Posted on 06/15/2017 12:50:19 PM PDT by Kaslin
While online editors can provide a quick and convenient way to generate HTML code, they do have their limitations.
If you need to do some serious web development work, you'll probably need an offline editor — one that you can download and use on your own desktop or laptop.
For a desktop HTML editor, try any of the following:
Title | Description 1 | Description 2 | ||||||
Inline styles | Using inline styles in your HTML document is a bad practice because they break the default styles of the website! | Use classes and IDs instead! |
||||||
Setting margins |
Do not use spaces or empty paragraphs
to set vertical and horizontal gaps. |
←| Use margin, padding, →| and line-height instead ↕ |
||||||
Links and images | This is a text link and this is an image: | And this is a link image: | ||||||
Tables and lists |
|
|
||||||
Floating an image |
Floating with inline styleLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, nonumes voluptatum mel ea, cu case ceteros cum. Novum commodo malorum vix ut. Dolores consequuntur in ius, sale electram dissentiunt quo te. Cu duo omnes invidunt, eos eu mucius fabellas. Stet facilis ius te, quando voluptatibus eos in. Ad vix mundi alterum, integre urbanitas intellegam vix in. |
Floating with classesLorem ipsum dolor sit amet, nonumes voluptatum mel ea, cu case ceteros cum. Novum commodo malorum vix ut. Dolores consequuntur in ius, sale electram dissentiunt quo te. Cu duo omnes invidunt, eos eu mucius fabellas. Stet facilis ius te, quando voluptatibus eos in. Ad vix mundi alterum, integre urbanitas intellegam vix in. |
the above was just a test- the text was copied from two online html editors here: https://htmlg.com/html-editor/ and here: https://html-online.com/editor/
seems to work well
Well; “The cheetahs are gonna die out ‘cause they ain’t diverse enough.”
http://www.brighthub.com/science/genetics/articles/54364.aspx
Sounds like they’ve just evolved YESTERDAY!
Kinda messes up the ape-prehuman A and ape-prehuman B gettin’ it on and producing The First Human; who then passes IT’s characteristics on when gettin’ jiggy with ape-prehuman C.
?
Don’t know; but the Participation Trophy is highly in demand in our skuls!
Those worms are in BIG cans!
Not by ME!
>>and the lack of evidence is another strong nail in the coffin
Ask cold blooded dinosaurs and warm blooded mammals about that.
“If there is no evolution, then why do we share the DNA of all the living creatures on the earth?”
Why not? Who says living tissue must be made of completely different substances.
the odds are low for sure- but it’s at least winnable- the probability of winning is a reality, with evolution there is no possibility because the odds are beyond the upper probability limit- way beyond
“Mathematicians agree that any requisite number beyond 10^50 has, statistically, a zero probability of occurrence.”
Lottery is well below that- evolution probability is way above that 10^50 limit of possibility
did i misunderstand your point on splicing? I’m assuming you believe it happens when species evolve? You seem to make the case that splicing adds genetic info- if so, where is the evidence that new non species specific information gets added, which is an absolute necessity for evolution beyond a species kind?
Again, Am i misunderstanding you point for zeroing in on splicing aDDINg genetic info?
“Where did carbon come from? Who created it?”
Stars. Fusion reaction.
>>Im assuming you believe it happens when species evolve?
Splicing (cutting and rearranging / inserting code) is only one factor that can result in the modifications to an organism's (and a species') genome that drive Natural Selection. Other common factors are radiation and chemicals in food/water/air.
Anything that modifies genetic coding creates a new genotype - and it is the change in genome that drives Natural Selection by effecting and affecting the fitness of species.
One simple measure of the new genotype's fitness is the number of reproductively viable offspring produced over multiple generations.
Observe the process in the context of viruses...
...and the beneficial (to viruses anyhow) resulting diversity of viral species.
For species with a lower rate of reproduction, the impact upon fitness becomes more visible in the context of relatively large and stressful environmental changes. A simple definition of stress being - some condition that requires an adaptation to maintain a population.
The stress could be something like an ice age, a famine, a communicable disease, the discovery/manufacture of a new food source (like alcohol, the poisonous aspects of which some individuals are better adapted to than others), or an invention - of something like warfare, or TV.
Some humans are immune to deadly infections like Ebola and HIV. How did that happen? Something adaptive happened somewhere in the history of their genome.
https://www.google.com/#q=Natural+Resistance+to+Ebola
Of course many (most?) adaptations are less than beneficial for the host - for example:
Viral oncogenes are responsible for oncogenesis resulting from persistent virus infection. Although different human tumor viruses express different viral oncogenes and induce different tumors...
http://www.ijbs.com/v06p0730.htm
>>Sounds like theyve just evolved YESTERDAY!
More like they became less diverse YESTERDAY.
How did that happen?
Speaking of diversity - Why did the Natural Selection of binary sexual reproduction have a beneficial impact upon the fitness of species?
Yeah but there’s bigger cans — AFAIK, Fight Club was never released on 70mm IMAX!
Cans will soon be all digital anyways.
Alas poor Kodachrome.
[[Anything that modifies genetic coding creates a new genotype]]
Only within the boundaries of species specific information- as mentioned before, species have several layers of protections that prevent them moving beyond their own kinds
[[and it is the change in genome that drives Natural Selection by effecting and affecting the fitness of species.]]
I had asked about evolution, not natural selection- NS works on species specific info- it doesn’t add new non species specific info- it can’t add spider silk mechanism to a bat or rat- it can onyl alter what is already present and allowed by the species protective mechanisms
[[For species with a lower rate of reproduction, the impact upon fitness]]
Again, we’re not discussing fitness or NS- I had asked about splicing resulting in new non species ‘allowed’ or ‘specific’ if you prefer, info (IE splicing adding in info to create silk in say a wombat, or a platypus bill into a goat- I’m not aware of any such splicing that creates new non species specific info out of nothing but a mistake
[[Some humans are immune to deadly infections like Ebola and HIV.]]
Resistance doesn’t = macroevolution
There is no species specific information. Only genotypes constructed from common code elements.
That's why the genetic code carried by viruses gets succesfully spliced into human genotypes.
>>I had asked about evolution, not natural selection-
>>Again, were not discussing fitness or
Evolution, Natural Selection, and Fitness...
All apply in the study of...
Rather than opining about bats and silk worms - try understanding the fundamental concepts regarding why sexual reproduction evolved and renders increased fitness for species.
That might be slightly more constructive in the context of a culture where dominion assuming religion enthusiasts have failed to connect their children with reality to such an extent THAT THEY CAN'T EVEN FIGURE OUT WHAT SEX THEY ARE, Bob.
.
What is your question?
Have you never used the “Spell” function for html conversion?
It works great.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.