Um, Doc, it was a joke. You're taking it too literally.

This might not exactly improve your grade, but I suggest you go to www.dictionary.com and look up impact. Then print out the entire page and demand your history professor read every word, slowly, in your presence,especially the usage notes. Then ask him to look up pedantic, dogmatic, and moronic, and ask him to explain which one best describes himself (hints: it's not the first one; and extreme generosity would be needed to allow the second to be chosen).

They mean almost the same thing, but there is a subtle difference. In the examples you gave, I would say that "think" implies you are seeking someone's opinion, Whereas "find" has as sense of realization or discovery about it. In particular, in order to "find driving in Paris", you actually have to go to Paris and drive first, but you can have opinions or thoughts about driving there without ever having been there.

Yes, it is a word, Craig. It's in all of my dictionaries. I just checked a 40 year old dictionary and it has "societal" in it. it's defined as "of or pertaining to society".

Societal's definition is more restrictive, but is roughly included within the wider definition of "social".
The word "social" is a much broader word with more definitions, only one of which is similar (but not identical):
"of or having to do with human beings living together as a group in a situation in which their dealings with one another affect their common welfare."
That could be interpreted to mean a society, but could also mean a family, or any group with a common interest.
"Social" can also just mean friendly and outgoing. "Societal" has no such meaning.

I don't know exactly how you used the word, but if you used "societal" to mean "pertaining to society" then you were absolutely correct. Now, you probably could have used "social", and meant exactly the same thing, but that doesn't mean that societal was wrong.

In some cases, using the word social is ambiguous, precisely because it has so many different meanings. In that case, using societal would probably be preferred for clarity.

I suspect that your professor is trying to prove a different point. He may think you are using buzz words, purposely using flowery prose when simpler words would suffice.
Using societal when just social would do could be considered an example of this. Many people have a pet peeve about using buzz words. His lesson might be that one should express oneself as simply and clearly as possible. On the other hand, if societal was used correctly, then your prof may just have a bug up his ass. Still, in general, don't use a big word when a small one will do.

For more on this check out:

http://www.37signals.com/svn/archives2/buzzwords_say_all_the_wrong_things.php

oops, "p" is me.

Not so fast, Edna. A short search shows many grammar sites show that 's should be added to possesive singulars ending in s, others show no s, and still others show it to be the writer's choice.

Here's something else to consider when comparing spacing rules for general typing vs typesetting for books, newspapers, etc. When typing is done on an 8-1/2 x11 inch sheet of paper, using a double space may make sense. Most books are much narrower and the columns in most newspapers are barely a few inches wide. Using a double space in such a narrow column eats up a big chunk of the line and might look awkward.

Eleanor, I'm guessing you tried googling this and found nothing. I think you mean Tumbarumba, so it would be Tumba-bloody-rumba, not Kunga-bloody-Runga. This is probably the poem you're referring to:

http://www.abc.net.au/overnights/stories/s1307296.htm

Kyle, apparently, you aren't a very careful or attentive reader:
1 - I haven't passed anything off as fact.
2 - I have provided back up.
3 - You have also misquoted me.

You might find this interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputed_English_grammar

I think you might be one of the angry English speakers described therein, although I think I would prefer mad to angry in this case.

You are obviously an extreme prescriptivist. Hey, fine by me. I tend to lean that way myself, But to assert that yours is the only point of view, especially when it is an unpopular one on a controversial subject is rather myopic, and just seems ignorant and dogmatic. Such hostility. I'm guessing you were slapped upside the head once too often yourself (or perhaps not often enough).

Actually, seasons are not generally capitalized. They would only be capitalized if they were used in a title, e.g., Winter Olympics. Names of months and days of the week are capitalized.