**Chemistry...Before/After

diarmo06

Gordon Gecko wrote: »

Aptitude for a high-end job? If you can't put the work in for the Leaving Cert, which you regard as being as simple as just learning off a few answers, how the hell do you have an "aptitude" for a high end job? The Leaving Cert isn't perfect by any means but it rewards the hard working.

The people who spend their time moaning about how bad it is, how it's not real education, how it's not properly structured are generally people who were too lazy or arrogant to knuckle down and study and who ended up or will end up doing badly in it.

I never called it simple. It's the most enduring mundane year of your live,
because you simply can't expect pupils to take a genuine interest in all aspects of study.
The hardworking are by no means the intelligent, they are the brainwashed.

ray2012

I find chemistry grand, it's just the maths parts that i'm pretty clueless on (which is a lot of the paper) :eek:

deathbythelc

There is really no point arguing about this. The education system, of course, could be better. There are so many points that could be improved but it's the same in every country - no education system will ever be perfect.

The only thing that will never change is that if you want the results, you need to put in the work. Blaming the system will get you nowhere, it won't change. And even if it does, it will never be fair to absolutely everyone.

Also, the comment that the hardworking people are brainwashed? That is ludicrous. Of course, intelligence can't be measured by your ability to memorise but to say they're brainwashed is actually ridiculous, if you want something enough you should be willing to put in the effort to get it. Whether or not rote learning is your strength, it's what has to be done. Some have it easier than others, of course, but sitting back and saying "Oh sure, I'm not good at that, I can't do it" isn't going to get you anywhere.

But to get back on point, Chemistry is a lovely subject once you understand the basic concepts. It's a short course and, with the right teacher, can be easy. But, obviously, it'll take a lot of work and learning like all the other subjects.

Monsieur Folie

diarmo06 wrote: »

you can argue for a small percentage of sub-human outliers but the fact remains.

What the hell? I take offence to this. I enjoy 7 of the 8 subjects that I do in school. The people who look back on it as 'the worst years of their life' are usually the moaners and complainers like yourself. The examination system might be flawed, but that doesn't make the material you study flawed. If you had gotten off of your high horse and engaged with your subjects you would have found them interesting.

diarmo06 wrote: »

Leaving Cert allows genuine promise to fall through the gaps in it's system.

No it doesn't. The naturally talented people that don't do well in the Leaving Cert are lazy. The Leaving Cert is easy for these people and they just choose to ''not put the hours in'', as you say. That is a fault of the person, not the system.

diarmo06

Monsieur Folie wrote: »

What the hell? I take offence to this. I enjoy 7 of the 8 subjects that I do in school. The people who look back on it as 'the worst years of their life' are usually the moaners and complainers like yourself. The examination system might be flawed, but that doesn't make the material you study flawed. If you had gotten off of your high horse and engaged with your subjects you would have found them interesting.

Well congratulations sir, you are an outlier. Not having a go at you or anything.
Not a moaner, I just hold a great distain for somebody's "intelligence" being based on a number, calculated on hours put it.
Just making a valid point & you have the audacity to call me a moaner?
You just sound like one of the many useless people who have no independent taughts and possesses the ability to to "study" the ideas of others.



No it doesn't. The naturally talented people that don't do well in the Leaving Cert are lazy. The Leaving Cert is easy for these people and they just choose to ''not put the hours in'', as you say. That is a fault of the person, not the system.

I good points, off little to no work because I hold genuine intelligence, something you will never learn.

BeanbagBallbag

diarmo06 wrote: »

That's all well & good. But in truth, today the majority of people are not like this period!

The majority of people don't enjoy learning? That makes no sense at all. What data have you got to back that up btw?

diarmo06 wrote: »

It's work at the end of the day and nobody enjoys it.

Nobody enjoys work? Really? Again, what data have you got supporting that statement?

diarmo06 wrote: »

It's fact, that the majority of people look back upon Lc as the worrst year of their life.

Source for that "fact"? Or are you basing it on your own experience and that of friends?

diarmo06 wrote: »

YES OKAY, you can argue for a small percentage of sub-human outliers but the fact remains.

So people who enjoy working and learning are "sub-human"?...That's a moronic thing to say. I'm repeating myself but where are you sourcing these "facts"?

diarmo06 wrote: »

Quite wrong, got computer science in nuig, had 450 points, so well over the required. Love it. As to people with aptitudes, a friend of mine was incrediblly gifted when it came to computers, designed over 20 apps during his leaving cert and couldn't put in the hours in numb learning to do the course.
I'd like to contrast this with somebody who could brunt learn for hours on end & took the course because it was "the next big thing" with no prior interest in computers.

Congratulations. As regards people with "high aptitudes", the LC is a two year course. You find out pretty early on what's expected as regards the exams and there's more than enough time for people to get off their high horse and just put the work in. You don't have to learn off essays by heart or memorize diagrams or experiments to do very well in the LC. I know plenty of people who attest to that. Seeing as you mentioned Medicine earlier I'll give a Medicine related fact. One of my good friends got a place in Medicine last year. He didn't learn off any essays or streams of information. He was very good at most subjects, because he applied himself to the work. He wasn't the best in the class at Irish/Maths, but he just did the work and got the course he really wanted. It's upto the person to do the work if they really want to do a course, rather than sulk because the system "doesn't suit them".

diarmo06 wrote: »

Leaving Cert allows genuine promise to fall through the gaps in it's system.

As has been said before and as will be said again, no system is perfect, and certainly not ours. However, I think that if somebody has "genuine promise", they won't give up all hope based on not doing well in the LC. The LC isn't the be-all and end-all afterall.

Monsieur Folie

diarmo06 wrote: »

I good points, off little to no work because I hold genuine intelligence, something you will never learn.

Are you trying to call me stupid now as well? You've already said I'm sub-human because I enjoy school, what next?

Yes, because genuine intelligence is sitting back and giving out about something just because it's difficult? Nobody's trying to say the education system isn't flawed, but your points most certainly are!

What the hell does 'I good points' mean anyway? So intelligent now that you just leave out words that aren't good enough for you?

Your points are most certainly flawed. You're saying the LC can inhibit certain 'genuine promise'. The only example you give is of a friend who you openly admit 'didn't put in the hours'. How is that a fault of the Leaving Cert? There are many faults, but person laziness/lack of motivation isn't one of them! That's his own fault!

A very valuable lesson that I have learned in life so far is that raw talent alone won't get you through life. You have to be willing to work too.

diarmo06

Monsieur Folie wrote: »

Are you trying to call me stupid now as well? You've already said I'm sub-human because I enjoy school, what next?

Yes, because genuine intelligence is sitting back and giving out about something just because it's difficult? Nobody's trying to say the education system isn't flawed, but your points most certainly are!

What the hell does 'I good points' mean anyway? So intelligent now that you just leave out words that aren't good enough for you?

Your points are most certainly flawed. You're saying the LC can inhibit certain 'genuine promise'. The only example you give is of a friend who you openly admit 'didn't put in the hours'. How is that a fault of the Leaving Cert? There are many faults, but person laziness/lack of motivation isn't one of them! That's his own fault!

A very valuable lesson that I have learned in life so far is that raw talent alone won't get you through life. You have to be willing to work too.

Ah, debating with the minnows, why must I stoop.
Adieu moron.

Monsieur Folie

diarmo06 wrote: »

Ah, debating with the minnows, why must I stoop.
Adieu moron.

I'm sorry? Oh, you're one of those high and mighty people. That explains the insults.

I don't think I'm the moron in this conversation.

You are the one labelling lazy people as 'genuine promise' and people who are willing to put in a bit of work (regardless of intelligence) as 'morons'.

By the way, pulling out of a debate on the grounds that the other person is stupid (or to use your own terminology, moronic) is a sure sign of a sore loser and of an arsehole.

Goodnight.

I'm sorry for derailing the thread, OP.

finality

diarmo06 wrote: »

The hardworking are by no means the intelligent, they are the brainwashed.

What's that even supposed to mean? This is like when you put words together in a sentence, and you can see that it's a sentence, it's got all the properties of a sentence, but when you actually think about it and try to work out what the sentence is saying, you can't because it genuinely has no meaning.

KR1995

ray2012 wrote: »

I find chemistry grand, it's just the maths parts that i'm pretty clueless on (which is a lot of the paper) :eek:

True that!!
everytime when there's a sum coming up... in the books there is hell a lot of examples.. and i dont have a clue how and which to follow because theres soo many TTnTT It's time to eat materials in once again this summer...

KR1995

diarmo06 wrote: »

I good points, off little to no work because I hold genuine intelligence, something you will never learn.

You do know theres a limit to this genuine intelligence of someone. Life is about effort. You aint gonna go anyway with that attitude of yours. I was looking for tips, not compliants!

I've got a good few friends in college, and many are pure genius'.. but they arent ego about it. They put in the effort to gain their BA, Master and PhD degrees. It's hard working, not talent and thats what they always tell me about. Surely anyone can do well in something when u put in the effort, but of course, this doesnt apply for everything.

It doesn't take a genius to do well in their Leaving cert. My piano teacher's daughter is now in 2nd year college, She is one of the 6A1 students on that particular year- She's not genius, She is just simply a young girl who wanted to gain something. The ambition in one is more important than anything else.. but that simply is just my opinion.

reznov

diarmo06 wrote: »

I good points, off little to no work because I hold genuine intelligence, something you will never learn.

You hold genuine intelligence? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh my. From your opinion it is clear you don't have "genuine intelligence", or any sort of intelligence at all. How is genuine intellgience even defined?
You bash those who work hard and are able to excel academically while you sit and moan about the LC system. Hardly bright.

I have enjoyed this year, out of all 11 years of my education, the most. The work load is there, material is interesting, and we have a challenge. Sorry if your experience was inferior, but remember, the LC is voluntary.

Did you by any stroke of luck sit an online IQ test? Those may render an illusion in regards to your level of intellect.

Stalin and rugby

Lads WTF? If you want to be fags arguing some pointless shít being keyboard warriors please do so in your own time.

In the name of Zeus himself I command thee to leave. You've hijacked this thread to bits.

Back to chem, what experiment do you guys think is coming up for Q. 3 the organic? Fair few have not come up in recent years?

FaoiSin

Stalin and rugby wrote: »

Lads WTF? If you want to be fags arguing some pointless shít being keyboard warriors please do so in your own time.

In the name of Zeus himself I command thee to leave. You've hijacked this thread to bits.

Back to chem, what experiment do you guys think is coming up for Q. 3 the organic? Fair few have not come up in recent years?

It'll be Q2 Erm I'd say Ethanal/Ethanoic Acid.

partyatmygaff

diarmo06 wrote: »

It's fact, that the majority of people look back upon Lc as the worrst year of their life. YES OKAY, you can argue for a small percentage of sub-human outliers but the fact remains.

How would being able to cope with difficulties make you sub-human? Surely it would be make you a super-human outlier?

Quite wrong, got computer science in nuig, had 450 points, so well over the required. Love it. As to people with aptitudes, a friend of mine was incrediblly gifted when it came to computers, designed over 20 apps during his leaving cert and couldn't put in the hours in numb learning to do the course.
I'd like to contrast this with somebody who could brunt learn for hours on end & took the course because it was "the next big thing" with no prior interest in computers.
Leaving Cert allows genuine promise to fall through the gaps in it's system.

It's not the LC's fault that your friend is lazy. If you want anything in life you have to work for it. Even if you personally think you're great, no one will recognise that if you can't be bothered to do something as simple as study for the LC.

diarmo06 wrote: »

I good points, off little to no work because I hold genuine intelligence, something you will never learn.

What in the name of God does that sentence even mean?

You "good points"... "off little to no work" because apparently you hold "genuine intelligence" that we will never learn.

I don't suppose you've got a certificate of authenticity to go with your "genuine" intelligence, do you? I suspect it may be counterfeit.


As for the LC itself, Ethanal/Ethanoic acid would be well worth studying this year.

DepoProvera

Does anyone know where to find the warning symbols for LC chemistry? There's only a few but I cannot for the life of me find them..

frozenfrozen

DepoProvera wrote: »

Does anyone know where to find the warning symbols for LC chemistry? There's only a few but I cannot for the life of me find them..

If you mean safety symbols there inside the front page of 'chemistry live' if you have that. There are only a few there though. Safety Glasses, Harmful or irritant, Flammable, Corrosive, Toxic, Oxidising, Explosive.

Scarlett Scout

Stalin and rugby wrote: »

Lads WTF? If you want to be fags arguing some pointless shít being keyboard warriors please do so in your own time.

In the name of Zeus himself I command thee to leave. You've hijacked this thread to bits.

Back to chem, what experiment do you guys think is coming up for Q. 3 the organic? Fair few have not come up in recent years?

Volatile Liquid/Heat of Neutralisation/production of O2 (redox of halogens could be an option)

Monsieur Folie

Scarlett Scout wrote: »

Volatile Liquid/Heat of Neutralisation/production of O2 (redox of halogens could be an option)

Is the volatile liquid an organic experiment? I thought it was one of the ones that fell into the 'other' category (i.e. not a titration or organic).

Saracarroll

Monsieur Folie wrote: »

Is the volatile liquid an organic experiment? I thought it was one of the ones that fell into the 'other' category (i.e. not a titration or organic).

When it came up in 2003 it was q3, so it wasn't considered as an organic (ethyne was)

Monsieur Folie

Saracarroll wrote: »

When it came up in 2003 it was q3, so it wasn't considered as an organic (ethyne was)

Yeah I thought so! I love that one! There's no fancy chemicals to learn off, just an example of a volatile liquid (propanone ) and then the method is fairly straightforward!

Saracarroll

Monsieur Folie wrote: »

Yeah I thought so! I love that one! There's no fancy chemicals to learn off, just an example of a volatile liquid (propanone ) and then the method is fairly straightforward!

Fingers crossed it comes up. What do u think the chances of an organic that we can't do will come up?

Random_Person

Saracarroll wrote: »

Fingers crossed it comes up. What do u think the chances of an organic that we can't do will come up?

Hopefully very likely.. the amount of work I've put into learning ethanal/ethanoic acid is crazy

Saracarroll

Random_Person wrote: »

Hopefully very likely.. the amount of work I've put into learning ethanal/ethanoic acid is crazy

Tell me about it, and if water or crystalisation or dissolved o2 dont come up, I am rolyally screwed!

finality

Random_Person wrote: »

Hopefully very likely.. the amount of work I've put into learning ethanal/ethanoic acid is crazy

We can't do those? We totally did those.

Ally7

Our teacher was told that sodium dichromate and potassium dichromate were carcinogenic, so students weren't supposed to carry them out but still had to know the theory of the experiments.

finality

I really think we did them. Or else I'm just visualizing them too well :L

Hayezer

Apparently ethanal and winkler(dissolved O2) sre coming up, not sure about the other :P

deathbythelc

finality wrote: »

I really think we did them. Or else I'm just visualizing them too well :L

My Chemistry teacher set them all up and did the experiment using water and green and orange food dye.