Until they go to the NCAA/CFL overtime system, the game will not be fair.
The Concept of School Uniforms in Public Schools: People have the fundamental right to express themselves, within reason, in our society. Banning most regular clothing and forcing all students to wear the same drab, boring clothing is a very frightening idea, which could lead to a society of dull sameness and stodgy conservatism
The idea is that by controlling the clothing, you would control all the other schoolhouse problems. But that is just doing something misdirected instead of facing the real issues of gangs, drugs, violence and distractions in school. It would be exactly like George W. Bush telling everyone to rally around the American flag instead of actually seriously fighting terrorism or cutting down on consumption.
Now, I have no problem with uniforms in private schools, as the student does not have to go to the particular institution. But for public school, where every student has a fundamental right to be educated, uniforms should not be imposed. A student who does not want to wear the same clonish clothing should not be deprived of in-class public school education. Also, students who go to uniformed schools who refuse to wear the stupid uniform, and instead wear real clothes, should not be sent home or punished for their rebellious, liberating behaviour.