Timing is everything. That's a phrase that we hear constantly. But how often do we apply it to our faith? We know that timing matters when buying a house or building a business. It also matters in sports (which is why you practice your "timing"). Even comedians work hard to get the timing of their jokes right.
But again, do we apply that same thought to our faith?
Is it any wonder we freeze in our tracks?
Not a week before. Not a month before. Not even an hour before.
Timing is everything. Even in our faith.
If you had a chance to question Jesus, would you?
Our natural reaction is "you bet I would!" But that's a very different picture than the one the Bible paints. In fact the people closest to Jesus often didn't question Jesus.
The Disciples were an interesting group. On the one hand they witnessed things that most of us never will. They saw miracles like people coming back from the dead (in non-zombie form) and the blind seeing. On top of all that they also had a chance to spend time 1-on-1 with God.
Now we can all talk to God in prayer. We can all get our questions answered that way. Prayer is an amazing thing. But it's not the same as talking to God while having a cup of Starbucks. The disciples though did this (although I'm not sure how many Starbucks there were in Galilee). They were able to talk, laugh, and just spend time with Jesus. They had a unique opportunity that none of us will get in this life.
And yet time and again they passed up on the opportunity to question Jesus.
Right before Jesus was crucified he began to talk about dying. The disciples, however, wanted no part of that conversation. They believed Jesus was going to be a great military leader. That he was going to reestablish a literal and physical kingdom, much like David. In short he was going to make Israel a world power again.
It would be as if George Washington had told his troops on the eve of the Revolutionary War that he was "about to die"? Or if Lincoln, during the height of the Civil War said he was about to die. People would have been terrified. Their leader, the person they put all their faith in, was going to die? How did that make sense? What was he talking about?
I think the disciples were afraid not just because Jesus said he would die, but because they couldn't understand how Jesus' death would bring about their image of a messiah. Dead leaders don't win wars after all.
Out of all of us the disciples were in the best position to question Jesus. Yet they didn't. They let fear hold them back. They more afraid of the truth than willing to trust Jesus.
Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if the disciples hadn't let fear rule those moments. Would the days following the crucifixion look different if they had really understood what Jesus' death had meant? What if the disciples had pursued an answer from Jesus? Would he have given it to them?
Of course that makes me think about you and I. What would our lives look like if we questioned Jesus for the truth, instead of letting fear stop us short?
We are often too afraid to ask God for help. We're afraid to ask because he might say "no." We're afraid to ask, because what does it mean if nothing happens? We're afraid to ask, because we can't see beyond our current problems. If we've only ever known suffering and fear, what else could there be?
We may be angry and yell at God and "question" his authority or justice. But we rarely question God seeking real answers. We don't want to understand what God has in mind for our lives if it means learning that it's not what we expected. And isn't that when we're the angriest at God? When our expectations don't match reality? How much less suffering we would endure if we just questioned God and actually listened for an answer!
It's hard to believe that R3 is entering its 4th year! (well technically "calendar year," R3's anniversary is in a few months). I never dreamed that I had enough to say to generate three posts a week. I find it amazing that I can do that. But that's not the only thing that makes this 4th year so remarkable. It wasn't that long ago that blogging didn't exist.
Think about that one for a while!
The internet has been a great technology for growing people's relationships with God. There is no other technology that allows someone to write in their spare time in Kansas but influence Christians in Australia, Indonesia, or even China. Or someone from Africa to influence people in Europe or America. The internet has had a profound impact on living a life of faith.
But blogging isn't the only change.
How we study the Bible has also changed. I can easily pull up Bible verses and do keyword searches online. If you own an iPhone you can download Bible apps and get the same thing. Never before has the Bible been so easy to access. While I still read a paper version of the Bible every day, I rarely use it for quick searches or to look things up. It just takes too long. Digital is the way to go.
And still there is more change.
Even the way we do Bible studies is different. There are online studies on hundreds of topics. Churches are giving away much of their own materials away for free. And now there are "social sites" popping up like EXAMEN.me. All dedicated to providing high quality Bible studies and devotionals.
There has never been a better time to learn about living out a life of faith. There has never been a time where so much has been available to so many. And I, for one, can't wait to see what the future holds.
As we go into the New Year, here is my challenge to you: find a new way to study the Bible and follow it for the next 30 days. As you go through it, come back here and let us know how it's going (I'm opening up the comments). Did it work? Was it a disaster? Did it revolutionize your life?
While most of us were busy celebrating the holidays, the world was in full motion. In a matter of about 24 hours we learned that a terrorist tried to kill 270 civilians by blowing up a plane. And while all of this was going on, the Pope was attacked during a Christmas service.
Fortunately both the passengers on the plane and the Pope escaped any significant injury (although a Vatican diplomat broke their hip and a passenger suffered 3rd degree burns wrestling the terrorist).
Reading headlines like this makes it easy to want to stick your fingers in your ears and hum Christmas carols really loudly. (I personally recommend Here Come Santa Claus.) But is that what we should be doing?
Now Security Analysts are paid to keep people safe. Their job is to limit risk. To create "risk management scenarios." But is that the job of a Christian? To stay safe? To manage risk? When I look at the Bible I see people who constantly put themselves in danger because that was where God was headed. They lived a life of faith so intensely that all that mattered was following God.
The Pope is a high profile figure. He's part celebrity. Part politician. Part religious figure. Which means he represents a very "appealing" target to people who may have psychological issues (as was the case with this woman).
I've never been the Pope. And not being Catholic, it's very unlikely I'll ever be the Pope. I've also never had anyone care enough about what I do to want to hurt me. I'm not famous, rich, or a religious figurehead. So I can't really understand what all comes with that. I also don't really understand what it's like to have my life constantly in danger. The most dangerous thing I do every day is scrape the ice off of my car.
But being the Pope is different.
He experiences all of those things. He has to make daily decisions that may cost him his life. And there are many people just like him, making those same kinds of decisions. But far too many people make choices based on risk management scenarios.
There is something seriously wrong with our churches when we put risk management above living out a life of faith. I applaud the Pope for being so accessible and putting his life on the line. I applaud the Christian who walks into danger, because that is where she sees God calling.
As we head into 2010 I want you to think about one question: Are you living a "safe" life? Or are you living the radical, revolutionary life that God calls us to?
I admit it. The last few weeks have been a bit up and down on R3. I haven't been able to post the usual three times a week. It seems events have been conspiring against me. At first I was sick. Then I realized it was NaNoWriMo. (That's National Novel Writing Month for those of you scoring at home.) And after writing about 20,000 words of a book, I had to put virtually everything on hold because, my friends, I have some good news to share. I was offered a job on Monday and accepted.
That means after all this time I will finally be employed.
If you've been following R3 for any length of time you know that this last year has been hard. I've been unemployed since the first of the year. And that takes a toll on you. More than just financially though. You can easily begin to doubt yourself. And at times I really questioned where I was going. Unemployment can also shake your faith. There were times when I really wondered if I was really following God or just going off on my own tangents. It also can impact your relationships. It's hard to be loving and engaged when you wonder where you will get enough money to pay the bills. It's also hard to stay active with your friends when they want to go do something that costs money and you don't have the funds for that.
Looking back on the year I realize just how much I have learned and just how much I've grown. I don't even feel like the same person anymore. And none of that would have been possible without trusting God and quitting my job. The ironic thing is, that despite all the pain this year has caused, it's something I wouldn't trade for anything. In fact, it's probably one of the best years I've ever had.
You see I don't want to go through the motions. I don't want to look back on my life and wonder, "did I really give everything?" I don't want to just be that guy who punches the clock and that's it. I want my life to make a difference. I want to advance the Kingdom in powerful ways, or at least in whatever ways I can.
Jesus once told the parable of the talents. In it he described three men who were each given talents (which was a sum of money equivalent to about 3 months of wages). Two of the men doubled what they had been given. But the last man didn't do anything with his talent. He was afraid and therefore didn't act.
When the master of the three men returned he demanded an account of how they had used the money. The first two were rewarded greatly, and the last man was punished. Not because he lost the money. But because he didn't do anything with his talent!
I would rather lead a life of adventure, and chaos, and unpredictability than live a safe, comfortable life that wasn't about pursuing God. I knew that I had a choice to make about my job. Stay there and be comfortable, but do nothing with my "talent." Or be willing to trust God so much that I would walk into a completely unpredictable world.
This is why the Matthew West song "The Motions" has become a theme song of sorts.
That's how I want to live. How about you? Are you going through the motions?
Revolution. That's a big theme around R3. In fact, that concept is a core part of what drives R3 (hence the line: radical, revolutionary, different). Being a revolutionary is part of what it means to live out a life of faith. Why am I talking about all of this? Because I am preparing to teach a new community group called Welcome to the Revolution. The class is based on the book written by Brian Tome. The book version of Welcome to the Revolution focuses on what it means to live out a life of faith as a new believer. The class I am teaching condenses these ideas into a six week period.
Because this is such an important topic to me, I was thrilled to have the opportunity to teach.
As I was preparing for the class I began to think about how you define a Revolution. What makes something revolutionary? What are the key components of a revolution? At the very core, what does a revolution look like? What does it mean?
As I thought about it, three concepts came to mind.
Revolutions are all about doing things differently.
While there are many different ways to describe a revolution, it's these three things that define a revolution. Especially the Kingdom revolution.
Revolution = different. If things are working perfectly in your life you don't need a revolution. If your government is doing the will of the people, you don't need a political revolution. If you're ok making your clothes by hand you don't need an industrial revolution. If you're content writing using only pen and paper you don't need a technological revolution. But if everything isn't perfect, then maybe it's time to do things differently. Maybe what's needed is a revolution.
Revolution = action. There isn't time off in a revolution. You don't go to commercial break. You can't call "time out" so you can go get a drink of water. Revolutions are 24/7. That doesn't mean there will be "fighting" all the time, but it does mean you are always on duty. You never know when the next battle will be fought, and if you aren't ready, you'll find yourself quickly defeated (metaphorically, spiritually, and perhaps even literally).
Revolution = hard. If someone told you a revolution was easy…they are lying. Changing things is never easy. This is especially true with the Kingdom revolution. The more headway you make the harder it gets, the bigger the challenges, and often, the more it costs.
If you aren't willing to accept these costs then your revolution will fail. In the physical world this means that your idea won't catch on. Or your political movement will die out. It will mean that change doesn't happen and the status quo remains. In the spiritual world it means your faith will falter, your trust in God will fail, and you'll find yourself in a very dark and lonely place.
That's the trade-off with a revolution. You can change the world, or you can fall in defeat. Revolutions aren't half way affairs. You are either winning a revolution or losing a revolution. But the pay-off for being a successful revolutionary is amazing. Despite the danger, despite the cost, the Kingdom revolution is worth it. Which is why I encourage you to seek out revolution in your life.
Become a revolutionary! Change the world!


Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 287(a), the products listed below are covered by or for use under one or more of the United States Patents listed below and their foreign counterparts. The reader is hereby placed on notice of these Patents. Other patents including patents issued after the date of this revision may also cover the products listed below.
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 287(a) one or more of the following U.S. Patents and/or their foreign counterparts cover these respective products.


text:
Q: DialogProc function asking to declare it self static here is my createdialogparam function which is calling DialogProc function from here-
 HRESULT AMEPreviewHandler::CreatePreviewWindow()
    {
        assert(m_hwndPreview == NULL);
        assert(m_hwndParent != NULL);
        HRESULT hr = S_OK;

        m_hwndPreview = CreateDialogParam( g_hInst,MAKEINTRESOURCE(IDD_MAINDIALOG), m_hwndParent,(DLGPROC)DialogProc, (LPARAM)this); /here the dialog proc function is called
        if (m_hwndPreview == NULL)
        {
          hr = HRESULT_FROM_WIN32(GetLastError());
        }
    ..........
    ...
    }

here is the definition of DialogProc function-
BOOL CALLBACK AMEPreviewHandler::DialogProc(HWND m_hwndPreview, UINT Umsg, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam)
    {
        static RECT m_rcParent ;

        switch(Umsg)
        {
        case WM_INITDIALOG:
            {
            return 0;
            }
            break;
........
case WM_COMMAND:
            {
                int ctl = LOWORD(wParam);
                int event = HIWORD(wParam);

                if (ctl == IDC_PREVIOUS && event == BN_CLICKED )
                {

                    CreateHtmlPreview(); //it must be static now and it is not able to access the non static vraibles delared globally in the program
                    return 0;
                }
}
}

and the declaration is like this-
static  BOOL CALLBACK  DialogProc(HWND hWindow, UINT uMsg, WPARAM wParam, LPARAM lParam); //suppose it is static ..it is not giving any error if static ..If it is not declared static it gives error
here -
m_hwndPreview = CreateDialogParam( g_hInst,MAKEINTRESOURCE(IDD_MAINDIALOG), m_hwndParent,(DLGPROC)DialogProc, (LPARAM)this); //error C2440: 'type cast' : cannot convert from 'overloaded-function' to 'DLGPROC'

Is there any way to access the globally declared variables inside the  static DialogProc or it is possible to access the globally declared variables inside the dialogproc without declaring the  those variables as static because t hey are also used as non static in other part of program ??

A: If by

globally declared variables inside the static DialogProc

you mean member variables in an instance of AMEPreviewHandler, I think you have sent what you need in the LPARAM:
m_hwndPreview = CreateDialogParam( ...(LPARAM)this);

When it calls your DialogProc these go to the last parameter: LPARAM lParam so you can do
AMEPreviewHandler* instance = (AMEPreviewHandler *)lParam;
instance->m_Whatever...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Beef cattle convert grass and roughage — which can't be eaten by humans — into high quality human food. In this course, you'll develop the knowledge and skills needed to analyse and make decisions about the management requirements of beef cattle.The course is designed for experiential learners and has a strong practical focus.
How Do You Decide Breeds to Raise?
Cattle with horns are more difficult to handle. This can result in bruising of meat, an important issue in marketing beef. Dehorning requires extra work for the producer and there is also the danger of infection or insect injury (especially in countries where screw worms is a problem).
Colour in some climates, can affect productivity of beef. In hot climates with intense sunlight, a light coat colours absorb less heat from the sun and aids in maintaining body temperature. In cold climates white udders may result in "snow burn". Pigment around the eyes in white-faced cattle reduces the incidence of cancer of the eyelid. A uniform colour provides the appearance (or illusion) of uniformity of type or conformation in a group of cattle.
Also a distinctive colour or colour pattern forms the trademark of particular breeds and for this reason breed societies adopt standard colours or colour patterns. The issue of selective breeding based on coat colour alone may result in the culling of animals regardless of their other merits, especially in breeds where uniform coat colour has proven difficult to "fix". To the extent that selection is made for coat colour, selection pressure for traits of greater economic importance is reduced.
Observable differences appear to exist between breeds, for example, some studies have found that in purebred Angus cattle, the gestation length averages 3 to 8 days less than Hereford or Shorthorn and calves are on average 5 to 8 pounds lighter at birth. Purebred Brahman cattle on average have gestation periods that are a few days longer than the British breeds. Crossing Brahman bulls with British cows tends to result in longer gestations.
The weaning weight of calves is a very important factor in profitable beef production. Some studies have shown that Angus cows tend to wean heavier calves than Herefords. In some areas Brahman cattle or Brahman cross cattle tend to wean calves that are considerably heavier than British breeds. Mothering ability is an important characteristic that varies within breeds and needs to be considered in any selection program.
The ability to gain weight rapidly and efficiently after weaning is another important consideration. Environmental and genetic factors will affect post weaning growth rates.
Meat quality refers to the palatability of meat, including tenderness, juiciness and flavour. Beef carcass quality grades are generally based on visual appraisal of the physiological maturity of the carcass and the intramuscular fat (marbling). Marbling can be influenced by selective breeding. Studies have found that cattle breeds such as Angus, Murray Grey, Shorthorns, and Wagyu cattle have higher marbling scores (on average) compared to cattle such as Simmentals, Charolais and Chianina. Marbling can also be influenced by time on feed and the type of feed.
Stress can affect meat colour and toughness. Dark-cutting beef (DCB) commonly results when cattle are subjected to prolonged stress just prior to slaughter. Muscle glycogen, or the energy reserves of the animal, has a large influence on meat colour and pH. Good quality beef has a final pH value close to 5.5. The disposition of cattle is very important as calm-natured cattle will produce less "dark-cutting" meat.
The choice of cattle breed is largely determined by the individual situation and markets. For example, many lot feeders show a preference for Angus cattle particularly if feeding for the Asian market. Intensive growing and range grazing situations might require different breeds. The climatic situation also has a large bearing on breed suitability. Brahman cattle, for example, are adapted to handle tropical situations. They appear to handle poorer quality pastures better and have a high degree of tolerance to many external parasites when compared with British breeds.
British bred cattle were developed in areas of temperate climate and generally don't have thermo-regulatory mechanisms good enough to maintain body temperatures in a hot environment.
Hereditary defects occur in many cattle breeds and producers should be aware of these. For example, dwarfism has been a problem in Herefords and Angus cattle. Culling of breeding animals who exhibit undesirable traits will be necessary.


Hi mis claire, i just bought 2 of your newest checkerd shirt! The design & material were so great. Even the buttons are pretty and stylish! I hope you will make more checkered design in future with the same kind of material such as hooded, or jacket, or long jacket! Thanks mis claire for existing!
Hi Izani, Thanks for your feedback on our Channing Shirt. Will definitely inform our product team on your suggestions.


text:
Q: Cross-Domain ajax to REST server with jQuery I'm creating a mobile app using PhoneGap. So effectively I'm writing the app in jQuery Mobile, HTML and CSS.
Here's the problem: The server is a REST implementation. This means that to create a new 'entity' (e.g. user, car, hot babe), the server listens for POST requests. If the server will respond to GET requests by returning existing 'entities'.
How does one get the mobile app to send a POST request from jQuery? This sounds simple, but keep in mind that jQuery will change a jsonp datatype request to a GET, even if you specify POST. Also, keep in mind that the server and the app is not on the same domain, so this request is send cross domain, so setting the datatype to json will not work.
I have been stuck with this for 4 long hours. I can get it to work in the blink of an eye if I only care about GET requests, but getting a POST on the server has proven to be impossible so far.
Here is a simplification of the server-side code:
 class GatewayService extends Service[Request, Response] {
   def apply(request: Request) = {
     request.method -> Path(request.path) match {
       case GET -> Root / "car" => {
         println("---Get car---")
       }
       case POST -> Root / "car" => {
         println("---New car---")
       }
       case _ => {
         println("---Other method type ---")
      }
    }
}

And here's the jQuery code:
function serverRequest(formId, url) {
    var result = ""
    var formData = readFormData(formId);
    console.log("Submitting form:\n"+JSON.stringify(formData));

    $.ajax({
        type:"POST",
        url: url,
        data: JSON.stringify(formData),
       dataType: "json",
        success: function(response){
            alert(response['message']);
            console.log("Received response: "+JSON.stringify(response));
            result = response;
         },
         error: function(jqXHR, textStatus, errorThrown){
             console.log(
                 "The following error occured: "+ jqXHR,
                 textStatus, errorThrown
             );
         },
         complete: function(){
             //Nothing here for now
         }
    });
    return result;
}

If you have any ideas on getting a POST request cross domain with jQuery, please share your secret.
It appears that you cannot simply access a REST server directly from a mobile app developed on jQuery Mobile. Is this correct?

A: Did you try using CORS instead of using JSONP? This should be supported by all modern browsers (and thus hopefully by phonegap too). This post relates to it: https://stackoverflow.com/a/8773095/773339
JSONP is limited to GET only.

A: As you also know that, you cannot send a JSON or JSONP request as a POST request. A JSON or JSONP request is always a GET request. To get round this you can post to a page on your domain and then use this page to post the data. Like:

var data ="url=http://www.example.com/post_url.php&parameters=1&para=2";
 $.ajax({
  url: "your_domain_url",
  data: data,
  type: "POST",
  success: function(data, textStatus, jqXHR){
    console.log('Success ' + data);
  },
  error: function (jqXHR, textStatus, errorThrown){
    console.log('Error ' + jqXHR);
  }
});

Get the post data in the file that exists in your domain and post it from there.
Hope that helps in some way.


text:
namespace LH.TestObjects.Tests.Compare
{
    using System.Linq;
    using Domain;
    using FluentAssertions;
    using NUnit.Framework;

    [TestFixture]
    public class WhenComparingObjects : ComparatorTestsBase
    {
        [Test]
        public void ThenShouldReturnDifferentIfOneIsNull()
        {
            var obj = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();
            var result = this.Comparator.Compare(obj, null);

            result.AreSame.Should().BeFalse();
            result.Differences.Should().NotBeNull();
            result.Differences.Count().Should().Be(1);
            result.Differences.Single().PropertyName.Should().BeNullOrEmpty();
            result.Differences.Single().ActualValue.Should().BeNull();
            result.Differences.Single().ExpectedValue.Should().NotBeNull();
        }

        [Test]
        public void ThenShouldReturnSameIfPropertyValuesMatch()
        {
            var objA = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();
            var objB = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();

            var result = this.Comparator.Compare(objA, objB);

            result.AreSame.Should().BeTrue();
        }

        [Test]
        public void ThenShouldReturnDifferentIfStringPropDiffers()
        {
            var objA = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();
            var objB = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet2();

            objA.IntProp = objB.IntProp;
            objA.StringProp2 = objB.StringProp2;

            var result = this.Comparator.Compare(objA, objB);

            result.AreSame.Should().BeFalse();

            result.Differences.Should().NotBeNull();
            result.Differences.Count().Should().Be(1);

            var difference = result.Differences.Single();
            difference.ExpectedValue.Should().Be(objA.StringProp);
            difference.ActualValue.Should().Be(objB.StringProp);
            difference.PropertyName.Should().Be("StringProp");
            difference.PropertyType.Should().Be(typeof (string));
        }

        [Test]
        public void ThenMessageShouldNotBeEmptyIfDifferenceIsFound()
        {
            var objA = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();
            var objB = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();

            objA.StringProp = "AAA";
            objB.StringProp = "BBB";

            var result = this.Comparator.Compare(objA, objB);

            result.AreSame.Should().BeFalse();
            result.Differences.Should().NotBeNull();
            result.Differences.Count().Should().Be(1);

            var difference = result.Differences.Single();
            difference.Message.Should().NotBeNullOrEmpty();
            difference.Message.Should().Contain(objA.StringProp);
            difference.Message.Should().Contain(objB.StringProp);
        }

        [Test]
        public void ThenShouldFailIfOneValueIsNull()
        {
            var objA = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();
            var objB = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();

            objB.StringProp = null;

            var result = this.Comparator.Compare(objA, objB);
            result.AreSame.Should().BeFalse();
            result.Differences.Count().Should().Be(1);
        }

        [Test]
        public void ThenShouldPassIfBothValuesAreNull()
        {
            var objA = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();
            var objB = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();

            objA.StringProp = null;
            objB.StringProp = null;

            var result = this.Comparator.Compare(objA, objB);
            result.AreSame.Should().BeTrue();
        }

        [Test]
        public void ThenShouldLogIfValuesDiffer()
        {
            var logCallCount = 0;
            this.Comparator.Log.Callback(x => logCallCount++);

            var objA = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet1();
            var objB = SimpleDomain.CreateObjectWithValueSet2();

            this.Comparator.Compare(objA, objB);
            logCallCount.Should().Be(3);
        }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Master Yoda's decision making regarding the use of the Force
At the end of Episode II: when Yoda was fighting Count Dooku, couldn't Master Yoda use the Force to pull out Anakin and Obi-Wan instead of trying to prevent the tower from falling over the unconscious Anakin and Obi-Wan? Failing to do so, Dooku escaped during Yoda's attempt to save them.
Null♦
You_Shall_Not_PassYou_Shall_Not_Pass
It's more likely that instead of trying to manipulate two separate bodies, he chose to focus on one falling item. – phantom42 Sep 26 '14 at 12:34
Very wise, he is. :D – You_Shall_Not_Pass Sep 26 '14 at 12:36
Hm, two bodies weighting less than 200kg total, for half a second, vs a pillar/tower (apparently) weighting much more and for an extended period of time? Note that if the number of bodies really matters more than the weight, he could as well have pushed the tower so that it falls 1m behind the Jedi. But there can be a variety of reasons: for example, that the damage caused by the pillar hitting the ground would have been too important, or that he wanted to give immediate medical assistance to Anakin and Obi-Wan anyway, or that he "knew" that he could not reasonably hope to stop Dooku... – T. Verron Sep 26 '14 at 12:47
you also dont want to just whip around 2 ingured guys, and throw them across the room. – Himarm Sep 26 '14 at 13:09
@T.Verron, I recall from Yoda's teaching to Luke in The Empire Strikes Back that size/weight doesn't matter (scene lifting a X-wing from Dagobah's swamp). – Kreann Sep 26 '14 at 13:11
AFAIK, there's no in-universe canon answer. The movie of course doesn't supply one.
Neither does the R.A. Salvatore's novelization, really:
"The battle is far from over!" Dooku stubbornly argued. "This is just the beginning!" Reaching into the Force, he took hold of one of the huge cranes within the hangar and threw it down at Obi-Wan and Anakin.
"Anakin!" Obi-Wan cried. He grabbed at the plummeting crane with the Force, and Anakin, startled awake, did so, as well. Even working together, they hadn't the strength left to stop its crushing descent.
But Yoda did.
Yoda grabbed the crane and held it fast, but in doing so, he had to release Dooku. The Count wasted no time, sprinting away, leaping up the ramp to his sail ship. As Yoda began to move the fallen crane harmlessly aside, the sail ship's engine roared to life, and all three Jedi watched helplessly as Count Dooku blasted away.
We can take a couple of guesses though:
They didn't know where the crane would land. Simply moving Anakin wouldn't have necessarily helped
It's a basic precept of emergency/trauma medicine, that moving an injured person - especially with the significant amount of force needed to quickly yank someone from under the falling crane - may significantly worsen them.
Even leaving that aside, a Force Push could injure a person in general, if it was done too hard/fast. Human body is fragile.
On Yoda's part, he already had Obi-Wan concentrating on moving the column. So he was better off joining that effort rather than doing his own with unpredictable results and interplay of the Force pushes in 2 different directions.
"Size matters not". For Yoda, lifting the crane may have been just as easy weight-wise as to lift a human.
Now that we said all of guessing, the real reason is one that is always explicitly stated in Star Wars material for actions of a Jedi in battle - Yoda wasn't thinking logically or making considered decisions. He was following the flow and the will of the Force.
DVK-on-Ahch-ToDVK-on-Ahch-To
Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged star-wars or ask your own question.
Anakin, Obi-wan, and Count Dooku's fighting styles
What does a high Midi-chlorian count actually mean?
Why doesn't Obi-Wan Kenobi use the Force more?
Why didn't Obi-Wan use The Force?
Has Qui-Gon ever visibly appeared as a Force ghost?
Why does Yoda think that Obi-Wan won't ever be strong enough to face Sidious?
In Attack of the Clones, why didn't Yoda ram Dooku's escape ship with the falling silo?
Why didn't Mace go with Yoda to stop Dooku from escaping?
Why don't Force users always resort to telekinesis after they are disarmed?
In Star Wars, does Yoda become more or less powerful with age?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


We have Package Deals to give you the services you need at a price that fits your budget. Each Package Deal includes the previous package unless otherwise noted. If you have any questions or concerns, contact us to discuss your needs.
Applied at time of Aeration, Rate: 6lbs per 1,000 sq. ft.
be pulled from the plant beds. Turf areas will be treated as necessary. Cracks in the curbs, driveway, sidewalks, etc.
Limestone application, 25lbs per 1000 sq. ft.
nutrients correctly and increases microbial activity, which is very important to the long-term health of your lawn.