If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   "Six percent of Americans believe in unicorns. Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together. Eighteen percent believe the sun revolves around the Earth. Nearly 30% believe cloud computing involves actual clouds"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 521
    More: Fail  
•       •       •

14292 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Mar 2013 at 10:29 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



521 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-14 08:51:10 AM
seriously? wow, Americans are pretty retarded.
 
2013-03-14 08:52:36 AM
Unicorn thread?
 
2013-03-14 09:18:15 AM
Is this the thread where we find out the percentage of things that Farkers think are real?
 
2013-03-14 09:19:08 AM
Nobody has ever gone broke underestimating the stupidity of the American people.
 
2013-03-14 09:21:04 AM
Dumbasses, everyone knows unicorns are extinct!
 
2013-03-14 09:23:53 AM
Jesus rode on a unicorn in the clouds chasing the earth around the sun!
 
2013-03-14 09:27:56 AM
i1151.photobucket.com
Fat, stupid & American is no way to go through life, son.
 
2013-03-14 09:36:33 AM
So many of these are arbitrary. There are a couple animals thought to have been the source for the unicorn. When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way. And a huge chunk of internet transmission goes through satellites, meaning your cloud computing data is passing through actual clouds.
 
2013-03-14 09:37:54 AM
It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist,

This is gonna be good...
 
2013-03-14 09:39:18 AM
I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.
 
2013-03-14 09:43:36 AM

Barfmaker: It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist,

This is gonna be good...


With Buckley gone, it's kind of hard to refute that.
 
2013-03-14 09:49:28 AM

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans people are pretty retarded unintelligent.

 
2013-03-14 09:53:21 AM
Holy crap, that adds up to 78%, that's like half of everybody
 
2013-03-14 10:23:43 AM
this is why we can't have nice things.
 
2013-03-14 10:25:40 AM
47% voted for Mitt Romney.
 
2013-03-14 10:26:02 AM

St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.


Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?
 
2013-03-14 10:28:02 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So many of these are arbitrary. There are a couple animals thought to have been the source for the unicorn. When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way. And a huge chunk of internet transmission goes through satellites, meaning your cloud computing data is passing through actual clouds.


Huge? For very small values of huge.

Sat sucks for internet.
 
2013-03-14 10:29:31 AM
That might be the most scathing column I have ever read. I can hardly wait to see the shiatstorm this thread will inevitably become.

/your popcorn, go get it

frathousesports.net
 
2013-03-14 10:29:51 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?


Maybe other types of clouds would work too, like the cloud of smoke from a Diesel engine exhaust. Every highway could become a data storage facility.
 
2013-03-14 10:30:31 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?


I know that lightning bolts carry 1.21 Jiggabytes of data.
 
2013-03-14 10:30:36 AM

BunkyBrewman: Is this the thread where we find out the percentage of things that Farkers think are real?


You mean the thrice weekly wrestling threads?
 
2013-03-14 10:32:04 AM
I Believe......
www.truehealthfacts.com
.....in Chemtrails
 
2013-03-14 10:32:36 AM
Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together. Eighteen percent believe the sun revolves around the Earth.

Jesus farking Christ. There is no hope for us.
 
2013-03-14 10:33:48 AM
You should see the percentage that believes in gun control.
 
2013-03-14 10:34:36 AM

Counter_Intelligent: Unicorn thread?


If by "unicorn" you mean attractive, single bisexual women.
 
2013-03-14 10:34:46 AM
USA! USA! USA!

Oh, look, a Walmart! Let's go to the Sarah Palin book signing.
 
2013-03-14 10:35:01 AM
"Newtown shooting happened and 20 young children were massacred due to America's fetish for, obsession with and addiction to firearms, violence and fear"

What percentage believe this bullshiat?
 
2013-03-14 10:36:20 AM

Counter_Intelligent: Unicorn thread?


denver.mylittlefacewhen.com
 
2013-03-14 10:36:42 AM
What percentage of Americans lie or pick random answers on surveys?
 
2013-03-14 10:36:51 AM
And every single one of them vote Democrat too.
 
2013-03-14 10:36:54 AM
media.tumblr.com
 
2013-03-14 10:37:02 AM

Molavian: You should see the percentage that believes in gun control.


I wonder how many think more guns = more safety.

Since we have 300 million people, and 200 million privately-owned firearms, shouldn't our murder rate be REALLY low?
 
2013-03-14 10:37:08 AM
Believing in UFO's isn't a stretch. I wish one would come take me from this crazy planet.
 
2013-03-14 10:37:24 AM
i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-03-14 10:37:32 AM
I wonder what percent believes that Huffpost is real news?
 
2013-03-14 10:37:45 AM
This wouldn't be a problem if we simply fed our children the way they need to be fed.

calorielab.com
 
2013-03-14 10:37:45 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?


There are online random number generators online that use current whether data to get the randomness.
 
2013-03-14 10:39:05 AM
Ha, I thought the image in the article looked familiar

d.gr-assets.com
 
2013-03-14 10:40:02 AM
Surveys tend to have an established minimum %, due to people screwing with the presenter, misunderstanding the question, being insane, or some linear combination of all three. I'm amazed that the unicorn question made it as low as 4%, actually. I'd always thought the floor was around 9%.
 
2013-03-14 10:40:04 AM
But nobody doesn't Like Sarah Lee.......
 
2013-03-14 10:40:26 AM

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans people are pretty retarded.


Similar polls have been done in other countries, with similar results. People are stupid all over. For example, many people in Iceland believe elves actually exist.

This is not unusual, nor is is particularly American. People are stupid all over.
 
2013-03-14 10:40:37 AM
Wait, why did the author pick on Kansas? Is this one of those "flyover country" things where we pretend that a large portion of the country doesn't count because some people live there that have opinions that we disagree with? How "progressive".

/Mark Morford sounds like a douchbag
 
2013-03-14 10:40:47 AM
It couldn't be that there has been an intentional and systematic effort to create a subservient, uncritical, ignorant population which can be easily manipulated to passively serve the 1% and their goals.

Nah, that's just crazy talk. Tinfoil hat, even.
 
2013-03-14 10:41:30 AM
"......Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together....."

Absolutely. Raquel Welch would never lie to me.

/obscure?
//perhaps for the younger farkers.....
 
2013-03-14 10:42:10 AM
I don't know which is sadder: that 37% of people are stupid, or that I'm not surprised.
 
2013-03-14 10:42:11 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Molavian: You should see the percentage that believes in gun control.

I wonder how many think more guns = more safety.

Since we have 300 million people, and 200 million privately-owned firearms, shouldn't our murder rate be REALLY low?


I wonder what how many of those who were murdered had a firearm on them at the time, or if those murdered even owned one.
 
2013-03-14 10:42:31 AM

GiantRex: That might be the most scathing column I have ever read. I can hardly wait to see the shiatstorm this thread will inevitably become.

/your popcorn, go get it

[frathousesports.net image 350x350]


I wouldn't worry about it, for several reasons:

1. the author is a smarmy dick
2. his "blog" sucks
3. quoting "surveys" is about as intellectually lazy a writing style as one could possibly imagine.
4. STRAW MEN, STRAW MEN EVERYWHERE!

Ask yourself a serious question: have you ever answered a social survey seriously? Of course not:

Do I believe in Unicorns (what a stupid question) hell yeah! Sure I do, idiot farking "survey" taker.

That way grossly lazy "intellectual liberals" can write grossly lazy, pandering blogs for people who enjoy the pandering.

For a writer, he is one hell of a yoga teacher.
 
2013-03-14 10:42:44 AM

bdub77: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?

I know that lightning bolts carry 1.21 Jiggabytes of data.


That's racist.
 
2013-03-14 10:42:59 AM
God is an American.
 
2013-03-14 10:43:04 AM
There is no incentive for them NOT to believe.

The incentive to believe in weird things is that people might find it interesting to talk to you.
 
2013-03-14 10:43:46 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other


If you simplify any observation to the point that it is utterly meaningless, then it is inane, that's for sure.  Knowledge of the planets goes back at least to the Sumerian civilization.
 
2013-03-14 10:44:06 AM
Hold on a second, Unicorns aren't real? Didn't North Korea find their lair?
 
2013-03-14 10:44:26 AM
I'm going to take the approach here that the select group of people interviewed do not really represent the populace of the US in general.  Like, they went directly to the backwoods of Kentucky, or the deep south, or some shiat.  If I were to run a similar survey just in the Northeast, or in California, or even farking Detroit, the numbers would look nothing like that.
 
m00
2013-03-14 10:45:13 AM
"...asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist."

There we go...
 
2013-03-14 10:45:19 AM
Elitist article is elitist.
 
2013-03-14 10:45:32 AM
Only six percent?

i25.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-14 10:45:34 AM
 
2013-03-14 10:45:42 AM
I'd definitely fark with an interviewer who wanted to know if I thought unicorns were real.  Yeah they're real.  My grandpappy rode one back and forth near the old crick.
 
2013-03-14 10:46:41 AM
A hilariously large percent of terrified right-wingers are convinced Obama is soon going to take away all their guns, so when the Newtown shooting happened and 20 young children were massacred due to America's fetish for, obsession with and addiction to firearms, violence and fear

I was going to make a snide remark about Huffington publishing an article debunking bullshiat undermining their own business model, but apparently they're doing that rhetorical trick where they deride someone else's slightly stupider bullshiat to set the bar incredibly low when lauding/affirming their own bullshiat.

So, actually, yeah, that's pretty clever.  A very effective trick for building the loyalty of stupid people, i.e. the kinds of people that get their news and opinion from SFC writers that have a second job as a Yoga instructor.  You see it a lot in politics, but that kind of nuance goes over the heads of most journalists these days.  Apparently at least the outright propagandists are re-learning basic psychology, took 'em long enough.

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans are pretty retarded.


By retarded I assume you mean "sarcastic", about 80% of the people that I know would, given the opportunity, give the answer that is funniest or that would give the funniest results on the completed survey over what they know to be the correct answer essentially every time.
 
2013-03-14 10:46:42 AM
Yuuup, pretty much, half of the population is of below average intelligence.
 
2013-03-14 10:46:54 AM
that writer wrote like a douchenozzle.  and, why pick on louisiana?  jindal said something clever, we should have gotten a pass...

either way, everyone knows that nessie was actually a botched sex rite performed by aleister crowley in the house overlooking the loch ness (later bought by the guy from led zeplin, who sold it after he suffered tragedies... because, well, it was aleister crowley's botched satanico-sexio ritual house).  doesn't affect evolution... but, breaks down the barrier between us and the abyss.

on a serious note, however, new orleans did pass a regulation that no public schools will interrupt the teaching of evolution or teach creationism as if it were real, and will not allow any revisionist histories that take about how great the crusades were, and how much black people liked slavery (that's more of a texas education thing, according to perry).
 
2013-03-14 10:47:11 AM
How come in areas where there are a lot of churches, the crime rate is higher? One would think more churches=more good law abiding people. Yet, the opposite is true.
 
2013-03-14 10:47:22 AM

shoegaze99: some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans people are pretty retarded.

Similar polls have been done in other countries, with similar results. People are stupid all over. For example, many people in Iceland believe elves actually exist.

This is not unusual, nor is is particularly American. People are stupid all over.


Farking communist! How dare you suggest that Amurcans aren't the stupidest people in the industrial world. If you don't love Amurca, get the hell out.
 
2013-03-14 10:47:24 AM
And most of them can vote. Some are politicians and some are our bosses.
 
2013-03-14 10:47:29 AM

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans are pretty retarded.


GAT_00: Nobody has ever gone broke underestimating the stupidity of the American people.


oldfarthenry: [i1151.photobucket.com image 180x180]
Fat, stupid & American is no way to go through life, son.


JackieRabbit: USA! USA! USA!

Oh, look, a Walmart! Let's go to the Sarah Palin book signing.


Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Americans, the scum of the Earth.
 
2013-03-14 10:48:08 AM
And we need to *slash* teacher salaries. Right-o.
 
2013-03-14 10:48:13 AM

powhound: Believing in UFO's isn't a stretch. I wish one would come take me from this crazy planet.


I wish authors were smart enough not to use "UFO" interchangeably with "alien spacecraft." You'd be a moron to deny UFOs exist. Alien spacecraft? Notsomuch.
 
2013-03-14 10:48:20 AM
Adding up the numbers, that accounts for Obama supporters and social Conservatives.

/we are sooo farked
 
2013-03-14 10:48:35 AM

snocone: Yuuup, pretty much, half of the population is of below average intelligence.


Well, if you are going to start with made up assumptions then we have nothing to discuss.
 
2013-03-14 10:48:51 AM

halfof33: GiantRex: That might be the most scathing column I have ever read. I can hardly wait to see the shiatstorm this thread will inevitably become.

/your popcorn, go get it

[frathousesports.net image 350x350]

I wouldn't worry about it, for several reasons:

1. the author is a smarmy dick
2. his "blog" sucks
3. quoting "surveys" is about as intellectually lazy a writing style as one could possibly imagine.
4. STRAW MEN, STRAW MEN EVERYWHERE!

Ask yourself a serious question: have you ever answered a social survey seriously? Of course not:

Do I believe in Unicorns (what a stupid question) hell yeah! Sure I do, idiot farking "survey" taker.

That way grossly lazy "intellectual liberals" can write grossly lazy, pandering blogs for people who enjoy the pandering.

For a writer, he is one hell of a yoga teacher.



img13.imageshack.us
 
2013-03-14 10:49:14 AM

m00: "...asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist."

There we go...


Yeah, that turned me off the article entirely. I know quite a number of people who consider themselves "conservative" who:

- Aren't delusional enough to believe the US was founded as a "Christian" nation
- Understand how the universe works
- Don't watch FOX

Now, are they in line with the rank and file, or the current batch of Tea Party coonts in office? No. But they are intelligent, well read, and not against intellectualism.
 
2013-03-14 10:49:33 AM

durbnpoisn: I'm going to take the approach here that the select group of people interviewed do not really represent the populace of the US in general.  Like, they went directly to the backwoods of Kentucky, or the deep south, or some shiat.  If I were to run a similar survey just in the Northeast, or in California, or even farking Detroit, the numbers would look nothing like that.


But since there are no sample numbers i am going with him just making up a bunch of shiat cause he be jealous he aint got no  unicorns in his basement
 
2013-03-14 10:49:36 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Since we have 300 million people, and 200 million privately-owned firearms, shouldn't our murder rate be REALLY low?


Outside of areas dominated by drug trafficking, gangs, etc. it is. Cities like Washington DC, Baltimore, Detroit, New Orleans, etc. disproportionately contribute to the violent crime rate in the US.

The number of guns in the country and guns-per-capita are at an all-time high while gun-related homicide rates are at their lowest point since 1964 and have been trending downwards for years.

There are quite a few states with lax gun laws, large amounts of guns and gun owners, and gun-related crime rates lower than that of other developed countries.

Could things be improved? Absolutely, but the average gun owner isn't the one going out and committing crimes.
 
2013-03-14 10:50:00 AM
60% of the time it works every time.
 
2013-03-14 10:50:12 AM

durbnpoisn: I'm going to take the approach here that the select group of people interviewed do not really represent the populace of the US in general.  Like, they went directly to the backwoods of Kentucky, or the deep south, or some shiat.  If I were to run a similar survey just in the Northeast, or in California, or even farking Detroit, the numbers would look nothing like that.


lol. You know how I know you haven't traveled the US very much?
 
2013-03-14 10:50:25 AM
I remember the good old days when we just shared stuff over a network.  We didn't have none of this fancy 'cloud computing' then.

/off my lawn
 
2013-03-14 10:50:36 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?


I tried to catch a cloud once, but I mist.
 
2013-03-14 10:50:42 AM

The Snow Dog: powhound: Believing in UFO's isn't a stretch. I wish one would come take me from this crazy planet.

I wish authors were smart enough not to use "UFO" interchangeably with "alien spacecraft." You'd be a moron to deny UFOs exist. Alien spacecraft? Notsomuch.


I'm sure they exist SOMEWHERE in the Universe. But to say they've visted a backwater planet which hasn't discovered Arcturian 10D Ultraporn yet? Nah.
 
2013-03-14 10:51:03 AM

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans are pretty retarded.

 This just in.  People lie on polls to be funny.
You don't like the people here?  Go back north.  You won't be missed.
 
2013-03-14 10:51:10 AM

Raharu: That way grossly lazy "intellectual liberals" can write grossly lazy, pandering blogs for people who enjoy the pandering.


I see you had the good fortune of not reading the linked blog. Good for you.
 
2013-03-14 10:51:50 AM
The ban on lead paint is beginning to reduce the number of Republican voters.

The effect is somewhat muted by the rise of the "cry it out" Ferberizer method of leaving infants to cry themselves to sleep.  Ferberizing infants breaks their will and teaches them that they are all alone in the world and that hope is foolish. You can't trust or love anyone, even your own parents.  The cry-it-out method is "sold" to frazzled moms as a way to help children sleep but that is bullshiat.  Who does it really help?  Mom's employer.  These ferberized babies will grow into adults with serious fear and trust issues... in other words, they will be receptive to the rhetorical musings of the Republican Fear Machine.
 
2013-03-14 10:52:02 AM
 
2013-03-14 10:52:12 AM
worst of all, 4% of america reads stuff on huffington post.
 
2013-03-14 10:52:56 AM

Voiceofreason01: Wait, why did the author pick on Kansas? Is this one of those "flyover country" things where we pretend that a large portion of the country doesn't count because some people live there that have opinions that we disagree with? How "progressive".

/Mark Morford sounds like a douchbag


You sound offended. Tell your unicorn we're sorry.

cnbcsucks.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-14 10:53:30 AM
Let's round it out with the rest of them believe that politicians no matter the party, give one hundred percent of their hearts about the people.

Because everyone knows (insert politician) knocks on your door with a pie and asks if you have a card game going.
 
2013-03-14 10:53:43 AM
100% of the people who commented in this thread believe they are smart.
 
2013-03-14 10:54:18 AM

m00: "...asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist."

There we go...


This. The article very quickly devolves into "see people are dumb because they don't believe what I believe". The % of people who believe in unicorns thing is just a smokescreen.
 
2013-03-14 10:54:29 AM
fc03.deviantart.net
You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D
 
2013-03-14 10:54:33 AM
Cloud computing doesn't work well in Germany, where it's so sunny all the time.
 
2013-03-14 10:54:50 AM
How to reach the not-very-bright hordes, when they simply refuse to be reached by logic, fact, or modern mode?

You're on the right track, keep it up.
 
2013-03-14 10:54:51 AM
Just Another OC Homeless Guy:
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Americans, the scum of the Earth.

Normally, I'd point out how various other nations are equally farked up in various ways, but we've already had two threads this morning discussing the US's manipulation of the world food market for international political leverage and how we (and China) unintentionally set of regional famines several times during the cold war despite global food supplies being more than sufficient for the global population.

So... too depressed to pile more examples of humanity not even living up to its own basic moral standards on the plate.  Suffice to say that you shouldn't look into Italian or French politics, ever, if you want to complain about the US, and you should also avoid any news from the UK containing "parliament" "house", or "MP" and definitely refuse to learn anything about Israel.

//The rest of first-world Europe is mostly easier, avoid any news related to immigration or muslim rights and you can probably remain smugly superior with only mild ignorance.
 
2013-03-14 10:54:56 AM
My first reaction was "I don't want to live on this planet anymore" but then I remembered that the dumbest quartile of kids at my school didn't vanish from the face of the earth when they left school. A lot of people just aren't that bright.
 
2013-03-14 10:55:08 AM
Shows you just how dumb the rest of the world is.
 
2013-03-14 10:55:29 AM

hardinparamedic: I'm sure they exist SOMEWHERE in the Universe. But to say they've visted a backwater planet which hasn't discovered Arcturian 10D Ultraporn yet? Nah.


The point is that UFOs are not necessarily alien spacecraft, they are unidentified flying objects, i.e. stuff in the sky that has not been identified.

So yes, he's right, you'd be a moron to deny that UFOs exist ... and it has nothing to do with what may or may not exist elsewhere in the universe. Right here, on Earth, UFOs undoubtedly, unquestionably exist because there have been flying objects we cannot identify. They're probably easily explained and Earthly in origin. but that's not the point. Unidentified is.
 
2013-03-14 10:55:45 AM
This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!
 
2013-03-14 10:55:46 AM
Wow.. the guy who wrote the article is just as stupid as the people he is complaining about...
 
2013-03-14 10:56:28 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?


Snow with a memory?  Not my problem!
 
2013-03-14 10:57:09 AM
Right, and people are 100% honest when they're asking ridiculous questions on a survey.
 
2013-03-14 10:57:38 AM
Stan & Kyle said it best.
25% of Americans are retarted.  At least 25%
 
2013-03-14 10:57:40 AM
Unicorns are real...they are just big and grey. farm9.staticflickr.com
Sadly, if unicorns really were real, some culture would likely view their horns as some sort of horse-viagra. There would be a trade in them, and the unicorns would be hunted down, horns hacked off, and the animal left for dead.

Humans suck.
 
2013-03-14 10:57:42 AM

Barfmaker: It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist,

This is gonna be good...


Intellectual conservatives do still exist, they just vote Democrat because there is only one way to vote in the US if you even have a modicum of intelligence (and don't earn more than a million per year and fark everyone who doesn't).
 
2013-03-14 10:57:45 AM
My dead Grandpa (RIP awesome dude), denied the moon landing actually happened, tons of people still think Obama is a Muslim, 9/11 truthers still exist, a lot of people think Miller Lite is a beer, and the entire country was duped into believing that Iraq had WMDs. So, even though these statistics are probably inaccurate, I don't doubt that a small percentage of people would believe in unicorns or all of the other BS from the article.

/fark yeah 'merica
 
2013-03-14 10:58:02 AM
Im sure that 99% of North Koreans think their country is the super awesomest on Earth too.
 
2013-03-14 10:58:46 AM

Sim Tree: Surveys tend to have an established minimum %, due to people screwing with the presenter, misunderstanding the question, being insane, or some linear combination of all three. I'm amazed that the unicorn question made it as low as 4%, actually. I'd always thought the floor was around 9%.


I came to say something the same, most people are just farking with these inane questions.
 
2013-03-14 10:59:07 AM
Oh......dear.
 
2013-03-14 10:59:29 AM

BalugaJoe: God is an American.


I'm afraid of Americans

Johnny wants a plane
Johnny wants to suck on a Coke
Johnny wants a woman
Johnny wants to think of a joke
Uh-uh-uh uh, uh, uh-uh uh-uh-uh
Johnny's in America
 
2013-03-14 10:59:50 AM

JarynFrostwing: [fc03.deviantart.net image 850x549]
You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D


That's Wildfire!
 
2013-03-14 11:01:01 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way.


For asteroids floating in deep space perhaps.  But for the Earth and Sun - no, you can't.  It's pretty easy to prove that the Earth revolves around the Sun because the center of it's orbit is actually INSIDE the sun.
 
2013-03-14 11:01:22 AM

Ivo Shandor: What percentage of Americans lie or pick random answers on surveys?


Yep

If you ain't lying when they ask you stupid questions you aren't doing it right.

Long time ago I was part of the 'studio' audience that was fed a bunch of commercials and asked for opinions.

The one I remember the most had toast flying in the air.

I claimed it showed 'demonic possession'

Never did see that commercial make the air. ............
 
2013-03-14 11:02:02 AM

Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!


This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?
 
2013-03-14 11:02:22 AM

Voiceofreason01: m00: "...asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist."

There we go...

This. The article very quickly devolves into "see people are dumb because they don't believe what I believe". The % of people who believe in unicorns thing is just a smokescreen.


Then carried on into a very wordy humble brag about how many awards he's won and he's such an intellectual threat that he gets death threats from all over the globe. Followed by a supposed life changing epiphany that he was so lucky to have witnessed his friend go through in real time.
 
2013-03-14 11:02:52 AM
I may not have any "training" or "education" or "credentials", but I'm a MOMMY and so I know that vaccinations are a huge scam by doctors to get rich by uploading our children's blood into the clouds.
 
2013-03-14 11:02:54 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So many of these are arbitrary. There are a couple animals thought to have been the source for the unicorn. When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way. And a huge chunk of internet transmission goes through satellites, meaning your cloud computing data is passing through actual clouds.


Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.
 
2013-03-14 11:02:56 AM

deanis: My dead Grandpa (RIP awesome dude), denied the moon landing actually happened, tons of people still think Obama is a Muslim,

9/11 truthers still exist, a lot of people think Miller Lite is a beer, and the entire country was duped into believing that Iraq had WMDs. So, even though these statistics are probably inaccurate, I don't doubt that a small percentage of people would believe in unicorns or all of the other BS from the article.

/fark yeah 'merica


Things that make me go hmmm... for 200 Alex
 
2013-03-14 11:03:01 AM

MrGuilt: Unicorns are real...they are just big and grey. [farm9.staticflickr.com image 640x426]


i25.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-14 11:03:26 AM

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans are pretty retarded.


Bear in mind that a  lot of people give deliberately stupid answers to these kinds of obvious polling questions.
 
m00
2013-03-14 11:03:53 AM

Voiceofreason01: m00: "...asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist."

There we go...

This. The article very quickly devolves into "see people are dumb because they don't believe what I believe". The % of people who believe in unicorns thing is just a smokescreen.


Exactly. The author makes a false leap. He uses that some people reported on a survey a belief in unicorns to demonstrate that intellectual conservatives don't exist. Okay. Because unicorn-belief is totally a plank of the GOP.
 
2013-03-14 11:03:53 AM
The writer seems like a douchebag.

I really liked this little gem:

" In sum and all averaged out, it's safe to say about 37 percent of Americans are just are not very bright."

Its safe to say that 100 percent of people insulting others should probably proofread first, especially when calling people dumb.
 
2013-03-14 11:04:08 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So many of these are arbitrary. There are a couple animals thought to have been the source for the unicorn. When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way. And a huge chunk of internet transmission goes through satellites, meaning your cloud computing data is passing through actual clouds.


Not really because gravity. Yeah, the math for the relative motion can be set up either way, but once you factor in the forces involved, saying the sun revolves around the earth is like saying that when you jump off the diving board, the earth falls up towards you.
 
2013-03-14 11:04:31 AM
the sun does revolve around the earth, in as much as anything could be said to revolve around anything.

people who think that the sun is a static central part of the universe are exactly the same as people who believe that the earth is a static central part of the universe.
 
2013-03-14 11:04:32 AM
Wow, not one Miss America pic.
 
2013-03-14 11:04:50 AM

ginandbacon: Jesus rode on a unicorn in the clouds chasing the earth around the sun!


Pshaw. Everyone knows the unicorns pull a chariot carrying the sun around the earth.

Jesus just drives the chariot.
 
2013-03-14 11:05:44 AM
Yes, lots of people are stupid.

I just wish I had a good way to take advantage of that fact.

/no, not writing articles about it
 
2013-03-14 11:05:56 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: "......Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together....."

Absolutely. Raquel Welch would never lie to me.

/obscure?
//perhaps for the younger farkers.....



img2.timeinc.net

Me and Andy Dufresne got it.
 
2013-03-14 11:06:02 AM

JarynFrostwing: You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D


The combination of that image and 'pegasi' put a thought in my head about ponies 'pegging'

/I've been on the internet / FARK far too long...
 
2013-03-14 11:06:08 AM
Well, since others are posting book covers...

ecx.images-amazon.com

Also...

nekom: Dumbasses, everyone knows unicorns are extinct!


www.ufunk.net

/Extinct but delicious!
 
2013-03-14 11:06:25 AM

TheOther: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?

Snow with a memory?  Not my problem!


I don't need a great intelligence to figure out that reference.  Yeti think others might.
 
m00
2013-03-14 11:07:10 AM

Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.


The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.
 
2013-03-14 11:07:32 AM

St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.


They use the same chemtrails from the jumbo jets.  Obama is controlling our minds and our data.
 
2013-03-14 11:08:04 AM

Voiceofreason01: Wait, why did the author pick on Kansas? Is this one of those "flyover country" things where we pretend that a large portion of the country doesn't count because some people live there that have opinions that we disagree with? How "progressive".

/Mark Morford sounds like a douchbag


'Mad Men is a great show' is an opinion I hold that some would disagree with.  If you can't see the difference between that and the items here you may be one of the people we're laughing at.
 
2013-03-14 11:08:16 AM
The only fail in this thread is the Fark mods greenlighting this liberal drivel.
 
2013-03-14 11:08:20 AM

the801: the sun does revolve around the earth, in as much as anything could be said to revolve around anything.


No. No, I'm afraid this is not correct.
 
2013-03-14 11:08:29 AM

xria: Barfmaker: It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist,

This is gonna be good...

Intellectual conservatives do still exist, they just vote Democrat because there is only one way to vote in the US if you even have a modicum of intelligence (and don't earn more than a million per year and fark everyone who doesn't).


Both suck majorly, but one is increasing the size of government while the other is somewhat trying to diminish it. The less government control the better. The government is anything but efficient and responsible. It is in neither party's best interest however.
 
2013-03-14 11:09:12 AM

JarynFrostwing: [fc03.deviantart.net image 850x549]
You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D


"Oh yeah man, I seen that pegasus - I seen it every day!"
 
2013-03-14 11:09:14 AM

hardinparamedic: JarynFrostwing: [fc03.deviantart.net image 850x549]
You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D

That's Wildfire!


Thanks for that. I hadn't realized Sisby's OC had such depth of storyline.

*

/ I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
 
2013-03-14 11:09:28 AM
I don't know about you, but I totally mess with polls. Accurately, the headline should be "X% of people told these pollers that they believed in...."
 
2013-03-14 11:09:46 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other


The sun being MUCH more massive can't possibly be affected by the earth gravity enough to revolve around the earth (it wobbles a bit, but it doesn't fall down). Your statement is only true for similarly sized bodies. You could also make the argument that the Earth revolves around the Moon, but it would be equally false.
 
2013-03-14 11:10:55 AM
www.nathanbeaver.com
 
2013-03-14 11:11:27 AM

durbnpoisn: I'm going to take the approach here that the select group of people interviewed do not really represent the populace of the US in general.  Like, they went directly to the backwoods of Kentucky, or the deep south, or some shiat.  If I were to run a similar survey just in the Northeast, or in California, or even farking Detroit, the numbers would look nothing like that.


Yeah they would.  Just recently it was revealed that 80% of NYC high school graduates entering CUNY (City University of New York) needed remedial work on reading, writing, and/or math.

These were *COLLEGE BOUND* kids, and 4 out of 5 couldn't meet the standards expected of them.

I'm betting that their education in science and social studies was similarly lacking.
 
2013-03-14 11:11:45 AM
If brains were dynamite, most Americans could not blow their noses.
 
2013-03-14 11:11:50 AM

fruitloop: I don't know which is sadder: that 37% of people are stupid, or that I'm not surprised.


Bell Curves, how do they work?
 
2013-03-14 11:12:18 AM
Anyone who is honestly surprised that a large percentage of humans are idiots has obviously never worked...well, any job dealing with the public.
 
2013-03-14 11:13:08 AM

neversubmit: Things that make me go hmmm... for 200 Alex


Well there was absolutely no question whatsoever that Iraq Had WMDs, hell they used them on the Kurds.

The question was whether in 1998-3 Iraq still had capable offensive WMD delivery and development programs.
 
2013-03-14 11:13:09 AM

Counter_Intelligent: Unicorn thread?


All the unicorns better be pink and invisible.
 
2013-03-14 11:13:15 AM

WaitWhatWhy: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So many of these are arbitrary. There are a couple animals thought to have been the source for the unicorn. When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way. And a huge chunk of internet transmission goes through satellites, meaning your cloud computing data is passing through actual clouds.

Not really because gravity. Yeah, the math for the relative motion can be set up either way, but once you factor in the forces involved, saying the sun revolves around the earth is like saying that when you jump off the diving board, the earth falls up towards you.


Haha...  That's a funny way to put it.

I think that there are some people that don't realize just how much of this solar system the sun takes up.  It might look like a cute little ball in the sky.  But in fact it contains 99.9% of every thing that makes up the system.  The Earth looks like a little tiny ball bearing next to it.

If you were to imagine that somehow, this little planet of ours is somehow keeping something THAT much bigger in a captive orbit, just defies sanity.
 
2013-03-14 11:13:31 AM

m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.


Which is, of course, entirely separate from the point of the question. It's like saying "If we expand the definition of the term to include those Blue Angel planes that do the fancy tricks, then angels really are real!", or "If we expand the definition of 'murder' to include 'killing someone softly with his song', then that man is guilty!"
 
2013-03-14 11:13:35 AM

WaitWhatWhy: Not really because gravity. Yeah, the math for the relative motion can be set up either way, but once you factor in the forces involved, saying the sun revolves around the earth is like saying that when you jump off the diving board, the earth falls up towards you.


Whoa, whoa, whoa...the earth  doesn't fall up toward me?
 
2013-03-14 11:13:49 AM

shoegaze99: some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans people are pretty retarded.

Similar polls have been done in other countries, with similar results. People are stupid all over. For example, many people in Iceland believe elves actually exist.

This is not unusual, nor is is particularly American. People are stupid all over.


Given that Björk is Icelandic I cannot blame them for believing in elves one bit.

userserve-ak.last.fm
 
2013-03-14 11:13:52 AM
HUFFINGTON POST!
HUFFINGTON POST!

...

HUFFINGTON! POST!
 
2013-03-14 11:15:08 AM
I weep
 
2013-03-14 11:15:22 AM
...and yet despite this knowledge, people here continue to call every post that seems stupid or unreasonable a "troll".
 
2013-03-14 11:15:46 AM

m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.


The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.
 
2013-03-14 11:16:22 AM
f.asset.soup.io
 
2013-03-14 11:16:34 AM
I don't believe in unicorns. I just really, really wish they were real.
 
2013-03-14 11:16:39 AM

halfof33: neversubmit: Things that make me go hmmm... for 200 Alex

Well there was absolutely no question whatsoever that Iraq Had WMDs, hell they used them on the Kurds.

The question was whether in 1998-3 Iraq still had capable offensive WMD delivery and development programs.


Is your reply meant to be meta? cause if so lol if not LOL
 
2013-03-14 11:17:54 AM

Moonfisher: I don't believe in unicorns. I just really, really wish they were real.


Me too.  I'd dig having a unicorn trophy on my wall.
 
2013-03-14 11:18:07 AM

m00: I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other.


Your colleague is right. The Earth and sun do not revolve around one another. Your reasoning may seem logical on the surface, but it's incorrect.
 
2013-03-14 11:18:17 AM
I just settled with being somewhat wealthy over being somewhat intelligent.
 
2013-03-14 11:18:38 AM

Sim Tree: Surveys tend to have an established minimum %, due to people screwing with the presenter, misunderstanding the question, being insane, or some linear combination of all three. I'm amazed that the unicorn question made it as low as 4%, actually. I'd always thought the floor was around 9%.



First to mind when asked what "the cloud" is, a majority respond it's either an actual cloud, the sky, or something related to weather (29%) (pdf)


If people asked me out of the blue what "the cloud" was I couldn't guarantee that I'd think of cloud computing either.
 
2013-03-14 11:18:41 AM

Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?


I know! Follow the money man, farking evil greedy corporations sidestepping regulations and letting this stuff pollute the planet! Savages! We need a revolution man, real change, a real message about how dangerous this stuff is! It has "die" right in its name what kind of hint do you need man?
 
2013-03-14 11:18:48 AM

Sim Tree: hardinparamedic: JarynFrostwing: [fc03.deviantart.net image 850x549]
You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D

That's Wildfire!

Thanks for that. I hadn't realized Sisby's OC had such depth of storyline.

*

/ I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.


Yeah but that's not Sibsy's OC, that's my OC lol Emberwind.
 
2013-03-14 11:19:02 AM
Personally, I blame the damn muddy the waters tactic certain groups have taken while attacking science education.

Add in a general disdain for intellectualism and intelligence in our country, add a hefty dose of "I reject reality and substitute my own", and you have modern day America.
 
2013-03-14 11:19:13 AM

neversubmit: Is your reply meant to be meta? cause if so lol if not LOL


No I meant to reply to the guy you were replying to.

The lizard shifting space Joos made me do it.
 
2013-03-14 11:19:22 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So many of these are arbitrary. There are a couple animals thought to have been the source for the unicorn. When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way. And a huge chunk of internet transmission goes through satellites, meaning your cloud computing data is passing through actual clouds.


Awesome, you made me snort coffee out my nose.
 
2013-03-14 11:19:22 AM

dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.


revolve != orbit
 
2013-03-14 11:20:05 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Molavian: You should see the percentage that believes in gun control.

I wonder how many think more guns = more safety.

Since we have 300 million people, and 200 million privately-owned firearms, shouldn't our murder rate be REALLY low?


On the flip side, if more guns means more violence we should have a much more violent country than we do since we're positively drowning in guns.

I think a better correlation with violence is wealth/income disparity. And we have a major problem with wealth/income disparity in the US. Guns themselves aren't the problem... a population shaped to have a high number of desperate people struggling on the margins ARE, however.


Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Americans, the scum of the Earth.



Not scum.... just way too many of us believe in angels and we disdain politicians who don't.
 
2013-03-14 11:20:13 AM

heypete: WaitWhatWhy: Not really because gravity. Yeah, the math for the relative motion can be set up either way, but once you factor in the forces involved, saying the sun revolves around the earth is like saying that when you jump off the diving board, the earth falls up towards you.

Whoa, whoa, whoa...the earth  doesn't fall up toward me?


Its exactly as true either way. Cause ya know, motion is relative and shiat.

Regarding "Yourself" as a fixed point just usually isn't a very useful frame of reference.
 
2013-03-14 11:20:30 AM

Moonfisher: I don't believe in unicorns. I just really, really wish they were real.


They are real.

i76.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-14 11:20:30 AM

Cheron: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

They use the same chemtrails from the jumbo jets.  Obama is controlling our minds and our data.


So Obama is just Bush in black face?
 
2013-03-14 11:21:47 AM
i120.photobucket.com
Suck it deniers!
 
2013-03-14 11:21:59 AM

m00: Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.


If you want to be technical (which you're not, despite your best attempts), any gravitationally interacting bodies orbit around the common center of mass.  In a simplified Earth/Sun system, that common center of mass is deep inside the Sun, so deep as to make the "center of mass" distinction essentially irrelevant.  The Earth orbits the Sun.

However, that's not technically correct either. There are other bodies in the solar system that affect both the Earth and Sun, and ALL bodies in the solar system are orbiting the common center of mass as determined by the entire system.

But wait, there's more! Since your desire is to be technical, the entire solar system is also orbiting the galactic core of the Milky Way, and in its collective journey, is also affected by all of the solar systems, stellar nurseries, etc, that are scattered around the galaxy, in addition to the gravitational attraction of the supermassive black hole at the galactic center.

/if you want to be technical, of course
//or you can just go back to agreeing with an obvious troll
 
2013-03-14 11:22:45 AM

halfof33: neversubmit: Things that make me go hmmm... for 200 Alex

Well there was absolutely no question whatsoever that Iraq Had WMDs, hell they used them on the Kurds.

The question was whether in 1998-3 Iraq still had capable offensive WMD delivery and development programs.


Well, you get my drift then.
 
2013-03-14 11:22:48 AM

neversubmit: halfof33: neversubmit: Things that make me go hmmm... for 200 Alex

Well there was absolutely no question whatsoever that Iraq Had WMDs, hell they used them on the Kurds.

The question was whether in 1998-3 Iraq still had capable offensive WMD delivery and development programs.

Is your reply meant to be meta? cause if so lol if not LOL


You do realize its KURDS he is talking about not CURDS right? RIGHT?
 
2013-03-14 11:22:55 AM

Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?


I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.
 
2013-03-14 11:23:24 AM
The Hasids I work with, whom normally seem quite intelligent, believe the earth is 5700 or so years old. I have faith too, but this belief seems a little out of touch these days.
 
2013-03-14 11:24:27 AM
neversubmit:

revolve != orbit

this.

is exactly what i was about to say. they're two totally different things, and whether or not one thing revolves around another has nothing to do with gravity and relative masses and such.

why people no know revolve != orbit?
 
2013-03-14 11:24:29 AM

halfof33: neversubmit: Is your reply meant to be meta? cause if so lol if not LOL

No I meant to reply to the guy you were replying to.

The lizard shifting space Joos made me do it.


Then LOL it is!
 
2013-03-14 11:25:21 AM

Joe Blowme: Cheron: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

They use the same chemtrails from the jumbo jets.  Obama is controlling our minds and our data.

So Obama is just Bush in black face?


Pretty much. He left most of Bush's policies in place. Thats why we still get to blame Bush, at least he isn't trying to take that from anybody
 
2013-03-14 11:25:31 AM

m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.


Two bodies in space orbit each other, but when one body is so incredibly massive compared to the other one, the co-orbital point (I'm not sure if that's the right term, it's the point the two bodies orbit around) is so close to the centre of mass of the big one that it's equally as valid to say the small one orbits the big one.

Similarly, the Earth and Moon orbit each other, but the co-orbital point (see above) is within the earth.  The moon makes us wobble a little bit, but we're not epicycling.
 
2013-03-14 11:26:10 AM

meat0918: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.


You would not believe the numbers i get signing that petition every year for earth week. granted most are right our of high school but still. The powers that be asked me not to do it again this year, it made someone feel dumb.
 
2013-03-14 11:26:28 AM

Ned Stark: Its exactly as true either way. Cause ya know, motion is relative and shiat.

Regarding "Yourself" as a fixed point just usually isn't a very useful frame of reference.


Hey, it works great when I'm walking around and stuff. :-D

/physics grad student, just joking around
 
2013-03-14 11:26:51 AM

Karac: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way.

For asteroids floating in deep space perhaps.  But for the Earth and Sun - no, you can't.  It's pretty easy to prove that the Earth revolves around the Sun because the center of it's orbit is actually INSIDE the sun.


That's unpossible. It would burn up INSIDE the sun!
 
2013-03-14 11:28:58 AM

Rapmaster2000: I may not have any "training" or "education" or "credentials", but I'm a MOMMY and so I know that vaccinations are a huge scam by doctors to get rich by uploading our children's blood into the clouds.


I wondered why the rain barrel was coppery. Thought it might've been the bird crap.
 
2013-03-14 11:29:45 AM

neversubmit: halfof33: neversubmit: Things that make me go hmmm... for 200 Alex

Well there was absolutely no question whatsoever that Iraq Had WMDs, hell they used them on the Kurds.

The question was whether in 1998-3 Iraq still had capable offensive WMD delivery and development programs.

Is your reply meant to be meta? cause if so lol if not LOL


They did have offensive WMD. They used them on the Kurds. I believe we found some of them and their is a belief that they shipped a lot of them to Syria for safe keeping. There is a fear that Syria is using them on their own revolutionaries.

The problem is that a lot of people equate WMD with NUKES and nothing else.
 
2013-03-14 11:30:34 AM
and 95% of huffpost contributors, bloggers and fark commenters [guilty!] pull statistics out of their ass, ensuring absolutely no integrity in their "reporting"...citations needed.
 
2013-03-14 11:30:41 AM

shoegaze99: some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans people are pretty retarded.

Similar polls have been done in other countries, with similar results. People are stupid all over. For example, many people in Iceland believe elves actually exist.

This is not unusual, nor is is particularly American. People are stupid polls are unreliable all over.


Seriously, don't believe survey results unless they are developed and executed by competent, disinterested professionals... and the subject matter rational, non-emotive stuff. Otherwise, the signal/noise ratio is potato.
 
2013-03-14 11:30:49 AM
You can' t see electricity or air either, just the results, yet everyone believes in it, too.
 
2013-03-14 11:30:49 AM

WaitWhatWhy: saying the sun revolves around the earth is like saying that when you jump off the diving board, the earth falls up towards you.


Doesn't it? I know people are used to assuming that the smaller object moves, while the bigger object remains stationary, but that's just convention.
 
2013-03-14 11:31:27 AM
"Six percent of Americans believe in unicorns."

From the last presidential election, I would have guessed this to be at least 51 percent.
 
2013-03-14 11:31:32 AM
Our daughter is 5 years old and doesn't believe unicorns are real.  She also knows that the Earth revolves around the Sun, that night and day are the result of the Earth spinning on its axis, and that humans are animals related to chimpanzees.

She knows nothing about Jesus since she's Jewish, but she does know that dinosaurs went extinct many millions of years ago, long before humans existed.  Oh, and she knows the log(1) = 0.*

In short, our kindergartener is smarter than many American adults.

*she doesn't know what that means, though
 
2013-03-14 11:31:39 AM
I do tech support for every state in the union and DRTFA, but sounds legit.
 
2013-03-14 11:31:58 AM

The Snow Dog: powhound: Believing in UFO's isn't a stretch. I wish one would come take me from this crazy planet.

I wish authors were smart enough not to use "UFO" interchangeably with "alien spacecraft." You'd be a moron to deny UFOs exist. Alien spacecraft? Notsomuch.


Alien spacecraft almost certainly exist. The unlikely bit is any of them are coming to earth to fart about secretly experimenting about stuff we have been broadcasting out the details of light years in all directions.
 
2013-03-14 11:32:14 AM
What an American who believes in leprechauns might look like:

i39.tinypic.com
 
2013-03-14 11:34:31 AM

Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.

You would not believe the numbers i get signing that petition every year for earth week. granted most are right our of high school but still. The powers that be asked me not to do it again this year, it made someone feel dumb.


I would believe you.  I almost want to go and gather signatures this year around town, just to see how many I get.

You should do it anyways.
 
2013-03-14 11:34:36 AM

shoegaze99:  For example, many people in Iceland believe elves actually exist.



77% of Americans believe in angels.  To me, there's no difference between believing in angels and believing in elves.
 
2013-03-14 11:34:49 AM
The problem is we simply have too many people. We are 7 billion + now on this planet. If even 10 percent of that figure are idiots it makes for 700,000,000 stupid mother farkers somehow remembering to breathe right this moment.

While I think that 10 percent is a lowball guess, it is compounded by the fact that we are all human. Even the best educated and cleverest of us still have moments of shocking stupidity. Consider that anther 10 percent (another lowball guess) of the "smarter" population segment in this example just happen to be doing something stupid RIGHT NOW. That makes for another 630,000,000 people.

So just using what are probably low percentages, we come to the realization that at any given moment there are 1,330,000,000 people either being stupid or doing something stupid.

It really begins to explain a lot.
 
2013-03-14 11:35:07 AM

CujoQuarrel: neversubmit: halfof33: neversubmit: Things that make me go hmmm... for 200 Alex

Well there was absolutely no question whatsoever that Iraq Had WMDs, hell they used them on the Kurds.

The question was whether in 1998-3 Iraq still had capable offensive WMD delivery and development programs.

Is your reply meant to be meta? cause if so lol if not LOL

They did have offensive WMD. They used them on the Kurds. I believe we found some of them and their is a belief that they shipped a lot of them to Syria for safe keeping. There is a fear that Syria is using them on their own revolutionaries.

The problem is that a lot of people equate WMD with NUKES and nothing else.


Your timeline is bad and you should feel bad. Oh btw where did they get those bio/chem weapons?

www.indybay.org
 
2013-03-14 11:35:48 AM
MrGuilt:

farm9.staticflickr.com
I'm a lone rhinoceros
There ain't one hell of a lots of us left in this world
 
2013-03-14 11:36:06 AM

Karac: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way.

For asteroids floating in deep space perhaps.  But for the Earth and Sun - no, you can't.  It's pretty easy to prove that the Earth revolves around the Sun because the center of it's orbit is actually INSIDE the sun.


If the Sun orbits around the Earth, wouldn't the center of its orbit likewise be inside the Earth?  It is just that everything else (except the moon) orbits the Sun.

And as a technicality, I keep hearing zoologists refer to crocodiles as living fossils.  I have also seen Steve Irwin jump on top of them.  So that one is not too far off.
 
2013-03-14 11:36:38 AM
I believe... I'll have a drink on the afternoon.
 
2013-03-14 11:38:15 AM
I"ll tell you what is real.  Steak and a BJ Day.  And it's today!  Someone get us a thread going.  WTF has happened to this place?
 
2013-03-14 11:40:14 AM
While I'll agree what this guy is saying, there's a lot of stupid people in America, but he's being a real douche-bag about it.
 
2013-03-14 11:40:14 AM

FizixJunkee: In short, our kindergartener is smarter than many American adults.


To me, there's no difference between believing this and believing in elves.
 
2013-03-14 11:41:01 AM

xria: The Snow Dog: powhound: Believing in UFO's isn't a stretch. I wish one would come take me from this crazy planet.

I wish authors were smart enough not to use "UFO" interchangeably with "alien spacecraft." You'd be a moron to deny UFOs exist. Alien spacecraft? Notsomuch.

Alien spacecraft almost certainly exist. The unlikely bit is any of them are coming to earth to fart about secretly experimenting about stuff we have been broadcasting out the details of light years in all directions.


Pics or it didn't happen, wait...never mind, it's just a damn street light.
 
2013-03-14 11:41:02 AM

MrGuilt: Unicorns are real...they are just big and grey. [farm9.staticflickr.com image 640x426]
Sadly, if unicorns really were real, some culture would likely view their horns as some sort of horse-viagra. There would be a trade in them, and the unicorns would be hunted down, horns hacked off, and the animal left for dead.

Humans suck.


Too late, they actually did.
 
2013-03-14 11:42:12 AM

durbnpoisn: .  If I were to run a similar survey just in the Northeast, or in California, or even farking Detroit, the numbers would look nothing like that.


I'm in California and a scary percentage of people here believe vaccines cause autism.  How's that for stupid?
 
2013-03-14 11:43:14 AM

JarynFrostwing: You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D


Whose art is that?
 
2013-03-14 11:43:15 AM

meat0918: Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.

You would not believe the numbers i get signing that petition every year for earth week. granted most are right our of high school but still. The powers that be asked me not to do it again this year, it made someone feel dumb.

I would believe you.  I almost want to go and gather signatures this year around town, just to see how many I get.

You should do it anyways.


I already have the form printed and planned on leaving it in the reception/Commons area on a clip board with a little sign.
 
2013-03-14 11:43:30 AM
I don't know if it has been said yet or not, but the article is under the "Comedy" section.  I don't know that the statistics are going to be as accurate as some of you believe.  But feel free to keep feeling superior to everyone who is not you if that's what it takes.
 
2013-03-14 11:44:27 AM
Finally, some statistics on the Tea Party.
 
2013-03-14 11:44:51 AM

Counter_Intelligent: JarynFrostwing: You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D

Whose art is that?


Gsphere: http://gsphere.deviantart.com/art/The-Lunar-Stone-Commission-Sanctuar y -of-Lights-347858683
 
2013-03-14 11:45:42 AM
Are there any (decent) free IQ tests available?

Would it be LOLworthy to test the fark cloud?
 
2013-03-14 11:46:56 AM
What is really sad is 1/2 of Americans are below average and 1/2 of the rest of the world are above average.  We don't stand a chance.
 
2013-03-14 11:47:17 AM

doubled99: ...and yet despite this knowledge, people here continue to call every post that seems stupid or unreasonable a "troll".


Awesome.
 
2013-03-14 11:47:18 AM
97% believe in some sort of god. Still doesn't make it true. Supernatural (for all the 14 year olds on Fark) means above nature, as in you can't use natural science to prove the existence of something that is - by definition - above nature.

Study it out.
a
 
2013-03-14 11:47:18 AM

JarynFrostwing: Gsphere:


Thankya!
 
2013-03-14 11:47:34 AM
What percentage believe CO2 concentration drives climate changes?
 
2013-03-14 11:47:47 AM
I hope there are no professional survey takers here, because I have a confession to make:
If someone persistently tries to make me take a survey, they get bad data.  Extremely silly and sexual data.
 
2013-03-14 11:48:33 AM

numbone: I just settled with being somewhat wealthy over being somewhat intelligent.


Your point?
 
2013-03-14 11:48:44 AM
Well, let's see. If magic suddenly sprung up (let's do a Shadowrun scenario), this would happen:

1.- Religious frenzy (people would start thinking it's the end of the world).
2.- Government persecution (do you really want someone that can create flames at will/raise the dead/teleport wherever he wants, unhinged? Balderdash! Gitmo would be like Hogwarts, minus the learning, and with rape and torture).
3.- Corporate takeover (see case 2).
4.- Scientific advancement (Possibly a consequence of cases 1 and 2).
 
2013-03-14 11:49:15 AM
Look, 10-20% of america mishear questions, misspeak answers, or just plain screw with the system because its' funny.

Me,  I overthink it.
Yes, a unicorn probably has existed.  If a narwhale exists, it's possible that somewhere in a horses DNA, a modified tooth my jut through it's skull.  A one in a billion chance?  Well, it's been 45-55 Million years.

cdn2.arkive.org
Not a dinosaur.
Crocodiles have been around for 230 million years.  So... Yeah, not a dinosaur either.  But I can see the idiots points.  The komodo dragon makes a nasty point too.

Earth Sun.  Good Lord, it's hard to make up an excuse for these idiots.

Cloud computing.  eh.  50% of America have never even heard the term.  Lets not be too nasty here.
 
2013-03-14 11:49:19 AM

stirfrybry: What percentage believe CO2 concentration of under .1% drives climate changes?


FTFY
 
2013-03-14 11:49:37 AM
Is this the thread where we show the graphic of the falsehoods that FoxNews viewers believe in much higher proportions than those who watch other networks?  Saddam and 9/11, etc.
 
2013-03-14 11:49:43 AM
Is this one of those epic threads that I've been told is better with Total Fark?
 
2013-03-14 11:50:56 AM

Nana's Vibrator: I hope there are no professional survey takers here, because I have a confession to make:
If someone persistently tries to make me take a survey, they get bad data.  Extremely silly and sexual data.


Do you eat beans?

Would you like to see a new George Wendt movie?

/would you like to see George Wendt eating beans?
 
2013-03-14 11:51:12 AM
You all are sheeple. Seriously, explain this:

i.ytimg.com

/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)
 
2013-03-14 11:52:04 AM
FTFA: In sum and all averaged out, it's safe to say about 37 percent of Americans are just are not very bright."

Actually, that's pretty much what I figured. I had it a little closer to high 40s, but I won't argue on this one. I have no problem whatsoever believing that at least 37% of Americans are stupid.
 
2013-03-14 11:53:36 AM

The Crepes of Wrath: m00: Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

If you want to be technical (which you're not, despite your best attempts), any gravitationally interacting bodies orbit around the common center of mass.  In a simplified Earth/Sun system, that common center of mass is deep inside the Sun, so deep as to make the "center of mass" distinction essentially irrelevant.  The Earth orbits the Sun.

However, that's not technically correct either. There are other bodies in the solar system that affect both the Earth and Sun, and ALL bodies in the solar system are orbiting the common center of mass as determined by the entire system.

But wait, there's more! Since your desire is to be technical, the entire solar system is also orbiting the galactic core of the Milky Way, and in its collective journey, is also affected by all of the solar systems, stellar nurseries, etc, that are scattered around the galaxy, in addition to the gravitational attraction of the supermassive black hole at the galactic center.

/if you want to be technical, of course
//or you can just go back to agreeing with an obvious troll


You just covered more astronomy/physics than is required to graduate from high school in this nation.  (sadly true, it's not required at all and it shows in the idiotic answers people give to things like this)
 
2013-03-14 11:55:00 AM

dittybopper: durbnpoisn: 

Yeah they would.  Just recently it was revealed that 80% of NYC high school graduates entering CUNY (City University of New York) needed remedial work on reading, writing, and/or math.

These were *COLLEGE BOUND* kids, and 4 out of 5 couldn't meet the standards expected of them.

I'm betting that their education in science and social studies was similarly lacking.



Have you seen the video of Harvard graduates and their explanations of what causes seasons?  Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer.

HARVARD GRADUATE.

Let that sink in.
 
2013-03-14 11:55:11 AM

Jim_Callahan: Just Another OC Homeless Guy:
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! Americans, the scum of the Earth.

Normally, I'd point out how various other nations are equally farked up in various ways, but we've already had two threads this morning discussing the US's manipulation of the world food market for international political leverage and how we (and China) unintentionally set of regional famines several times during the cold war despite global food supplies being more than sufficient for the global population.

So... too depressed to pile more examples of humanity not even living up to its own basic moral standards on the plate.  Suffice to say that you shouldn't look into Italian or French politics, ever, if you want to complain about the US, and you should also avoid any news from the UK containing "parliament" "house", or "MP" and definitely refuse to learn anything about Israel.

//The rest of first-world Europe is mostly easier, avoid any news related to immigration or muslim rights and you can probably remain smugly superior with only mild ignorance.


Sorry, my sarcasm tool is apparently miss-calibrated. I agree with you 100%. You are obviously not the typical Fark mental 12 year old reveling in the joy of being trendily liberal and relevant from his mother's basement.
 
2013-03-14 11:55:23 AM

neversubmit: dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.

revolve != orbit


Yeah, that's why I made sure to distinguish the two.
 
2013-03-14 11:56:29 AM
But dinosaurs and man DO hang out together:
files.myopera.com
/pedantic cladist
 
2013-03-14 11:58:13 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?


I've looked at them from both sides now and I still don't know clouds, at all.
 
2013-03-14 11:58:38 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way.


No, but you can say they are rotating around a shared center of gravity, because they are.  It just so happens that the center of gravity in the earth-sun system closely coincides with the center of the sun.  While you can create imaginative mathematical solutions involving loops and spirals, they do not correspond to the known physics of the universe.
 
2013-03-14 11:58:51 AM
and THIS is why intelligent people want a republican form of federal governance, and not a democratic one (no, I'm not talking about parties)

the mob will KILL us
 
2013-03-14 12:01:51 PM

Karac: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way.

For asteroids floating in deep space perhaps.  But for the Earth and Sun - no, you can't.  It's pretty easy to prove that the Earth revolves around the Sun because the center of it's orbit is actually INSIDE the sun.


The centre of gravity is inside the sun, but that doesn't necessarily mean the centre of the orbit is given that Earth isn't going around in a perfect circle. Given the Earth is ~5 million km nearer the sun in January (perihelion) than July (aphelion), and the Sun is ~1.4 million km in diameter, that would suggest the centre of the orbit is outside the sun by ~1.8 million km.
 
2013-03-14 12:02:06 PM

anelson41: and THIS is why intelligent people want a republican form of federal governance, and not a democratic one (no, I'm not talking about parties)

the mob will KILL us


It's amusing how their names, and what they stand for, are essentially reversed.

/truth is lieing
 
2013-03-14 12:02:06 PM

neversubmit: The problem is that a lot of people equate WMD with NUKES and nothing else.

Your timeline is bad and you should feel bad. Oh btw where did they get those bio/chem weapons nukes?

[www.indybay.org image 468x350]


atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com

/actually relevant today
 
2013-03-14 12:02:40 PM

dittybopper: neversubmit: dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.


The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.

revolve != orbit

Yeah, that's why I made sure to distinguish the two.


No they don't the earth orbits the sun the sun orbits the center of the milkyway galaxy
 
2013-03-14 12:03:21 PM

12monkeys: But dinosaurs and man DO hang out together:
[files.myopera.com image 450x300]

files.myopera.com
/pedantic cladist

seriousfacts.com
we also eat them
 
2013-03-14 12:04:46 PM

Voiceofreason01: "Newtown shooting happened and 20 young children were massacred due to America's fetish for, obsession with and addiction to firearms, violence and fear"

What percentage believe this bullshiat?


Ahhh, the under-endowed contingent of fark shows up!
 
2013-03-14 12:04:54 PM

weirdneighbour: 12monkeys: But dinosaurs and man DO hang out together:
[files.myopera.com image 450x300]
[files.myopera.com image 450x300]
/pedantic cladist

[seriousfacts.com image 334x360]
we also eat them


Ergo, dinosaurs were delicious, and good with raspberry and chile sauce?.
 
2013-03-14 12:05:14 PM

peterthx: neversubmit: The problem is that a lot of people equate WMD with NUKES and nothing else.

Your timeline is bad and you should feel bad. Oh btw where did they get those bio/chem weapons nukes?

[www.indybay.org image 468x350]

[atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com image 410x269]

/actually relevant today


He is dead, how is that relevant today?
 
2013-03-14 12:05:36 PM

CygnusDarius: MrGuilt: Unicorns are real...they are just big and grey. [farm9.staticflickr.com image 640x426]
Sadly, if unicorns really were real, some culture would likely view their horns as some sort of horse-viagra. There would be a trade in them, and the unicorns would be hunted down, horns hacked off, and the animal left for dead.

Humans suck.

Too late, they actually did.


From the wiki article:  Beliefs in the virtues of the unicorn corn and its origins persisted from the...

Now we have Unicorn corn? wtf is happening?!
 
2013-03-14 12:07:01 PM

neversubmit: Your timeline is bad and you should feel bad. Oh btw where did they get those bio/chem weapons?


The technology Iraq used came mostly from Spain, Germany, Austria, China, and France.  They received some biological samples from the US, but the bulk of the material they used to make mustard and nerve gases seems to have come from Singapore, Egypt, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Spain.  They received smaller amounts from Brazil.

France was especially egregious:  They pretty much set up Iraq's nuclear program from scratch, and 21% of their chemical weapons manufacturing equipment was French in origin.

You want to blame someone for *THAT*, blame Jacques Chirac, who was much more buddy-buddy with Saddam Hussein than Donald Rumsfeld ever was.

The only involvement the US seems to have had in Iraqi WMD research and production was sending biological samples that the Iraqis claimed were for medical research.
 
2013-03-14 12:07:09 PM
Do 100% of those people mentioned belong to an organized religion?
 
2013-03-14 12:07:54 PM

deanis: CygnusDarius: MrGuilt: Unicorns are real...they are just big and grey. [farm9.staticflickr.com image 640x426]
Sadly, if unicorns really were real, some culture would likely view their horns as some sort of horse-viagra. There would be a trade in them, and the unicorns would be hunted down, horns hacked off, and the animal left for dead.

Humans suck.

Too late, they actually did.

From the wiki article:  Beliefs in the virtues of the unicorn corn and its origins persisted from the...

Now we have Unicorn corn? wtf is happening?!


Science.
 
2013-03-14 12:09:25 PM

neversubmit: Your timeline is bad and you should feel bad. Oh btw where did they get those bio/chem weapons?


The irony of you complaining about the time line and then in the very next sentence going back to 1983-84 is delicious.

Oh btw where did Israel get the weapons to bomb the Iraq nuclear reactor in 1981?
 
2013-03-14 12:09:35 PM

Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?


People need to know that it's used in nuclear reactors and chemical plants. It's even used in the production of WEAPONS.
 
2013-03-14 12:10:05 PM

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: Voiceofreason01: "Newtown shooting happened and 20 young children were massacred due to America's fetish for, obsession with and addiction to firearms, violence and fear"

What percentage believe this bullshiat?

Ahhh, the under-endowed contingent of fark shows up!


You really dont need to announce your arrival, we can see you are here
 
2013-03-14 12:10:23 PM
halfof33: derpderpderpityDOOOOoooooo!

Clarified for newbs.
 
Skr
2013-03-14 12:10:56 PM
I was thinking that in the past a equestrian variant of Shope Papilloma Virus had created a few unfortunate Unicorns.

Shope papilloma virus is what causes the real life Jackalopes.

www.cryptomundo.com
 
2013-03-14 12:13:34 PM

Fano: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

People need to know that it's used in nuclear reactors and chemical plants. It's even used in the production of WEAPONS.


AND its in damn near every house in america, just waiting to kill people.
 
2013-03-14 12:13:51 PM
never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

they elect our congress. (and everything else)
 
2013-03-14 12:14:25 PM

neversubmit: dittybopper: neversubmit: dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.

revolve != orbit

Yeah, that's why I made sure to distinguish the two.

No they don't the earth orbits the sun the sun orbits the center of the milkyway galaxy


We're both right, depending on the frame of reference.

Considered as a two body system, the Earth and Sun orbit around a barycenter.  Because the Sun is much more massive than the Earth, that barycenter is below the surface of the Sun.

As a system, they both orbit the center of the Milky Way galaxy.
 
2013-03-14 12:14:58 PM

Joe Blowme: Fano: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

People need to know that it's used in nuclear reactors and chemical plants. It's even used in the production of WEAPONS.

AND its in damn near every house in america, just waiting to kill people.


... and i hear that the government is working to bring it to every home that doesn't already have it!~  The HORROR!
 
2013-03-14 12:15:40 PM

FizixJunkee: dittybopper: durbnpoisn: 

Yeah they would.  Just recently it was revealed that 80% of NYC high school graduates entering CUNY (City University of New York) needed remedial work on reading, writing, and/or math.

These were *COLLEGE BOUND* kids, and 4 out of 5 couldn't meet the standards expected of them.

I'm betting that their education in science and social studies was similarly lacking.


Have you seen the video of Harvard graduates and their explanations of what causes seasons?  Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer.

HARVARD GRADUATE.

Let that sink in.



Well, at least he put some logical thought into it.  It's completely wrong.  But at least he wasn't as wrong as, "See, a chariot pulls the sun across the sky, blabbity bla bla."

I wonder if the real problem here is that some people don't tend to look beyond what they consider to be obvious conclusions.  For instance, what I pointed out about the sun being a little ball in the sky (it's not.  It's a monstrous ball.  And it's 93 million miles away).  But you couldn't draw that conclusion by simply looking at it.
And I wonder who is to blame for that...  Could it be, just maybe, the same people that tell us that God created the universe a few thousand years ago, and there is no need to question things any further?
 
2013-03-14 12:16:33 PM
A hilariously large percent of terrified right-wingers are convinced Obama is soon going to take away all their guns, so when the Newtown shooting happened and 20 young children were massacred due to America's fetish for, obsession with and addiction to firearms, violence and fear, they bought more bullets. Because obviously.

Why the f*ck do I ever click on links from this website?
 
2013-03-14 12:17:16 PM

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: halfof33: derpderpderpityDOOOOoooooo!

Clarified for newbs.


lolz

Sport, when you have nothing you really have nothing, don't you? Hee hee!
 
2013-03-14 12:18:04 PM

Tat'dGreaser: A hilariously large percent of terrified right-wingers are convinced Obama is soon going to take away all their guns, so when the Newtown shooting happened and 20 young children were massacred due to America's fetish for, obsession with and addiction to firearms, violence and fear, they bought more bullets. Because obviously.

Why the f*ck do I ever click on links from this website?


Because you hate yourself and this is how you beat your ass, or is that me?
 
2013-03-14 12:19:18 PM

neversubmit: Because you hate yourself and this is how you beat your ass, or is that me?


No that's me too

"Oh well maybe it won't be crazy this one time........"
 
2013-03-14 12:20:32 PM

durbnpoisn: FizixJunkee: dittybopper: durbnpoisn: 

Yeah they would.  Just recently it was revealed that 80% of NYC high school graduates entering CUNY (City University of New York) needed remedial work on reading, writing, and/or math.

These were *COLLEGE BOUND* kids, and 4 out of 5 couldn't meet the standards expected of them.

I'm betting that their education in science and social studies was similarly lacking.


Have you seen the video of Harvard graduates and their explanations of what causes seasons?  Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer.

HARVARD GRADUATE.

Let that sink in.


Well, at least he put some logical thought into it.  It's completely wrong.  But at least he wasn't as wrong as, "See, a chariot pulls the sun across the sky, blabbity bla bla."

I wonder if the real problem here is that some people don't tend to look beyond what they consider to be obvious conclusions.  For instance, what I pointed out about the sun being a little ball in the sky (it's not.  It's a monstrous ball.  And it's 93 million miles away).  But you couldn't draw that conclusion by simply looking at it.
And I wonder who is to blame for that...  Could it be, just maybe, the same people that tell us that God created the universe a few thousand years ago, and there is no need to question things any further?


It amazes me how many people have that "question everything until no questions remain" part of their brains turned off.  I've never understood how people can understand so little about the universe around them and not care or notice.  I've found that even the educated among us tend to not question things themselves when offered even a basic explanation of something. I tend to ponder whether substituting curiosity/inquisition with superstition/fairy tales as children has irrevocably broken certain peoples' abilities to discern and question the less than obvious things around us.  As a result, people can be incredibly ignorant about the simplest of things in the world around them....
 
2013-03-14 12:20:48 PM
No more ridiculous than believing in god or that the Earth is only 6000 years old and a whole hell of a lot more people believe that bullshiat.
 
2013-03-14 12:22:12 PM
Meh, when asked a question in polling most people feel compelled to give an answer even if they know nothing on the topic.

It's only the truly stupid who will argue for their incorrect point of view.

It may be the same percentage but the questions alone aren't really indicative of much.
 
2013-03-14 12:22:26 PM

Tat'dGreaser: A hilariously large percent of terrified right-wingers are convinced Obama is soon going to take away all their guns, so when the Newtown shooting happened and 20 young children were massacred due to America's fetish for, obsession with and addiction to firearms, violence and fear, they bought more bullets. Because obviously.

Why the f*ck do I ever click on links from this website?


Care to 'refudiate' the statement?
 
2013-03-14 12:23:00 PM

SpectroBoy: MrGuilt:

[farm9.staticflickr.com image 640x426]
I'm a lone rhinoceros
There ain't one hell of a lots of us left in this world


I stand alone in my concrete cell
where people stare and toss me Coke cans
I guess it's better than being poached
but I'd give my horn just to see my homeland...

=]
 
2013-03-14 12:23:49 PM
This Is Great News. For Ashley Judd.
 
2013-03-14 12:24:44 PM

titwrench: No more ridiculous than believing in god or that the Earth is only 6000 years old and a whole hell of a lot more people believe that bullshiat.


http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/creation-museum-photos


laugh at that.  it's one of many photo collections i've seen made by "skeptics" visiting the Creationist museum.  Worth a laugh.
 
2013-03-14 12:25:08 PM

heypete: The number of guns in the country and guns-per-capita are at an all-time high while gun-related homicide rates are at their lowest point since 1964 and have been trending downwards for years.


Nope.  Gun ownership has been falling since the 70's, and so has violent crime.  Interesting.
 
2013-03-14 12:27:42 PM

halfof33: Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: halfof33: derpderpderpityDOOOOoooooo!

Clarified for newbs.

lolz

Sport, when you have nothing you really have nothing, don't you? Hee hee!


Bless his heart
 
2013-03-14 12:28:35 PM

FizixJunkee: Have you seen the video of Harvard graduates and their explanations of what causes seasons? Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer.

HARVARD GRADUATE.


So what? It's easy to cherry pick and make someone look dumb because they don't know a specific fact that you know (and the one you cite isn't even a very good example, since that misconception is very common and quite widespread). That same guy may also have stunning skills with numbers, remarkably business intuition, and a sweeping knowledge of world politics and history. He might be better than 99% of people in a half-dozen other areas of knowledge. The fact that he doesn't know one thing and instead believes something he probably learned (incorrectly) as a child and has never had cause to think of again doesn't mean squat. All it means is that he doesn't know that one thing.

With the right questions and the right editing, it's easy to make just about anyone look stupid.
 
2013-03-14 12:29:09 PM

the801: the sun does revolve around the earth, in as much as anything could be said to revolve around anything.

people who think that the sun is a static central part of the universe are exactly the same as people who believe that the earth is a static central part of the universe.


Yes, yes... it's all frames of reference. But a reference frame where the sun revolves around the Earth isn't a very useful one to work with if you are, for instance, trying to put a lander on Mars.
 
2013-03-14 12:32:22 PM
She saw dinosaurs.
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-03-14 12:32:28 PM

midigod: heypete: The number of guns in the country and guns-per-capita are at an all-time high while gun-related homicide rates are at their lowest point since 1964 and have been trending downwards for years.

Nope.  Gun ownership has been falling since the 70's, and so has violent crime.  Interesting.


And yet the number of penises has been increasing steadily and incidents of rape has dropped in that EXACT SAME timeline!. You can't explain that!

/correlation does not equal causation.
 
2013-03-14 12:32:35 PM

dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.


Thanks, I was going to say this. The only thing I would add is that the common point is the common center of gravity, and that it's not at the geometric center of the sun (just very, very close to it).
 
2013-03-14 12:34:21 PM
Being in IT, a few years ago, there were many people asking me "What is cloud computing?"  I would give them a short description, and within 15 seconds, could see their eyes glaze over.

Most Avg. people don't care to know.  I now just tell when asked "any storage or computation that takes place outside your computer"  and walk away quickly.

Sometimes, I'd get people who would actually argue with me, because "Their friend who is like a computer genius, told me that cloud computing was X, X, X,."  I usually held off on telling them that their friend was an idiot.
 
2013-03-14 12:35:13 PM

Fano: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

People need to know that it's used in nuclear reactors and chemical plants. It's even used in the production of WEAPONS.


For the love of ...Umm. Its even worse than I thought!
 
2013-03-14 12:35:17 PM
I think its closer to 51% considering the election results,
 
2013-03-14 12:37:00 PM
I would love to meet someone, just once, who sincerely believes that the sun revolves around the earth, because

1) I don't believe they exist outside of mental illness, and think it's much more likely that 18% will take the piss if presented, and

2) it would be so much fun to teach them otherwise and blow their mind. Usually, you only get to rock someone's world like that when they're under the age of six.
 
2013-03-14 12:37:29 PM

Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.

You would not believe the numbers i get signing that petition every year for earth week. granted most are right our of high school but still. The powers that be asked me not to do it again this year, it made someone feelproved someone was dumb.


FTFY
 
2013-03-14 12:37:43 PM

dittybopper: neversubmit: dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.

revolve != orbit

Yeah, that's why I made sure to distinguish the two.


Earth rotates on its own axis and revolves around the sun.
 
2013-03-14 12:38:06 PM

meat0918: Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.

You would not believe the numbers i get signing that petition every year for earth week. granted most are right our of high school but still. The powers that be asked me not to do it again this year, it made someone feel dumb.

I would believe you.  I almost want to go and gather signatures this year around town, just to see how many I get.

You should do it anyways.


If you like those sorts of joke, you should try to see "Brass Eye" if you haven't before (the second episode about drugs is particuarly hilarious).
 
2013-03-14 12:38:09 PM
We're going to candy mountain, Charlie!
 
2013-03-14 12:40:24 PM

SquiggsIN: titwrench: No more ridiculous than believing in god or that the Earth is only 6000 years old and a whole hell of a lot more people believe that bullshiat.

http://www.skepticalmonkey.com/creation-museum-photos


laugh at that.  it's one of many photo collections i've seen made by "skeptics" visiting the Creationist museum.  Worth a laugh.


Saved for after work
 
2013-03-14 12:40:48 PM

midigod: Nope.  Gun ownership has been falling since the 70's, and so has violent crime.  Interesting.


Interesting. Thanks for the link.

Since more people are living in cities and not doing as much outdoor living, it doesn't really surprise me that fewer households contain guns (though the number of guns-per-capita is certainly increasing, as is the amount of people with concealed carry permits). Five Thirty Eight has an interesting analysis of the same surveys.

That said, I wonder if people are truthfully answering those surveys: I realize that its anecdotal, but all the gun owners I know are rather skeptical of telling a random telephone caller if they do or don't own guns. I wonder how one could take that into consideration?

In my personal experience, every time I'd go to the local ranges in the SF Bay Area (CA), Phoenix, Casa Grande, and Tucson (AZ) area they were quite full, often with lots younger shooters (in their 20s-30s, rather than old guys).

Yeah, I know the plural of "anecdote" isn't "data", but that doesn't really jive with my personal experience. I admit I could definitely be wrong though. :)
 
2013-03-14 12:40:50 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?



icasl.com.br
 
2013-03-14 12:40:58 PM

FizixJunkee: Have you seen the video of Harvard graduates and their explanations of what causes seasons?  Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer.

HARVARD GRADUATE.

Let that sink in.


ISWYDT. I wonder how many people you'll snag.
 
2013-03-14 12:41:12 PM
Only six believe in unicorns?  That's surprising seeing as though even the Bible implies their existence.  All Christians (to a lesser extent, the Jews - I don't know where or if Job places in their canon) should believe in it.

Job 39:9-12

/snicker
 
2013-03-14 12:41:13 PM

balisane: Usually, you only get to rock someone's world like that when they're under the age of six.


You should meet my wife.  She's not stupid but as ditzy as they come.  She gets that bewildered / glazed look in her eyes far more often than i'd like to see.
 
2013-03-14 12:43:44 PM
I have been saying this for years: the systematic dumbing down of the American populace so that the elite exert more control than they already have.
 
2013-03-14 12:44:50 PM

balisane: 2) it would be so much fun to teach them otherwise and blow their mind.


It wouldn't. Most people don't care about that stuff. You'd get halfway through explaining it to them and they'd either tune you out because they think you're being obnoxious, their eyes would glaze over because you're utterly boring them, or both.

Most people stop caring about what causes the seasons, where the Earth is in relation to the rest of the celestial bodies, the span of time between us and the dinosaurs, and why the sky is blue when they realize that it has no bearing on their job, their relationship, paying their bills, unwinding on the weekend, or whatever.

I don't particularly agree with or relate to that mindset, as my lust for learning never left me (and likely never will), but I certainly understand it.
 
2013-03-14 12:45:04 PM

thisisyourbrainonFark: You all are sheeple. Seriously, explain this:

[i.ytimg.com image 320x180]

/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLwPfobiyuo

xria: Karac: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way.

For asteroids floating in deep space perhaps.  But for the Earth and Sun - no, you can't.  It's pretty easy to prove that the Earth revolves around the Sun because the center of it's orbit is actually INSIDE the sun.

The centre of gravity is inside the sun, but that doesn't necessarily mean the centre of the orbit is given that Earth isn't going around in a perfect circle. Given the Earth is ~5 million km nearer the sun in January (perihelion) than July (aphelion), and the Sun is ~1.4 million km in diameter, that would suggest the centre of the orbit is outside the sun by ~1.8 million km.


The earth's orbit is elliptical, not a perfect circle.  Ellipses have two "centres" (foci, plural of focus).  The sun sits at one of them, and that's what we're talking about when we say "centre of the orbit" (at least, that's what I should have said earlier - it completely slipped my mind until I read your post).

/clarifications welcome, it's been a while since I took first year astronomy
 
2013-03-14 12:46:03 PM
So let me get this straight. If someone does not think like this guy they are a moron. He is enlightened and all should now down to his superior liberal intellect.

Nothing closed minded there, nope nothing.
 
2013-03-14 12:47:07 PM

FizixJunkee: dittybopper: durbnpoisn: 

Yeah they would.  Just recently it was revealed that 80% of NYC high school graduates entering CUNY (City University of New York) needed remedial work on reading, writing, and/or math.

These were *COLLEGE BOUND* kids, and 4 out of 5 couldn't meet the standards expected of them.

I'm betting that their education in science and social studies was similarly lacking.


Have you seen the video of Harvard graduates and their explanations of what causes seasons?  Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer.

HARVARD GRADUATE.

Let that sink in.


In the southern hemisphere, the earth is further from the sun in winter. Closest approach is Jan 4, which is summer in the south.

Didn't watch.
 
2013-03-14 12:48:44 PM
Depends on how the question is worded. For example, Of course unicorns exist as a concept in human discourse. We wouldn't be talking about them if the didn't. So yes, to that question.

In other, words how intelligent were the survey creators? Something tells me they aren't real bright.

/btw - Neornithes (birds) clade includes birds exiting and surviving the Cretaceous-Paleogene extinction (dinosaurs).
 
2013-03-14 12:53:29 PM

Visionmn2: So let me get this straight. If someone does not think like this guy they are a moron. He is enlightened and all should now down to his superior liberal intellect.

Nothing closed minded there, nope nothing.


Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.  You know what not everyone has?  The facts.  You know what no one has?  A unicorn, because they don't exist.  You know what that makes you if you believe in unicorns?  A moron, worthy of scorn and ridicule.  Or a child, in which case rock on.
 
2013-03-14 12:54:25 PM

WhoGAS: Only six believe in unicorns?  That's surprising seeing as though even the Bible implies their existence.  All Christians (to a lesser extent, the Jews - I don't know where or if Job places in their canon) should believe in it.

Job 39:9-12

/snicker


The KJV is full of translation fail. My favorite one is the passage where God compares the Israelites to the Scottish.
 
2013-03-14 12:56:47 PM
Not sure if I can stomach a thread like this today. I'm just going to go ahead and assume all comments here, witty or derptastic, consist solely of:

"In sum and all averaged out, it's safe to say about 37 percent of Americans are just are not very bright."
What an idiot! His grammar is terrible. I can't acknowledge a positive or negative response to this article because the writer left a typo in.
 
m00
2013-03-14 12:57:01 PM

Biological Ali: Which is, of course, entirely separate from the point of the question. It's like saying "If we expand the definition of the term to include those Blue Angel planes that do the fancy tricks, then angels really are real!", or "If we expand the definition of 'murder' to include 'killing someone softly with his song', then that man is guilty!"


I think you're missing the point I'm (maybe poorly) trying to make. It's factually incorrect to say "the Sun does not revolve around the Earth." This is what we teach kids, because it's easier than high school/college level physics and there is the history behind heliocentric/geocentric models. It's like a questionnaire that says "Is the acceleration of gravity  9.81 m/s2?" The answer is, of course, "no." It's the acceleration of gravity on earth, in a vacuum, as described by classical mechanics. Basically, it's a poorly worded question because it's looking for a specific answer but it doesn't phrase the question to make that answer absolutely true. "Does the sun revolve around the earth?" is another example. You might call this nit-picky, but these are supposed to be scientific questions. Don't give me a scientific y/n question where the answer isn't an absolute.

"Do unicorns exist?" is also a poorly phrased question. It should be "Has there been any scientific discoveries of fossil records, bones, or physical remnants of the mythological creature known as a 'unicorn'?" Because the actual answer to the question "do unicorns exist" is who knows? Nobody has directly observed a unicorn, but nobody has directly observed pretty much anything in string theory. A lack of observation doesn't prove something doesn't exist. All we can say is that we haven't observed something, we do/don't have evidence for something. We can prove something does exist, but we can't prove the negative.

So what the survey questions I'm picking on really ask is "how in line are you of what other people think about an issue?" Obviously, most people don't think unicorns exist... so the right answer to "do unicorns exist" is "no" why? because most people think they don't exist, and we're all taught they don't exist.  So basically it's playing Family Feud.
 
2013-03-14 12:57:05 PM
So, the writer admonishes people for believing in things with no evidence . . . and then proceeds to make all sorts of assumptions while presenting no evidence.

It's almost like the authors lack of belief is the product of socialization and not rational thought. Of course, I have no evidence of that . . .
 
2013-03-14 12:57:07 PM

barefoot in the head: In the southern hemisphere, the earth is further from the sun in winter.


The distance is not only irrelevant to what causes the seasons, the difference in distance is so miniscule that it's not even worth mentioning. It's a mere handful of miles. The effect on temperature is as close to zero as can be.

It's all down to how much sunlight the hemisphere gets. Hemisphere is tilted towards the sun, it gets loads more sunlight, it's summer. Tilted away, gets much less sunlight, it's winter. It's like standing directly under a heat lamp and pointing the lamp slightly to the side. You're just as far away in both cases. What matters is the direct exposure you're getting.
 
2013-03-14 12:59:18 PM

Joe Blowme: Fano: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

People need to know that it's used in nuclear reactors and chemical plants. It's even used in the production of WEAPONS.

AND its in damn near every house in america, just waiting to kill people.


Find out more, tonight at eleven!
 
2013-03-14 01:00:49 PM

Karac: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: "......Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together....."

Absolutely. Raquel Welch would never lie to me.

/obscure?
//perhaps for the younger farkers.....


[img2.timeinc.net image 400x580]

Me and Andy Dufresne got it.


What say you, sugar britches?  You believe in unicorns?
 
2013-03-14 01:01:42 PM
This article does nothing.  It feels like this guy is the liberal/atheist version of Ted Nugent.  First, I don't think you can discredit anyone who believes in a religion as dumb.  Sure there are the loud idiots who think man walked with dinosaurs, but those are preverbial fish in a barrel.  What of Agnostics?  I pose that you can believe in evolution, the big bang theory, and creationism.  What if god made the big bang happen, and evolution took care of the rest?  What if god is a scientist?  I think deeply religious people, not blindly religious people, are capable of asking these questions.

Also, when he interjects obvious subjective opinion as fact, he totally loses me, and becomes the close-minded dumb person, married to a dogma, that rallies against other dumb people married to dogma.  I'm talking about the mumford and sons bit.  Sure they're easy because hipsters like them.  But I think some of their songs are emotionally powerful, and the rest are just cheap knock-offs of the good ones.  But I won't begrudge anyone for thinking they are the bees-knees.  There are a lot of bands that a lot of people like but I don't.  That makes neither of us dumb, but different.

If this guy had any actual desire to shock people into thinking, he should have left some of the snark at the door.  Otherwise, he should have totally committed to his theme and named the article "religious righty's are dumb, and so can you".  Unfortunately, this case of witless try-to-hard has made me consider leaning away from a direction I was already going.
 
2013-03-14 01:01:54 PM
HS:  Aw, you can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that.
 
2013-03-14 01:02:09 PM
I can sum up what happens here in a few statements:
1) Old Man yells at clouds
2) Man yells at Old Man for yelling at clouds
3) Others gather and reach critical mass then go nuclear
4) Script kiddies get pissed off that no one is going nuclear over them and send death threats to Old Man yelling at cloud
5) new Old Man discovers script kiddies sending death threats and starts yelling at clouds
 
m00
2013-03-14 01:02:13 PM
dittybopper: neversubmit: dittybopper: neversubmit: dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.

revolve != orbit

Yeah, that's why I made sure to distinguish the two.

No they don't the earth orbits the sun the sun orbits the center of the milkyway galaxy

We're both right, depending on the frame of reference.

Considered as a two body system, the Earth and Sun orbit around a barycenter.  Because the Sun is much more massive than the Earth, that barycenter is below the surface of the Sun.

This is what I meant by "revolve around each other" but I had forgotten the technical term. Thanks :)
 
2013-03-14 01:02:14 PM

bdub77: 47% voted for Mitt Romney.


And still haven't peeled off the bumper stickers. There's even a pickup truck I see around town from time to time still sporting a full-width rear-window "Romney" decal.

I was behind an SUV yesterday with a "Don't blame me, I voted for Romney" and all I could think was, "Actually, I do blame you - for being the reason we can't have nice things."
 
2013-03-14 01:02:25 PM
Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together.

www.progarchives.com : of cause they did
 
2013-03-14 01:03:52 PM
Technically it's impossible to disprove the existence of unicorns. So people who are "unicorn atheistic" are actually "unicorn agnostic". Also, the unicorn issue should not be mixed in with obvious stuff like the earth revolving around the sun.
 
2013-03-14 01:04:15 PM

CuttySupreme: The only fail in this thread is the Fark mods greenlighting this liberal drivel.


Could care less about the political ideology of the writer, but yes. This. HuffPo readers done got trolled, and the mod who greenlit this needs his/her hand slapped.

/still wondering wtf I just read.
 
2013-03-14 01:05:08 PM
right now I'm trying to think about how cloud computing could involve actual clouds..... hmm
 
2013-03-14 01:05:31 PM

crazydave023: I have been saying this for years: the systematic dumbing down of the American populace so that the elite exert more control than they already have.


"Alpha children wear grey They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm really awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're too stupid to be able..."
 
2013-03-14 01:06:18 PM
dittybopper:

We're both right, depending on the frame of reference.

Considered as a two body system, the Earth and Sun orbit around a barycenter.  Because the Sun is much more massive than the Earth, that barycenter is below the surface of the Sun.

As a system, they both orbit the center of the Milky Way galaxy.


And the Milky Way is moving away from the Center of the Universe, which we all know is in Tulsa, OK.
 
2013-03-14 01:08:02 PM

shoegaze99: barefoot in the head: In the southern hemisphere, the earth is further from the sun in winter.

The distance is not only irrelevant to what causes the seasons, the difference in distance is so miniscule that it's not even worth mentioning. It's a mere handful of miles. The effect on temperature is as close to zero as can be.

It's all down to how much sunlight the hemisphere gets. Hemisphere is tilted towards the sun, it gets loads more sunlight, it's summer. Tilted away, gets much less sunlight, it's winter. It's like standing directly under a heat lamp and pointing the lamp slightly to the side. You're just as far away in both cases. What matters is the direct exposure you're getting.


Thanks, but the reference includes the word "when". That's all I was responding to.
 
2013-03-14 01:09:15 PM
barefoot in the head:

In the southern hemisphere, the earth is further from the sun in winter. Closest approach is Jan 4, which is summer in the south.

Didn't watch.



Uh...  No.  That's like saying that the western hemisphere is further away at night time.  In terms of how seasons work, It's all about the angle of orientation, and how direct the suns light is.
 
2013-03-14 01:09:36 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: "......Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together....."

Absolutely. Raquel Welch would never lie to me.

/obscure?
//perhaps for the younger farkers.....


Nor Victoria Vetri!

\who got naked in her dinosaur film
 
2013-03-14 01:09:58 PM
What about alicorns?

images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-03-14 01:10:30 PM

barefoot in the head: dittybopper: neversubmit: dittybopper: m00: Biological Ali: Oh that was good. I give it 7/10.

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

The Earth and the Sun orbit around a common point.  That point is wholly within the Sun, so for all practical purposes, it's accurate enough to say the Earth orbits the Sun.

Both of them revolve around their respective axes.

revolve != orbit

Yeah, that's why I made sure to distinguish the two.

Earth rotates on its own axis and revolves around the sun.


Knock off the bogus pedantry or I will be forced to shoot you with my .357 Magnum rotator.
 
2013-03-14 01:10:49 PM

m00: "Do unicorns exist?" is also a poorly phrased question. It should be "Has there been any scientific discoveries of fossil records, bones, or physical remnants of the mythological creature known as a 'unicorn'?" Because the actual answer to the question "do unicorns exist" is who knows? Nobody has directly observed a unicorn, but nobody has directly observed pretty much anything in string theory. A lack of observation doesn't prove something doesn't exist. All we can say is that we haven't observed something, we do/don't have evidence for something. We can prove something does exist, but we can't prove the negative.


Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false.

That's how science and rational thought work.  If evidence were to suddenly appear that a unicorn exists or may have existed in the past, you re-evaluate at that point.  As for string theory, scientists are relatively certain that they have witnessed the Higgs boson in recent experiments.  String theory predicted that this particle existed and until they found evidence, there was a lot of justified resistance to the theory.  The particle's existence and its behavior will go a long way toward theoretical physicists being able to support or disprove string theory.

The burden of proof is on the person making the hypothesis, otherwise anything imaginary must be real because no evidence exists to prove or deny the claim.
 
2013-03-14 01:11:45 PM

thisisyourbrainonFark: You all are sheeple. Seriously, explain this:

[i.ytimg.com image 320x180]

/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)


LMAO!! A whole new level of stupid right there.
 
2013-03-14 01:12:00 PM

Tex570: bdub77: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?

I know that lightning bolts carry 1.21 Jiggabytes of data.

That's racist.


How many Jiggabytes in a nubianbyte?
 
2013-03-14 01:13:08 PM

Zavulon: WhoGAS: Only six believe in unicorns?  That's surprising seeing as though even the Bible implies their existence.  All Christians (to a lesser extent, the Jews - I don't know where or if Job places in their canon) should believe in it.

Job 39:9-12

/snicker

The KJV is full of translation fail. My favorite one is the passage where God compares the Israelites to the Scottish.


Oh..don't remember that one.  Where is it?  That sounds fun.
 
2013-03-14 01:14:37 PM

Aigoo: CuttySupreme: The only fail in this thread is the Fark mods greenlighting this liberal drivel.

Could care less about the political ideology of the writer, but yes. This. HuffPo readers done got trolled, and the mod who greenlit this needs his/her hand slapped.

/still wondering wtf I just read.


Hm.  Prepare to be trolled by me then:
-If you're conservative and you don't get this article then the article has proven itself true and you will just never understand some things.
-If you're liberal and you don't get this article then you are unwilling to accept that, some people no matter how hard you try, will never understand what you say.

How did such a gap in misunderstanding one anouther come about?  What should we do about it if anything?  That's what the article is about.
 
2013-03-14 01:16:04 PM

Lollipop165: thisisyourbrainonFark: You all are sheeple. Seriously, explain this:

[i.ytimg.com image 320x180]

/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)

LMAO!! A whole new level of stupid right there.


Reminded me of this lady : Deer Xing Lady
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K3MoxlCaJ4

Also, too all you physicist wannabes... if you really are that adept, you should be pointing out how 100% of everything is relative to your vantage point.  Our entire solar system is moving through our galaxy which itself is moving in a group of galaxies....
 
Xai
2013-03-14 01:16:54 PM
Headline "37 Percent of People Completely Lost"

Reality: 37% of Americans are retarded
 
2013-03-14 01:17:09 PM

m00: Biological Ali: Which is, of course, entirely separate from the point of the question. It's like saying "If we expand the definition of the term to include those Blue Angel planes that do the fancy tricks, then angels really are real!", or "If we expand the definition of 'murder' to include 'killing someone softly with his song', then that man is guilty!"

I think you're missing the point I'm (maybe poorly) trying to make. It's factually incorrect to say "the Sun does not revolve around the Earth." This is what we teach kids, because it's easier than high school/college level physics and there is the history behind heliocentric/geocentric models. It's like a questionnaire that says "Is the acceleration of gravity  9.81 m/s2?" The answer is, of course, "no." It's the acceleration of gravity on earth, in a vacuum, as described by classical mechanics. Basically, it's a poorly worded question because it's looking for a specific answer but it doesn't phrase the question to make that answer absolutely true. "Does the sun revolve around the earth?" is another example. You might call this nit-picky, but these are supposed to be scientific questions. Don't give me a scientific y/n question where the answer isn't an absolute.


It's not even that either.  9.81m/s2 is just a good approximation for average gravitational attraction on Earth.  It's based on distance to center of mass and how much mass is between you and that center.  The number is different at the top of a mountain than it is at sea level.  The position of the moon also affects the force of gravity experienced at any given position.

Certain questions come with built in, or assumed, boundaries.  "Do unicorns exist?" is an example.  To me, I process this question to mean "Do real living animals called unicorns currently exist on the planet earth?"  I don't include the abstract concept of a unicorn in my selection.  Otherwise, the question "Does blank exist?" will always be "yes" as blank exists within the question itself.  Nor do I include toys or stuffed animals or artwork in my selection process.  And I frame my selection process within the confines of the world which I reside in, not in some fairy tale or imaginary world.  There's no hard written rules on these assumptions and context that everyone can or will agree on.  I assumed the "real world" in the unicorn question.  But sometimes the question can demand it exist elsewhere.  "Do Jawas exist?"  No.  Jawas are a character from Star Wars.  "Do Jawas ever travel to Coruscant?"  This question makes the statement that Jawas exist by framing it as if they do.  Taking that lead, we can then infer this question is in the context of an imaginary world, not our real world, and therefore can be answered thusly.  Sort of rambling now, so I'll wrap it up...
 
m00
2013-03-14 01:17:42 PM

Carn: Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false.

That's how science and rational thought work.  If evidence were to suddenly appear that a unicorn exists or may have existed in the past, you re-evaluate at that point.  As for string theory, scientists are relatively certain that they have witnessed the Higgs boson in recent experiments.  String theory predicted that this particle existed and until they found evidence, there was a lot of justified resistance to the theory.  The particle's existence and its behavior will go a long way toward theoretical physicists being able to support or disprove string theory.


So you're saying that String Theory magically became true when the Higgs boson was kinda-observed? And DNA didn't exist until the 1960s? This isn't Schroedinger's box. Things exist or don't exist regardless of our ability to observe them.

(By the way, they didn't "witness" it. They took measurements consistent with what they thought a Higgs boson would give off.)
 
2013-03-14 01:17:46 PM
the general awfulness of Mumford & Sons

You can sometimes find a fleck of gold in the biggest dung heap.

i2.cdnds.net
 
2013-03-14 01:18:17 PM

Carn: Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false not proven.


FTFY

RedTank: Hm. Prepare to be trolled by me then:
-If you're conservative and you don't get this article then the article has proven itself true and you will just never understand some things.
-If you're liberal and you don't get this article then you are unwilling to accept that, some people no matter how hard you try, will never understand what you say.

How did such a gap in misunderstanding one anouther come about? What should we do about it if anything? That's what the article is about.


You got trolled than, because the article is absolutely loaded with logical fallacies, and otherwise is poorly written dreck.
 
2013-03-14 01:18:31 PM

dittybopper: Moonfisher: I don't believe in unicorns. I just really, really wish they were real.

Me too.  I'd dig having a unicorn trophy on my wall.


People like you are the reason unicorns are now extinct.
 
2013-03-14 01:18:36 PM

durbnpoisn: barefoot in the head:

In the southern hemisphere, the earth is further from the sun in winter. Closest approach is Jan 4, which is summer in the south.

Didn't watch.


Uh...  No.  That's like saying that the western hemisphere is further away at night time.  In terms of how seasons work, It's all about the angle of orientation, and how direct the suns light is.


Here is the reference from the comment above:
"Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer. "
That is true, in the southern hemisphere, where it is winter on January 4th, the day WHEN the closest approach to the sun occurs.

article, meet thread.
 
2013-03-14 01:19:12 PM

ghettodwarf: What if god is a scientist?


Nagilum would be his name


images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-03-14 01:20:29 PM

SquiggsIN: ghettodwarf: I don't think you can discredit anyone who believes in a religion as dumb.

I'll just go ahead and ignore you now.


Some of the most brilliant minds in history were also religious and/or spiritual people, people who both subscribed to a religion and/or spirituality of one kind or another and who also broke new ground and/or changed the world with their intellect.

So yeah, your reaction is kind of strange, considering the guy you are ignoring is completely correct.
 
2013-03-14 01:20:50 PM

shoegaze99: balisane: 2) it would be so much fun to teach them otherwise and blow their mind.

It wouldn't. Most people don't care about that stuff. You'd get halfway through explaining it to them and they'd either tune you out because they think you're being obnoxious, their eyes would glaze over because you're utterly boring them, or both.

Most people stop caring about what causes the seasons, where the Earth is in relation to the rest of the celestial bodies, the span of time between us and the dinosaurs, and why the sky is blue when they realize that it has no bearing on their job, their relationship, paying their bills, unwinding on the weekend, or whatever.

I don't particularly agree with or relate to that mindset, as my lust for learning never left me (and likely never will), but I certainly understand it.


Heh: I really don't understand it at all, I have to admit. For me, knowing that the earth goes around the sun is only slightly less essential knowledge than boiling water, primary colors, and the sucker's guide to not drowning in the rain.

Probably on the level of knowing about how many calories you need in a day... which, admitted, probably a lot more than 18% of a given population is ignorant of.
 
2013-03-14 01:20:55 PM

halfof33: You got trolled than,


WTF did I just write? Fixed that for me.

/stupid 37%'er
 
2013-03-14 01:21:32 PM

halfof33: Carn: Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false not proven.

FTFY

RedTank: Hm. Prepare to be trolled by me then:
-If you're conservative and you don't get this article then the article has proven itself true and you will just never understand some things.
-If you're liberal and you don't get this article then you are unwilling to accept that, some people no matter how hard you try, will never understand what you say.

How did such a gap in misunderstanding one anouther come about? What should we do about it if anything? That's what the article is about.

You got trolled than, because the article is absolutely loaded with logical fallacies, and otherwise is poorly written dreck.


Then give me an example of the logical fallacies and we'll discuss them.
 
2013-03-14 01:24:26 PM

SquiggsIN: balisane: Usually, you only get to rock someone's world like that when they're under the age of six.

You should meet my wife.  She's not stupid but as ditzy as they come.  She gets that bewildered / glazed look in her eyes far more often than i'd like to see.


Not a lot of vectors for new information in her life? Or, I'm sure she just deeply processes what she does hear and hasn't lost her sense of wonder. Yeah, that's the ticket.
 
2013-03-14 01:25:01 PM

dittybopper: Knock off the bogus pedantry or I will be forced to shoot you with my .357 Magnum rotator.


The face of responsible gun ownership, ladies and gentlemen.
 
2013-03-14 01:25:29 PM

m00: This is what we teach kids, because it's easier than high school/college level physics and there is the history behind heliocentric/geocentric models. It's like a questionnaire that says "Is the acceleration of gravity 9.81 m/s2?"


The terms and phrases you're talking about aren't "incorrect"; they're used as convenient shorthand (as you yourself note) for propositions that themselves are not ambiguous. What you're terming as "incorrect" are literal interpretations of these fragments that are irrelevant because everybody knows what's being referred to.

Importantly, even the people who gave the silly answers to these questions are doing so under the same understanding of terms like "revolve around the sun" that everybody else is (unless they're deliberately farking around, which is a separate issue). If you want to engage in pedantry about the wording of the questions, that's fine, but that doesn't make the people who gave these silly answers any more correct.
 
2013-03-14 01:25:57 PM

Bondith: thisisyourbrainonFark: You all are sheeple. Seriously, explain this:

[i.ytimg.com image 320x180]

/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLwPfobiyuo


I was joking, christ. The lady's obviously a loon.
 
2013-03-14 01:26:23 PM

Bacontastesgood: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other

If you simplify any observation to the point that it is utterly meaningless, then it is inane, that's for sure.  Knowledge of the planets goes back at least to the Sumerian civilization.


They orbit around their center of mass.
 
2013-03-14 01:26:35 PM

shoegaze99: SquiggsIN: ghettodwarf: I don't think you can discredit anyone who believes in a religion as dumb.

I'll just go ahead and ignore you now.

Some of the most brilliant minds in history were also religious and/or spiritual people , people who both subscribed to a religion and/or spirituality of one kind or another and who also broke new ground and/or changed the world with their intellect

pretended to be religious so they wouldn't be killed.

FTFY
 
2013-03-14 01:27:16 PM
But Unicorns ARE real!   They have just left the land and evolved back into whales!

upload.wikimedia.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narwhal
 
2013-03-14 01:28:25 PM

CheekyMonkey: dittybopper: Moonfisher: I don't believe in unicorns. I just really, really wish they were real.

Me too.  I'd dig having a unicorn trophy on my wall.

People like you are the reason unicorns are now extinct.


and they were delicious too.
 
2013-03-14 01:28:27 PM

Barfmaker: It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist,

This is gonna be good...


One cannot be accepted as a true conservative by those who dominate American conservativism unless one is a "real Christian".  Anyone who does not accept biblical literalism is at best a "liberal Christian", i.e., no Christian at all.  Believing that everything in the Bible is literally true requires that one reject biology, geology, astronomy, genetics, anthropology, and history.  So, yeah, that doesn't leave much room for "intellectual conservatives" to exist.
 
2013-03-14 01:28:33 PM

titwrench: No more ridiculous than believing in god or that the Earth is only 6000 years old and a whole hell of a lot more people believe that bullshiat.


YOU CANT PROVE THAT GOD DOEASNT EXIST, SO STFU JERK
 
m00
2013-03-14 01:28:51 PM

stonicus: It's not even that either.  9.81m/s2 is just a good approximation for average gravitational attraction on Earth.  It's based on distance to center of mass and how much mass is between you and that center.  The number is different at the top of a mountain than it is at sea level.  The position of the moon also affects the force of gravity experienced at any given position.

Certain questions come with built in, or assumed, boundaries.  "Do unicorns exist?" is an example.  To me, I process this question to mean "Do real living animals called unicorns currently exist on the planet earth?"  I don't include the abstract concept of a unicorn in my selection.  Otherwise, the question "Does blank exist?" will always be "yes" as blank exists within the question itself.  Nor do I include toys or stuffed animals or artwork in my selection process.  And I frame my selection process within the confines of the world which I reside in, not in some fairy tale or imaginary world.  There's no hard written rules on these assumptions and context that everyone can or will agree on.  I assumed the "real world" in the unicorn question.  But sometimes the question can demand it exist elsewhere.  "Do Jawas exist?"  No.  Jawas are a character from Star Wars.  "Do Jawas ever travel to Coruscant?"  This question makes the statement that Jawas exist by framing it as if they do.  Taking that lead, we can then infer this question is in the context of an imaginary world, not our real world, and therefore can be answered thusly.  Sort of rambling now, so I'll wrap it up...


Well, my point is the answer to "does X exist" is always either "yes" or "unknown." You can't prove something doesn't exist, it's logically impossible unless X is pre-defined as being mutually exclusive or co-existent with some already known thing.

I mean, obviously the answer the question "Do unicorns exist" is looking for is 'no.' That's the right answer. But... then the point of the question isn't to think about it and give an answer, it's to pick the answer that conforms to the publicly held view. You are right, unicorns in the metaphysical sense do exist... just as "wealth" exists or any other intangible or abstract thing. But this isn't the "right answer."

So I wouldn't call someone stupid for failing such a test, just that they aren't aware/don't care about what the test is trying to get you to answer.
 
2013-03-14 01:31:07 PM
62% believe every farking stat they read
 
2013-03-14 01:31:19 PM
You anti-gun nuts might want to look up the murder rate in Kennasaw, GA,
Where they are REQUIRED to own a firearm...
25 years murder free.....hmmmm.

While you are at it, take a peek at Switzerland, then compare it to Chicago and Detroit where its near impossible to get a gun LEGALLY.


/Splain dat  !!
Wiki quote:Gun lawIn 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-17">[ 17]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
Gun rights activist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kopel" title="David Kopel" class="mw-redirect">David Kopel has claimed that there is evidence that this gun law has reduced the incident rate of home burglaries citing that in the first year, home burglaries dropped from 65 before the ordinance, down to 26 in 1983, and to 11 in 1984.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-18">[18 ] Another report observed a noticeable reduction in burglary from 1981, the year before the ordinance was passed, to 1999. A 2001 media report stated that Kennesaw's crime rates continued to decline and were well below the national average, making citizens feel safer and more secure.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-19">[ 19] Later research claims that there is no evidence that [the law] reduced the rate of home burglaries [in Kennesaw],http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-is bn0-472-031 62-7-20">[20]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note- isbn0-415-170 87-7-21">[21] even though the overall crime rate had decreased by more than 50% between 1982 and 2005.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-22">[22 ]

The city's websitehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-23">[ 23] claims the city has the lowest crime rate in the county.
 
2013-03-14 01:32:32 PM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other


Not all frames of reference are created equal.  Inertial frames of reference have the property that you can actually apply the laws of physics to them.  There is no inertial reference frame in which the sun goes around the Earth.
 
2013-03-14 01:32:37 PM

heypete: midigod: Nope.  Gun ownership has been falling since the 70's, and so has violent crime.  Interesting.

Interesting. Thanks for the link.

Since more people are living in cities and not doing as much outdoor living, it doesn't really surprise me that fewer households contain guns (though the number of guns-per-capita is certainly increasing, as is the amount of people with concealed carry permits). Five Thirty Eight has an interesting analysis of the same surveys.

That said, I wonder if people are truthfully answering those surveys: I realize that its anecdotal, but all the gun owners I know are rather skeptical of telling a random telephone caller if they do or don't own guns. I wonder how one could take that into consideration?

In my personal experience, every time I'd go to the local ranges in the SF Bay Area (CA), Phoenix, Casa Grande, and Tucson (AZ) area they were quite full, often with lots younger shooters (in their 20s-30s, rather than old guys).

Yeah, I know the plural of "anecdote" isn't "data", but that doesn't really jive with my personal experience. I admit I could definitely be wrong though. :)


Actually, there is some evidence that the GSS data might be wrong.

Look at this graph from GSS data:

www.washingtonpost.com

Look at the "% with pistol or shotgun in home (GSS)".

If you read that, the number of households with a rifle or pistol in the home *DOUBLED* in the space of a handful of years, and it appears to have dropped by nearly *HALF* in what appears to be just the span of a  year or two.

That would be tens of millions of guns flooding the market back then.  Something like that would have been noticed.

I think there is something else going on here, and it's a reason why we will *NEVER* get an accurate count of the number of people who own guns:  It's a politically charged question, and people are far more likely to falsely answer "NO" then they would be to falsely answer "YES".

Consider many nations with very strict gun laws:  Even they don't have an accurate count on the number of guns and gun owners because of defiance to the laws enacted.

This is a very informative law review article that touches on that subject:
IMAGINING GUN CONTROL IN AMERICA:  THE REMAINDER PROBLEM.
 
2013-03-14 01:33:41 PM
Looks like someone was watching The Newsroom....

http://youtu.be/16K6m3Ua2nw
 
2013-03-14 01:34:12 PM

balisane: SquiggsIN: balisane: Usually, you only get to rock someone's world like that when they're under the age of six.

You should meet my wife.  She's not stupid but as ditzy as they come.  She gets that bewildered / glazed look in her eyes far more often than i'd like to see.

Not a lot of vectors for new information in her life? Or, I'm sure she just deeply processes what she does hear and hasn't lost her sense of wonder. Yeah, that's the ticket.

stonicus: shoegaze99: SquiggsIN: ghettodwarf: I don't think you can discredit anyone who believes in a religion as dumb.

I'll just go ahead and ignore you now.

Some of the most brilliant minds in history were also religious and/or spiritual people , people who both subscribed to a religion and/or spirituality of one kind or another and who also broke new ground and/or changed the world with their intellect pretended to be religious so they wouldn't be killed.

FTFY


hey it works for two-faced politicians too!  The closer the election the more pious the candidates become.
 
2013-03-14 01:34:17 PM
You'd be surprised how many adults, many of them at least partially educated, have to think for a minute when you ask them to hold up their left or right hand.

Or can't alphabetize something without singing the song to help them.

Personally, i would have liked the article better if one of the questions asked you to distinguish between shiat and a can of Shinola.
 
2013-03-14 01:34:42 PM

m00: Carn: Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false.

That's how science and rational thought work.  If evidence were to suddenly appear that a unicorn exists or may have existed in the past, you re-evaluate at that point.  As for string theory, scientists are relatively certain that they have witnessed the Higgs boson in recent experiments.  String theory predicted that this particle existed and until they found evidence, there was a lot of justified resistance to the theory.   The particle's existence and its behavior will go a long way toward theoretical physicists being able to support or disprove string theory.

So you're saying that String Theory magically became true when the Higgs boson was kinda-observed? And DNA didn't exist until the 1960s? This isn't Schroedinger's box. Things exist or don't exist regardless of our ability to observe them.

(By the way, they didn't "witness" it. They took measurements consistent with what they thought a Higgs boson would give off.)


Please.  There are many other theories in physics trying to explain the gap between classical and quantum physics.  In my last sentence, bolded above, I stated that the particle's existence will help to evaluate whether the theory is valid.

Things exist.  Really?  What things?  By your current reasoning, every possible imaginary creature is quite real because there is no evidence.  That's not how science works.  String theory existed outside of the existence of the higgs because it is just a theory that tries to predict the realities of the universe.  The Higgs cannot be proven to exist until it is/was observed.  If you'd like to start "m00's Theory of the Possibility of the Existence of Invisible Unicorns", then by all means please do.  Mark me down as a skeptic, however.
 
2013-03-14 01:34:54 PM
/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLwPfobiyuo

I was joking, christ. The lady's obviously a loon.



I know you were.  I don't think it's possible to be a Farker and believe that rubbish.  I just wanted to get some self-pimpage in.  Probably could have mentioned that.  My apologies.
 
2013-03-14 01:35:23 PM

mrbmp: You anti-gun nuts might want to look up the murder rate in Kennasaw, GA,
Where they are REQUIRED to own a firearm...
25 years murder free.....hmmmm.

While you are at it, take a peek at Switzerland, then compare it to Chicago and Detroit where its near impossible to get a gun LEGALLY.

/Splain dat  !!
Wiki quote:Gun lawIn 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-17">[ 17]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
Gun rights activist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kopel" title="David Kopel" class="mw-redirect">David Kopel has claimed that there is evidence that this gun law has reduced the incident rate of home burglaries citing that in the first year, home burglaries dropped from 65 before the ordinance, down to 26 in 1983, and to 11 in 1984.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-18">[18 ] Another report observed a noticeable reduction in burglary from 1981, the year before the ordinance was passed, to 1999. A 2001 media report stated that Kennesaw's crime rates continued to decline and were well below the national average, making citizens feel safer and more secure.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-19">[ 19] Later research claims that there is no evidence that [the law] reduced the rate of home burgl ...


If the threat of someone owning a gun, hence getting shot if you try to rob them, is keeping down burglaries, why don't we just implement the death penalty for burglary?  Shouldn't that have the same effect without putting a bunch of guns out there?
 
2013-03-14 01:36:07 PM

mrbmp: You anti-gun nuts might want to look up the murder rate in Kennasaw, GA,
Where they are REQUIRED to own a firearm...
25 years murder free.....hmmmm.


Lol, what?  Well this should be fun...

I'll start with the fact that Kennesaw (notice how I spelled it correctly) only has 30,000 people.
 
2013-03-14 01:36:11 PM

pciszek: Barfmaker: It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist,

This is gonna be good...

One cannot be accepted as a true conservative by those who dominate American conservativism unless one is a "real Christian".  Anyone who does not accept biblical literalism is at best a "liberal Christian", i.e., no Christian at all.  Believing that everything in the Bible is literally true requires that one reject biology, geology, astronomy, genetics, anthropology, and history.  So, yeah, that doesn't leave much room for "intellectual conservatives" to exist.


It's the reason that fiscally-conservative, socially-liberal people like me have been abandoning the Republicans like rats from a sinking ship.  Until they reject the "religious right" and the "conservative christian" mantra and expectations, they will continue to turn lots of people away.
 
2013-03-14 01:36:55 PM

unchellmatt: m00: "...asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist."

There we go...

Yeah, that turned me off the article entirely. I know quite a number of people who consider themselves "conservative" who:

- Aren't delusional enough to believe the US was founded as a "Christian" nation
- Understand how the universe works
- Don't watch FOX

Now, are they in line with the rank and file, or the current batch of Tea Party coonts in office? No. But they are intelligent, well read, and not against intellectualism.


Ooh ohh!!!

1797 treaty of tripoli.

Universe workes according to the four fundamental forces of nature, exploded out of a singularity about 13 billion years ago, is expanding, and we're all going to die a horrible cold death in the future.

I only watch fox news in the break room while I make my coffee.

But I don't consider myself a conservative or liberal but on some issues i agree with the conservative platform - like forcing pregnant women who want an abortion to see their ultrasound so that they can make an informed decision. More information leads to better decisions and who is against better decisions?
 
2013-03-14 01:38:53 PM

mrbmp: You anti-gun nuts might want to look up the murder rate in Kennasaw, GA,
Where they are REQUIRED to own a firearm...
25 years murder free.....hmmmm.

While you are at it, take a peek at Switzerland, then compare it to Chicago and Detroit where its near impossible to get a gun LEGALLY.

/Splain dat  !!
Wiki quote:Gun lawIn 1982 the city passed an ordinance [Sec 34-21]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-17">[ 17]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
Gun rights activist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kopel" title="David Kopel" class="mw-redirect">David Kopel has claimed that there is evidence that this gun law has reduced the incident rate of home burglaries citing that in the first year, home burglaries dropped from 65 before the ordinance, down to 26 in 1983, and to 11 in 1984.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-18">[18 ] Another report observed a noticeable reduction in burglary from 1981, the year before the ordinance was passed, to 1999. A 2001 media report stated that Kennesaw's crime rates continued to decline and were well below the national average, making citizens feel safer and more secure.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#cite_note-19">[ 19] Later research claims that there is no evidence that [the law] reduced the rate of home burgl ...


threadjacking?
 
2013-03-14 01:39:22 PM

stonicus: FTFY


It's convenient to think this, I'm sure, but it's also wrong. From Georges Lemaître to Gerhard Ertl to Sewall Wright, there have been many great minds who clearly, unquestionably were also religious/spiritual men. They were in no danger. They did not fear being killed. They were simply brilliant men of science who also had religious beliefs.

And that's not getting into brilliant philosophers, writers, and so on who were also religious.
 
2013-03-14 01:39:24 PM

RedTank: Then give me an example of the logical fallacies and we'll discuss them.


Well, beyond the fact that the whole damn thing is an ad hominem you mean?
 
m00
2013-03-14 01:39:56 PM

Biological Ali: The terms and phrases you're talking about aren't "incorrect"; they're used as convenient shorthand (as you yourself note) for propositions that themselves are not ambiguous. What you're terming as "incorrect" are literal interpretations of these fragments that are irrelevant because everybody knows what's being referred to.

Importantly, even the people who gave the silly answers to these questions are doing so under the same understanding of terms like "revolve around the sun" that everybody else is (unless they're deliberately farking around, which is a separate issue). If you want to engage in pedantry about the wording of the questions, that's fine, but that doesn't make the people who gave these silly answers any more correct.


I'm pretty sure most people don't understand that the earth/sun dynamic is a two-body system, and that they both orbit around a common point which happens to inside the sun's atmosphere, but is not "the sun" if you are treating the sun as a point mass, because it's outside the sun's center of gravity. And like any two-body system, they are rotating around each other.
 
2013-03-14 01:40:15 PM

m00: stonicus: It's not even that either.  9.81m/s2 is just a good approximation for average gravitational attraction on Earth.  It's based on distance to center of mass and how much mass is between you and that center.  The number is different at the top of a mountain than it is at sea level.  The position of the moon also affects the force of gravity experienced at any given position.

Certain questions come with built in, or assumed, boundaries.  "Do unicorns exist?" is an example.  To me, I process this question to mean "Do real living animals called unicorns currently exist on the planet earth?"  I don't include the abstract concept of a unicorn in my selection.  Otherwise, the question "Does blank exist?" will always be "yes" as blank exists within the question itself.  Nor do I include toys or stuffed animals or artwork in my selection process.  And I frame my selection process within the confines of the world which I reside in, not in some fairy tale or imaginary world.  There's no hard written rules on these assumptions and context that everyone can or will agree on.  I assumed the "real world" in the unicorn question.  But sometimes the question can demand it exist elsewhere.  "Do Jawas exist?"  No.  Jawas are a character from Star Wars.  "Do Jawas ever travel to Coruscant?"  This question makes the statement that Jawas exist by framing it as if they do.  Taking that lead, we can then infer this question is in the context of an imaginary world, not our real world, and therefore can be answered thusly.  Sort of rambling now, so I'll wrap it up...

Well, my point is the answer to "does X exist" is always either "yes" or "unknown." You can't prove something doesn't exist, it's logically impossible unless X is pre-defined as being mutually exclusive or co-existent with some already known thing.

I mean, obviously the answer the question "Do unicorns exist" is looking for is 'no.' That's the right answer. But... then the point of the question isn't to think about it ...


The answer is "yes" or "no until proven otherwise".  If you're persisting in this line of reasoning because you are religious, we'll allow that one exception, especially if you worship a unicorn god.
 
2013-03-14 01:40:37 PM

Boudyro: The problem is we simply have too many people. We are 7 billion + now on this planet. If even 10 percent of that figure are idiots it makes for 700,000,000 stupid mother farkers somehow remembering to breathe right this moment.

While I think that 10 percent is a lowball guess, it is compounded by the fact that we are all human. Even the best educated and cleverest of us still have moments of shocking stupidity. Consider that anther 10 percent (another lowball guess) of the "smarter" population segment in this example just happen to be doing something stupid RIGHT NOW. That makes for another 630,000,000 people.

So just using what are probably low percentages, we come to the realization that at any given moment there are 1,330,000,000 people either being stupid or doing something stupid.

It really begins to explain a lot.


Thanks for almost making me choke on my sandwich.

This line alone was snort causing
700,000,000 stupid mother farkers somehow remembering to breathe right this moment.

 Well done sir, well done.
 
2013-03-14 01:41:53 PM

SquiggsIN: ghettodwarf: I don't think you can discredit anyone who believes in a religion as dumb.

I'll just go ahead and ignore you now.


I think my wording there was bad.  I'm not suggesting that you can't consider religious people dumb.  I'm saying you can't consider people dumb because they are religious.  There are all kinds of dumb religious people.  I think they are dumb because they are dumb, and the way they practice their religion is just an extension of their dumbness, not the reason for it.
 
2013-03-14 01:42:45 PM

stonicus: m00: Biological Ali: Which is, of course, entirely separate from the point of the question. It's like saying "If we expand the definition of the term to include those Blue Angel planes that do the fancy tricks, then angels really are real!", or "If we expand the definition of 'murder' to include 'killing someone softly with his song', then that man is guilty!"

I think you're missing the point I'm (maybe poorly) trying to make. It's factually incorrect to say "the Sun does not revolve around the Earth." This is what we teach kids, because it's easier than high school/college level physics and there is the history behind heliocentric/geocentric models. It's like a questionnaire that says "Is the acceleration of gravity  9.81 m/s2?" The answer is, of course, "no." It's the acceleration of gravity on earth, in a vacuum, as described by classical mechanics. Basically, it's a poorly worded question because it's looking for a specific answer but it doesn't phrase the question to make that answer absolutely true. "Does the sun revolve around the earth?" is another example. You might call this nit-picky, but these are supposed to be scientific questions. Don't give me a scientific y/n question where the answer isn't an absolute.

It's not even that either.  9.81m/s2 is just a good approximation for average gravitational attraction on Earth.  It's based on distance to center of mass and how much mass is between you and that center.  The number is different at the top of a mountain than it is at sea level.  The position of the moon also affects the force of gravity experienced at any given position.

Certain questions come with built in, or assumed, boundaries.  "Do unicorns exist?" is an example.  To me, I process this question to mean "Do real living animals called unicorns currently exist on the planet earth?"  I don't include the abstract concept of a unicorn in my selection.  Otherwise, the question "Does blank exist?" will always be "yes" as blank exists within the question itself.  Nor do I include toys or stuffed animals or artwork in my selection process.  And I frame my selection process within the confines of the world which I reside in, not in some fairy tale or imaginary world.  There's no hard written rules on these assumptions and context that everyone can or will agree on.  I assumed the "real world" in the unicorn question.  But sometimes the question can demand it exist elsewhere.  "Do Jawas exist?"  No.  Jawas are a character from Star Wars.  "Do Jawas ever travel to Coruscant?"  This question makes the statement that Jawas exist by framing it as if they do.  Taking that lead, we can then infer this question is in the context of an imaginary world, not our real world, and therefore can be answered thusly.  Sort of rambling now, so I'll wrap it up...


Most importantly, is the King of France bald?
 
2013-03-14 01:42:54 PM

barefoot in the head: That is true, in the southern hemisphere, where it is winter on January 4th, the day WHEN the closest approach to the sun occurs.


So your whole point is a silly bit of semantics that clearly ignores the intended meaning of the person who wrote the post?
 
m00
2013-03-14 01:44:27 PM

Carn: m00: Carn: Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false.

That's how science and rational thought work.  If evidence were to suddenly appear that a unicorn exists or may have existed in the past, you re-evaluate at that point.  As for string theory, scientists are relatively certain that they have witnessed the Higgs boson in recent experiments.  String theory predicted that this particle existed and until they found evidence, there was a lot of justified resistance to the theory.   The particle's existence and its behavior will go a long way toward theoretical physicists being able to support or disprove string theory.

So you're saying that String Theory magically became true when the Higgs boson was kinda-observed? And DNA didn't exist until the 1960s? This isn't Schroedinger's box. Things exist or don't exist regardless of our ability to observe them.

(By the way, they didn't "witness" it. They took measurements consistent with what they thought a Higgs boson would give off.)

Please.  There are many other theories in physics trying to explain the gap between classical and quantum physics.  In my last sentence, bolded above, I stated that the particle's existence will help to evaluate whether the theory is valid.

Things exist.  Really?  What things?   By your current reasoning, every possible imaginary creature is quite real because there is no evidence.  That's not how science works.  String theory existed outside of the existence of the higgs because it is just a theory that tries to predict the realities of the universe.  The Higgs cannot be proven to exist until it is/was observed.  If you'd like to start "m00's Theory of the Possibility of the Existence of Invisible Unicorns", then by all means please do.  Mark me down as a skeptic, however.


You clearly don't understand the difference between "does not exist" and "is not known to exist/has not been observed to exist."

Because by my current reasoning, you can't prove anything does not exist. You can only prove it does exist. This does not that everything which can be imagined exists. It only means everything which can be imagined cannot be proven definitively to not exist, unless as part of it's criteria it has a pre-established relationship with a known thing.
 
2013-03-14 01:45:26 PM

Joe Blowme: Nagilum


I can't unsee that face now...thanks for the nightmares.
 
2013-03-14 01:46:39 PM

ghettodwarf: SquiggsIN: ghettodwarf: I don't think you can discredit anyone who believes in a religion as dumb.

I'll just go ahead and ignore you now.

I think my wording there was bad.  I'm not suggesting that you can't consider religious people dumb.  I'm saying you can't consider people dumb because they are religious.  There are all kinds of dumb religious people.  I think they are dumb because they are dumb, and the way they practice their religion is just an extension of their dumbness, not the reason for it.


I was joking.  But, I see it as you see it.  I think religion is dumb.  I think people are dumb.  Sometimes those overlap.  Frequently the "dumb" is a result of the "religion" and its resultant influence.  Some times it isn't.

Fano: Most importantly, is the King of France bald?

Dig the last one up and find out?
 
2013-03-14 01:47:54 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: dittybopper: Knock off the bogus pedantry or I will be forced to shoot you with my .357 Magnum rotator.

The face of responsible gun ownership, ladies and gentlemen.


Wow, that's deliciously ironic giving your chosen nom de Fark.  "Hey, I joke about death, but when someone I disagree with does it, it's bad".
 
2013-03-14 01:48:34 PM
occamswrist:  ...like forcing pregnant women who want an abortion to see their ultrasound so that they can make an informed decision. More information leads to better decisions and who is against better decisions?

Wouldn't it be a better option to offer these women more information on having their baby adopted as opposed to trolling them out of having an abortion?  Having all the information directly or indirectly related to a decision is not always the best option.  In this case the forced ultrasound information is of poor quality.  It's only meant to torture and manipulate the recipient into making the "right" decision.

It's the quality, weight, and priority of the information that's truly important.  If one person knew everything there was to know then they would go mad.
 
2013-03-14 01:48:42 PM

m00: Carn: m00: Carn: Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false.

That's how science and rational thought work.  If evidence were to suddenly appear that a unicorn exists or may have existed in the past, you re-evaluate at that point.  As for string theory, scientists are relatively certain that they have witnessed the Higgs boson in recent experiments.  String theory predicted that this particle existed and until they found evidence, there was a lot of justified resistance to the theory.   The particle's existence and its behavior will go a long way toward theoretical physicists being able to support or disprove string theory.

So you're saying that String Theory magically became true when the Higgs boson was kinda-observed? And DNA didn't exist until the 1960s? This isn't Schroedinger's box. Things exist or don't exist regardless of our ability to observe them.

(By the way, they didn't "witness" it. They took measurements consistent with what they thought a Higgs boson would give off.)

Please.  There are many other theories in physics trying to explain the gap between classical and quantum physics.  In my last sentence, bolded above, I stated that the particle's existence will help to evaluate whether the theory is valid.

Things exist.  Really?  What things?   By your current reasoning, every possible imaginary creature is quite real because there is no evidence.  That's not how science works.  String theory existed outside of the existence of the higgs because it is just a theory that tries to predict the realities of the universe.  The Higgs cannot be proven to exist until it is/was observed.  If you'd like to start "m00's Theory of the Possibility of the Existence of Invisible Unicorns", then by all means please do.  Mark me down as a skeptic, however.

You clearly don't understand the difference between "does not exist" and "is not known to exist/has not been observed to exist."

Because by my current reasoning, you c ...


some people's brains don't function in the absolute logic factory the way yours does.  (My brain is like yours)
 
2013-03-14 01:49:12 PM

m00: I'm pretty sure most people don't understand that the earth/sun dynamic is a two-body system, and that they both orbit around a common point which happens to inside the sun's atmosphere, but is not "the sun" if you are treating the sun as a point mass, because it's outside the sun's center of gravity. And like any two-body system, they are rotating around each other.


The whole point of my post was to explain to you that virtually nobody interprets a question like that as being about a "two-body system". They interpret it in the context of our solar system, along with all the other orbiting entities it contains, and saying that "The sun revolves around the earth" means something very different (and very wrong), in that context, than the "technically correct" proposition you've been talking about.
 
m00
2013-03-14 01:49:27 PM

Carn: The answer is "yes" or "no until proven otherwise".  If you're persisting in this line of reasoning because you are religious, we'll allow that one exception, especially if you worship a unicorn god.


You can only prove that something exists.
You cannot prove the absence of something, unless it's a built-in condition.
This is basic, gradeschool, logic.
 
2013-03-14 01:49:32 PM

dittybopper: The My Little Pony Killer: dittybopper: Knock off the bogus pedantry or I will be forced to shoot you with my .357 Magnum rotator.

The face of responsible gun ownership, ladies and gentlemen.

Wow, that's deliciously ironic giving your chosen nom de Fark.  "Hey, I joke about death, but when someone I disagree with does it, it's bad".


Wait, I just thought:  Are you so intellectually stunted that you didn't get the revolver/rotator joke?  In that case, I apologize for assuming you were smart enough to get it.
 
2013-03-14 01:49:53 PM
I mean are the 6% under 9 years old? Because I could excuse that...

I want a study on how practical knowledge and how people do their job relates to people who believe crazy things like vaccines = autism, ghosts, dinosaurs didn't exist, Obama is a muslim, etc.

Because everyone is always shouting around that everyone else is stupid, but SOMEHOW in general these people can do their jobs. I know some 'Obama is not a US citizen' believers who are engineers and as far as I can tell they aren't farking things up left to right. I know a girl who is a CT tech and is all Obama is a Muslim, vaccines are a government plot to kill us, etc. but if you ask her what a certain bone is or need her to position someone for the right scan that is easy.

What I'm saying is that I *don't* think we are stupid (I mean- the bell curve of IQ pretty much tells you where we all are), I think we are easily brainwashed. Which, to me, is way more concerning.
 
2013-03-14 01:50:51 PM
Yesterday I was talking with coworkers and religion/pope was brought up.

One guy went to the white board and drew a Venn diagram explaining the Trinity. I went up to the whiteboard and drew a circle around his diagram and labelled it "make believe". You could cut the tension in the room with a knife.

And yes I'd do it again in a heartbeat.
 
2013-03-14 01:51:23 PM

halfof33: RedTank: Then give me an example of the logical fallacies and we'll discuss them.

Well, beyond the fact that the whole damn thing is an ad hominem you mean?


Yes, beyond that fact.
 
2013-03-14 01:52:25 PM

RedTank: occamswrist:  ...like forcing pregnant women who want an abortion to see their ultrasound so that they can make an informed decision. More information leads to better decisions and who is against better decisions?

Wouldn't it be a better option to offer these women more information on having their baby adopted as opposed to trolling them out of having an abortion?  Having all the information directly or indirectly related to a decision is not always the best option.  In this case the forced ultrasound information is of poor quality.  It's only meant to torture and manipulate the recipient into making the "right" decision.

It's the quality, weight, and priority of the information that's truly important.  If one person knew everything there was to know then they would go mad.


I agree with you. Was being sarcastic based on a previous thread.
 
2013-03-14 01:52:49 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: dittybopper: Knock off the bogus pedantry or I will be forced to shoot you with my .357 Magnum rotator.

The face of responsible gun ownership, ladies and gentlemen.


www.inquisitr.com
 
2013-03-14 01:53:39 PM
And 25% believe the President was born in Kenya
 
2013-03-14 01:55:00 PM
Actually number 1 on this list is interesting considering the % of farkers who actually believe that Joe Paterno was worse then Hitler.
 
2013-03-14 01:56:07 PM

occamswrist: I agree with you. Was being sarcastic based on a previous thread.


Oh, ok.  Sorry - I'm reading too many comments to discern sarcasm...  Someone should invent a sarcasm font or something....
 
2013-03-14 01:56:09 PM
Err sorry you have to click a link in the article but it says that 28 % of America believes that Paterno Molested children.
 
2013-03-14 01:56:16 PM

stonicus: If the threat of someone owning a gun, hence getting shot if you try to rob them, is keeping down burglaries, why don't we just implement the death penalty for burglary?  Shouldn't that have the same effect without putting a bunch of guns out there?


At the risk of threadjacking, no, not really. The odds of a burglar being caught by the police, tried, and convicted is fairly low particularly if there's no witnesses to the crime (either they burglarize the place with nobody home or they kill anyone who's there). The odds of being stopped and/or captured by the police if the homeowner is armed is higher.

While not much can be done to prevent empty homes from being burglarized, if someone is armed and at home they have a decent chance of defending themselves and repelling the criminal.

While I'm not convinced that giving more people guns will result in less burglaries, it's perfectly reasonable for a person to defend their life if threatened. A gun is an effective means of self-defense.

In regards to "putting a bunch of guns out there", that horse has already left the barn.
 
2013-03-14 01:57:44 PM

barefoot in the head: durbnpoisn: barefoot in the head:

In the southern hemisphere, the earth is further from the sun in winter. Closest approach is Jan 4, which is summer in the south.

Didn't watch.


Uh...  No.  That's like saying that the western hemisphere is further away at night time.  In terms of how seasons work, It's all about the angle of orientation, and how direct the suns light is.

Here is the reference from the comment above:
"Like, there's one guy who claims winter occurs when Earth is farther away from the Sun, and summer occurs when its closer. "
That is true, in the southern hemisphere, where it is winter on January 4th, the day WHEN the closest approach to the sun occurs.

article, meet thread.



Sorry...  I didn't take it the way you meant it.  In that respect, the guy from Harvard is correct, assuming he is referring to the southern hemisphere.
I think the point, however, is that it doesn't appear that's the way he meant it.  It's almost like he doesn't even realize that the seasons are reversed in the north and south.
 
2013-03-14 01:58:36 PM

m00: You clearly don't understand the difference between "does not exist" and "is not known to exist/has not been observed to exist."

Because by my current reasoning, you can't prove anything does not exist. You can only prove it does exist. This does not that everything which can be imagined exists. It only means everything which can be imagined cannot be proven definitively to not exist, unless as part of it's criteria it has a pre-established relationship with a known thing.


I understand quite well.  The proof is the lack of evidence, especially when we're talking about imaginary horse-sized creatures.  Or sasquatches.  Or leprechauns.    More accurately, as I said up thread, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim in such a case. Things are a little different when we're discussing sub-atomic particles (or God(s)) as we're dealing with things that we can't see with the naked eye.  In the case of finding the Higgs, it was theorized (looking to be correctly) that we just didn't have a big enough or powerful enough reactor.

So, unless you're arguing that unicorns are invisible and/or the size of sub-atomic particles, the only rational conclusion is that they don't exist.  It's not unknown, it's false.  Would you argue that we just have not invented the proper unicorn detector yet?
 
2013-03-14 01:59:10 PM

pciszek: Barfmaker: It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist,

This is gonna be good...

One cannot be accepted as a true conservative by those who dominate American conservativism unless one is a "real Christian".  Anyone who does not accept biblical literalism is at best a "liberal Christian", i.e., no Christian at all.  Believing that everything in the Bible is literally true requires that one reject biology, geology, astronomy, genetics, anthropology, and history.  So, yeah, that doesn't leave much room for "intellectual conservatives" to exist.


Wow, another one to add to this guys list of retarded beliefs.
 
m00
2013-03-14 02:03:14 PM

Biological Ali: m00: I'm pretty sure most people don't understand that the earth/sun dynamic is a two-body system, and that they both orbit around a common point which happens to inside the sun's atmosphere, but is not "the sun" if you are treating the sun as a point mass, because it's outside the sun's center of gravity. And like any two-body system, they are rotating around each other.

The whole point of my post was to explain to you that virtually nobody interprets a question like that as being about a "two-body system". They interpret it in the context of our solar system, along with all the other orbiting entities it contains, and saying that "The sun revolves around the earth" means something very different (and very wrong), in that context, than the "technically correct" proposition you've been talking about.


You realize, in the context of our solar system the earth and sun behave in a dynamic where the earth does not  really revolve around the sun. Mainly because the earth has non-zero mass. So the center of mass of the earth/sun system is not identical to the center of mass of the sun. Therefore, the earth cannot be said to revolve around the sun. Both the sun, and the earth, revolve around that point (obviously the sun is much, much, much closer).But as was said earlier, "the earth revolves around the sun" is shorthand for the high school physics explanation. The whole point of my post is that most people clearly don't understand what it's shorthand for.
 
2013-03-14 02:03:17 PM

RedTank: Yes, beyond that fact.


OK, first sentence. "Six percent of Americans believe in unicorns." What is that based on? he doesn't say. A survey perhaps? Well we all know a survey doesn't work that way, because there has to be a factor for accuracy or the lack thereof taken into account. If it is plus or minus 9% as someone here suggested, then the entire conclusion is faulty, it could be as low as 0%. Therefore, any conclusion that relies on that is fallacious based on the Fallacy of Assumption.
 
2013-03-14 02:06:10 PM

m00: Carn: The answer is "yes" or "no until proven otherwise".  If you're persisting in this line of reasoning because you are religious, we'll allow that one exception, especially if you worship a unicorn god.

You can only prove that something exists.
You cannot prove the absence of something, unless it's a built-in condition.
This is basic, gradeschool, logic.


What is a vacuum?  What is a 100% pure metal/element/compound?  How do we determine half life?  Does a sun give off radiation, and if we didn't measure any, would we know that there wasn't one nearby?  There is sadly, a 100% absence of hot naked ladies in my house.  You can disprove me by sending one over, and I'll thank you for it.
 
m00
2013-03-14 02:06:24 PM

Carn: The proof is the lack of evidence


I don't know if you are trolling me now. Lack of evidence is not proof. There was lack of evidence that the Higgs Boson existed until recently. Does this mean there was PROOF the Higgs Boson didn't exist until they took the measurements?

As I said earlier, you seem to live in Schroedinger's box.
 
2013-03-14 02:07:13 PM
Yes I believe the angels *mumble* are in Anaheim and unicorns *are in tapestries*,

- What can I say? I like to fark with pollsters.
 
m00
2013-03-14 02:07:56 PM

Carn: What is a vacuum?  What is a 100% pure metal/element/compound?  How do we determine half life?  Does a sun give off radiation, and if we didn't measure any, would we know that there wasn't one nearby?  There is sadly, a 100% absence of hot naked ladies in my house.  You can disprove me by sending one over, and I'll thank you for it.


The sad part is you probably think, deep down, that you are smarter than other people.
 
2013-03-14 02:10:16 PM
Believing in unicorns is similar to believing the governments 9/11 story.
 
2013-03-14 02:10:46 PM

m00: Because by my current reasoning, you can't prove anything does not exist.


Bertrand Russell's way ahead of you:


On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.

None of us would seriously consider the possibility that all the gods of homer really exist, and yet if you were to set to work to give a logical demonstration that Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, and the rest of them did not exist you would find it an awful job. You could not get such proof.


What you're talking about applies only in a certain strictly philosophical sense - in everyday discourse, we have a different standard for saying whether something does or does not exist, or whether something did or did not happen, and so on. And as with the previous points, everyone understands intuitively what this standard is; the ones giving the silly answers are merely wrong.
 
2013-03-14 02:12:59 PM
fox new is still a major news channel. That's all the coffin nails you need right there.
/ hurry up and die... hurry up and die...
 
2013-03-14 02:13:43 PM

m00: Carn: What is a vacuum?  What is a 100% pure metal/element/compound?  How do we determine half life?  Does a sun give off radiation, and if we didn't measure any, would we know that there wasn't one nearby?  There is sadly, a 100% absence of hot naked ladies in my house.  You can disprove me by sending one over, and I'll thank you for it.

The sad part is you probably think, deep down, that you are smarter than other people.


Pleeeeease can I have a picture of your unicorn?  Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease.
 
2013-03-14 02:14:12 PM

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans are pretty retarded.


You are assuming they answered those questions honestly.  I would have certainly farked around with my answers.
 
2013-03-14 02:16:16 PM

weirdneighbour: 12monkeys: But dinosaurs and man DO hang out together:
[files.myopera.com image 450x300]
[files.myopera.com image 450x300]
/pedantic cladist

[seriousfacts.com image 334x360]
we also eat them


I like my McDinosaurs dipped in honey.
 
2013-03-14 02:17:40 PM
I don't like this shiat anymore. I don't want to be smarter than anybody else. It's tiresome.
 
2013-03-14 02:20:27 PM

Zavulon: WhoGAS: Only six believe in unicorns?  That's surprising seeing as though even the Bible implies their existence.  All Christians (to a lesser extent, the Jews - I don't know where or if Job places in their canon) should believe in it.

Job 39:9-12

/snicker

The KJV is full of translation fail. My favorite one is the passage where God compares the Israelites to the Scottish.


It's obviously correct, as they are both the Chosen of the Lord.
 
2013-03-14 02:22:39 PM
Involuntary sterilization should be an option   (no, not really, the stupid have as much a right to reproduce as the rest of us)
 
2013-03-14 02:22:56 PM

CygnusDarius: Ergo, dinosaurs were delicious, and good with raspberry and chile sauce?


Isaac Asimov wrote a short story about that.
 
2013-03-14 02:23:38 PM
If one wants to write an article deploring ignorance and magical thinking, it would be better to actually write it well, and to have a point other than "ain't it awful."
 
2013-03-14 02:24:54 PM

12monkeys: I like my McDinosaurs dipped in honey.


I don't think the "nuggets" sold by McDonalds come from same phylum as dinosaurs.
 
2013-03-14 02:25:16 PM

SquiggsIN: Involuntary sterilization should be an option   (no, not really, the stupid have as much a right to reproduce as the rest of us)


They may have the right, but I wouldn't object to Momma Nature throwing a few more hurdles in the way.
 
2013-03-14 02:26:34 PM
Sadly - our government is such that everyone's vote is equal.

So yeah - that retard who thinks cloud computing really uses clouds and the sun goes around the Earth have as much power in making laws and setting policy as anyone else.
 
2013-03-14 02:26:51 PM

m00: The whole point of my post is that most people clearly don't understand what it's shorthand for.


You opened this conversation with this:

The earth/sun thing is true though. I was arguing this with a colleague at work. Technically, the earth and the sun revolve around each other. It's not like the sun is somehow fixed in space.

I was explaining to you that the people who gave the wrong answer to this question weren't using the reasoning you're describing here, and indeed meant something that is incredibly, thoroughly wrong. The people who gave the right answer, on the other hand, either did understand it perfectly while giving the right answer, or reasoned "incorrectly" in the same way that a person who completes a calculation using Newtonian values is "incorrect".

As I said before, being pedantic is one thing, but suggesting that the people who gave the wrong answers were "technically correct" in some way (or that the people who gave the right answers were wrong in some comparable way) is just silly.
 
2013-03-14 02:27:33 PM
Has this thread really devolved into people defending the idea that unicorns may exist?

Yep, that's it, we're doomed ... I'm riding that missile in like Slim Pickens ... see you all in hell!
 
2013-03-14 02:28:42 PM

Tricky Chicken: And as a technicality, I keep hearing zoologists refer to crocodiles as living fossils.  I have also seen Steve Irwin jump on top of them.  So that one is not too far off.


That's impossible--Steve Irwin is extinct.
 
2013-03-14 02:29:19 PM

Raoul Eaton: If one wants to write an article deploring ignorance and magical thinking, it would be better to actually write it well, and to have a point other than "ain't it awful."


but that's all that's left for us to do.  the religious nutjobs have derailed progress in this nation for decades.  they practice the fingers in their ears yelling "nyah nyah can't hear you" debate style.  No facts, figures, or statistics will influence them to abandon their superstitions and myths.

It's down to ridicule and stating the obvious when combating religious fervency.
 
2013-03-14 02:32:44 PM

tripleseven: Being in IT, a few years ago, there were many people asking me "What is cloud computing?"  I would give them a short description, and within 15 seconds, could see their eyes glaze over.

Most Avg. people don't care to know.  I now just tell when asked "any storage or computation that takes place outside your computer"  and walk away quickly.

Sometimes, I'd get people who would actually argue with me, because "Their friend who is like a computer genius, told me that cloud computing was X, X, X,."  I usually held off on telling them that their friend was an idiot.


That's the Microsoft definition, and the reason everyone is confused.   And I disagree, but won't bore Fark with the reasons why, and you probably know them anyway.  My job is in building private clouds, so I know way too much.  And yet even I'm tired of the term too.

/OpenStack
//the future yo
 
2013-03-14 02:33:23 PM
Note that the intellectual genius liberal college graduate who wrote the article provided no source information for the facts and figures he  made up spouts throughout the article. Liberal college graduates don't have to provide any evidence to support there viewpoints cause they're smarter than the rest of us. What a supercilious prick.
 
2013-03-14 02:36:45 PM

CruJones: tripleseven: Being in IT, a few years ago, there were many people asking me "What is cloud computing?"  I would give them a short description, and within 15 seconds, could see their eyes glaze over.

Most Avg. people don't care to know.  I now just tell when asked "any storage or computation that takes place outside your computer"  and walk away quickly.

Sometimes, I'd get people who would actually argue with me, because "Their friend who is like a computer genius, told me that cloud computing was X, X, X,."  I usually held off on telling them that their friend was an idiot.

That's the Microsoft definition, and the reason everyone is confused.   And I disagree, but won't bore Fark with the reasons why, and you probably know them anyway.  My job is in building private clouds, so I know way too much.  And yet even I'm tired of the term too.

/OpenStack
//the future yo


just tell them that it's like SETI.

 

KillerAttackParrot: Note that the intellectual genius liberal college graduate who wrote the article provided no source information for the facts and figures he  made up spouts throughout the article. Liberal college graduates don't have to provide any evidence to support there viewpoints cause they're smarter than the rest of us. What a supercilious prick.


Are you upset that he didn't directly tell you how smart you are?  Or are you upset that you believe in unicorns and angels and that his "stats" have you in the minority?
 
2013-03-14 02:40:25 PM

seadoo2006: Has this thread really devolved into people defending the idea that unicorns may exist?

Yep, that's it, we're doomed ... I'm riding that missile in like Slim Pickens ... see you all in hell!


Just like vampires, werewolves, and Eskimos.
 
2013-03-14 02:43:55 PM

halfof33: RedTank: Yes, beyond that fact.

OK, first sentence. "Six percent of Americans believe in unicorns." What is that based on? he doesn't say. A survey perhaps? Well we all know a survey doesn't work that way, because there has to be a factor for accuracy or the lack thereof taken into account. If it is plus or minus 9% as someone here suggested, then the entire conclusion is faulty, it could be as low as 0%. Therefore, any conclusion that relies on that is fallacious based on the Fallacy of Assumption.


Ok, granted I can't find anything about 6% of Americans believing in unicorns which in turn places doubt on the remaining statistics quoted.  Although I'm 100% certain that at least someone believes in Unicorns...  Regardless, in the context of this article I don't make the assumptions that only Republicans believe in unicorns, perhaps you feel like the article seems to say 37% of the population are dumb conservatives.  Maybe it does in the ad hominem manner you mentioned but that's not how I took it personally.

The article was by no means brilliant or fair but I still it spoke to me on some higher level. For me it boils down to the fact that there is a growing gap (this is something I believed before reading this) between right/wrong or logical/illogical beliefs and there is a reason that gap exists.  I'm mostly concerned that politics in America is beginning to perpetuate, manipulate, and depend upon these right/wrong or logical/illogical beliefs while potentially widening the gap at the expense of intellectual progress.
 
2013-03-14 02:44:51 PM

Fano: seadoo2006: Has this thread really devolved into people defending the idea that unicorns may exist?

Yep, that's it, we're doomed ... I'm riding that missile in like Slim Pickens ... see you all in hell!

Just like vampires, werewolves, and Eskimos.



You could probably find as many people that don't believe Eskimos exist as you could that believe vampires/werewolves do.
 
2013-03-14 02:49:01 PM

RedTank: halfof33: RedTank: Yes, beyond that fact.

OK, first sentence. "Six percent of Americans believe in unicorns." What is that based on? he doesn't say. A survey perhaps? Well we all know a survey doesn't work that way, because there has to be a factor for accuracy or the lack thereof taken into account. If it is plus or minus 9% as someone here suggested, then the entire conclusion is faulty, it could be as low as 0%. Therefore, any conclusion that relies on that is fallacious based on the Fallacy of Assumption.

Ok, granted I can't find anything about 6% of Americans believing in unicorns which in turn places doubt on the remaining statistics quoted.  Although I'm 100% certain that at least someone believes in Unicorns...  Regardless, in the context of this article I don't make the assumptions that only Republicans believe in unicorns, perhaps you feel like the article seems to say 37% of the population are dumb conservatives.  Maybe it does in the ad hominem manner you mentioned but that's not how I took it personally.

The article was by no means brilliant or fair but I still it spoke to me on some higher level. For me it boils down to the fact that there is a growing gap (this is something I believed before reading this) between right/wrong or logical/illogical beliefs and there is a reason that gap exists.  I'm mostly concerned that politics in America is beginning to perpetuate, manipulate, and depend upon these right/wrong or logical/illogical beliefs while potentially widening the gap at the expense of intellectual progress.


one of the biggest things allowing that gap to widen is the perception that our political system is as they want us to think it is.  R doesn't mean fully conservative, L doesn't mean fully liberal, conservative and liberal are not mutually-exclusive, there are more than 2 political parties, etc..

R's and D's have us on a see saw and that's just the way they like it.  People of the most extreme viewpoints spend the most time/energy jumping up and down at each end while the mostly moderate majority in the middle is kept off balance.

The fact that there are people who will vote D no matter what and vote R no matter what proves it.  They have been convinced that the goal of supporting their party is to oppose the other one no matter what the subject matter.  That's why D's and R's scream about things that they'll never agree on.  It keeps the rest of us distracted from the areas where D's and R's agree, and that's what we should really worry about.
 
2013-03-14 02:50:15 PM
i.imgur.com

I believe in alicorns.
 
2013-03-14 02:52:26 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: dittybopper: Knock off the bogus pedantry or I will be forced to shoot you with my .357 Magnum rotator.

The face of responsible gun ownership, ladies and gentlemen.



The post of an idiot, ladies and gentlemen.
 
2013-03-14 02:56:07 PM

SquiggsIN: It keeps the rest of us distracted from the areas where D's and R's agree, and that's what we should really worry about.


Yup, that is where the worst corruption in our system exists.
 
2013-03-14 02:57:53 PM
SquiggsIN:

just tell them that it's like SETI.

It's really funny you mentioned this, because that was what one of the people arguing with me referenced.  And by SETI, I assume you mean BOINC, which is the platform the SETI distributed computing runs on.    A whole mess of other projects run on BOINC too.  That's distributed computing, which is, yes, cloud computing.  However, not the only example.

This girl was almost arguing with me that SETI was cloud computing.  I tried explaining to her, yes, while BOINC is an example of cloud computing, it's not the only one.
She looked at me distrustingly because her "computer genius" friend had told her exactly what cloud computing is.

Shrug.
 
2013-03-14 02:58:23 PM
were these statistics taken in a kindergarten class? unicorns and dinosaurs are hot topics for crayola projects
 
2013-03-14 03:01:27 PM

tripleseven: SquiggsIN:

just tell them that it's like SETI.

It's really funny you mentioned this, because that was what one of the people arguing with me referenced.  And by SETI, I assume you mean BOINC, which is the platform the SETI distributed computing runs on.    A whole mess of other projects run on BOINC too.  That's distributed computing, which is, yes, cloud computing.  However, not the only example.

This girl was almost arguing with me that SETI was cloud computing.  I tried explaining to her, yes, while BOINC is an example of cloud computing, it's not the only one.
She looked at me distrustingly because her "computer genius" friend had told her exactly what cloud computing is.

Shrug.


As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."
 
2013-03-14 03:02:40 PM

tripleseven: SquiggsIN:

just tell them that it's like SETI.

It's really funny you mentioned this, because that was what one of the people arguing with me referenced.  And by SETI, I assume you mean BOINC, which is the platform the SETI distributed computing runs on.    A whole mess of other projects run on BOINC too.  That's distributed computing, which is, yes, cloud computing.  However, not the only example.

This girl was almost arguing with me that SETI was cloud computing.  I tried explaining to her, yes, while BOINC is an example of cloud computing, it's not the only one.
She looked at me distrustingly because her "computer genius" friend had told her exactly what cloud computing is.

Shrug.


When I'm bored, I can read this.  http://www.distributed.net/
 
m00
2013-03-14 03:04:40 PM

tripleseven: She looked at me distrustingly because her "computer genius" friend had told her exactly what cloud computing is.


See the real answer is "Cloud computing is the currently vogue made-up term that marketing executives use to sell COTS to clueless managers. Similar to how 'Web 2.0'  '.Net compliant' and any phrase with 'social media' or 'viral' in it was used in the past"
 
2013-03-14 03:05:18 PM

tripleseven: tripleseven: SquiggsIN:

just tell them that it's like SETI.

It's really funny you mentioned this, because that was what one of the people arguing with me referenced.  And by SETI, I assume you mean BOINC, which is the platform the SETI distributed computing runs on.    A whole mess of other projects run on BOINC too.  That's distributed computing, which is, yes, cloud computing.  However, not the only example.

This girl was almost arguing with me that SETI was cloud computing.  I tried explaining to her, yes, while BOINC is an example of cloud computing, it's not the only one.
She looked at me distrustingly because her "computer genius" friend had told her exactly what cloud computing is.

Shrug.

As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."


Any company with halfway decent user control would never allow you to install your own browser   :)
 
2013-03-14 03:09:02 PM
If we don't live with dinosaurs then how did Godzilla make all of those movies?
 
2013-03-14 03:09:48 PM

m00: tripleseven: She looked at me distrustingly because her "computer genius" friend had told her exactly what cloud computing is.

See the real answer is "Cloud computing is the currently vogue made-up term that marketing executives use to sell COTS to clueless managers. Similar to how 'Web 2.0'  '.Net compliant' and any phrase with 'social media' or 'viral' in it was used in the past"


I left a job because i couldn't handle the underhanded methods that my company's "infrastructure consultants" used to con businesses into buying hardware and services that they didn't need.  It still amazes me how many people (managers) use the "I trust this guy" instincts when making business decisions.  We sold servers with dual procs and RAID to mom and pop shops that needed a pop3 email and a URL that pointed people to where their business was located.  The owner of the company just couldn't understand that I had a problem with his "sell them what you can sell them" mantra over "sell them what they need" strategy which helps them and you in the long run.
 
2013-03-14 03:12:36 PM

some_beer_drinker: seriously? wow, Americans are pretty retarded.


And you are surprised by this?
 
2013-03-14 03:13:23 PM

SquiggsIN: tripleseven: tripleseven: SquiggsIN:

just tell them that it's like SETI.

It's really funny you mentioned this, because that was what one of the people arguing with me referenced.  And by SETI, I assume you mean BOINC, which is the platform the SETI distributed computing runs on.    A whole mess of other projects run on BOINC too.  That's distributed computing, which is, yes, cloud computing.  However, not the only example.

This girl was almost arguing with me that SETI was cloud computing.  I tried explaining to her, yes, while BOINC is an example of cloud computing, it's not the only one.
She looked at me distrustingly because her "computer genius" friend had told her exactly what cloud computing is.

Shrug.

As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."

Any company with halfway decent user control would never allow you to install your own browser   :)


I work for a consulting company, and while yes, we can make recommendations, the real problem is, as an outside entity, we don't/can't make their policy.  No matter how asinine their requests, we have to kind of respect them, cause they pay the bill (within reason - see below)

I do have my own discretion, such as the time I had to refuse to open a clients network shares out to the internet so that their users could access them from home, and wouldn't need to enter any passwords or use vpns etc.
Really, I got asked to do this.  In earnest.  This particular client was a construction company, and apparently, they really hate having to use passwords.

Thankfully my company is pulling me off client sites to work on...our own cloud initiatives.
 
2013-03-14 03:17:04 PM
durbnpoisn:
 Sorry...  I didn't take it the way you meant it.  In that respect, the guy from Harvard is correct, assuming he is referring to the southern hemisphere.

I think the point, however, is that it doesn't appear that's the way he meant it.  It's almost like he doesn't even realize that the seasons are reversed in the north and south.


You are correct. I spoke to the loose context of the post and not the context of the video, which I have searched for and watched. My snarking at you was unwarranted.
 
2013-03-14 03:18:21 PM

thisisyourbrainonFark: You all are sheeple. Seriously, explain this:

[i.ytimg.com image 320x180]

/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)


After that, I feel like I know how Hawking feels everyday.  Her stupidity destroyed my nervous system.
 
2013-03-14 03:19:00 PM

Joe Blowme: One cannot be accepted as a true conservative by those who dominate American conservativism unless one is a "real Christian".  Anyone who does not accept biblical literalism is at best a "liberal Christian", i.e., no Christian at all.  Believing that everything in the Bible is literally true requires that one reject biology, geology, astronomy, genetics, anthropology, and history.  So, yeah, that doesn't leave much room for "intellectual conservatives" to exist.

Wow, another one to add to this guys list of retarded beliefs.


Why, then, does the Republican party keep packing the House Science Committee with young-Earth creationists?  The only Republican candidate for president who denied being a young-Earth creationist was Huntsman, and it proved to be political suicide.
 
m00
2013-03-14 03:21:46 PM

tripleseven: Thankfully my company is pulling me off client sites to work on...our own cloud initiatives.


www.ricespoonandfork.com
 
m00
2013-03-14 03:23:10 PM

Biological Ali: I was explaining to you that the people who gave the wrong answer to this question weren't using the reasoning you're describing here, and indeed meant something that is incredibly, thoroughly wrong. The people who gave the right answer, on the other hand, either did understand it perfectly while giving the right answer, or reasoned "incorrectly" in the same way that a person who completes a calculation using Newtonian values is "incorrect".

As I said before, being pedantic is one thing, but suggesting that the people who gave the wrong answers were "technically correct" in some way (or that the people who gave the right answers were wrong in some comparable way) is just silly.


Well, I am the kind of person to answer scientific-sounding questions on a survey pedantically. But my main point was that surveys/questions like that should use accurate language. Can you imagine being on the gameshow "who wants to be a millionaire" and the question is like "what is the orbit of the earth around the sun"?

a)circular
b)rhomboid
c)parabolic
d)triangular

and you KNOW the answer they are looking for is a) but it's not really correct. I dont know about you, but my head would explode.
 
2013-03-14 03:25:04 PM

m00: tripleseven: Thankfully my company is pulling me off client sites to work on...our own cloud initiatives.

[www.ricespoonandfork.com image 640x287]


thanks.  i needed that laugh just about now.
 
2013-03-14 03:25:23 PM
They only surveyed huffington post readers?
 
2013-03-14 03:25:50 PM

CheekyMonkey: titwrench: No more ridiculous than believing in god or that the Earth is only 6000 years old and a whole hell of a lot more people believe that bullshiat.

YOU CANT PROVE THAT GOD DOEASNT EXIST, SO STFU JERK


You are adorable.
 
2013-03-14 03:26:14 PM

Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.

You would not believe the numbers i get signing that petition every year for earth week. granted most are right our of high school but still. The powers that be asked me not to do it again this year, it made someone feel dumb.

I would believe you.  I almost want to go and gather signatures this year around town, just to see how many I get.

You should do it anyways.

I already have the form printed and planned on leaving it in the reception/Commons area on a clip board with a little sign.


Is there some purpose to doing this, or do you just have so much time on your hands that you have nothing better to do?

I mean, if you do something with these surveys other than just laugh at the stupid hippies, what is it? Do you do this, then point out to them what they've just signed? Or do you just chuckle to yourself and feel smug?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for exposing people to their own stupidity. But pray tell, what's the practical upshot of your particular incarnation of this prank?
 
2013-03-14 03:27:27 PM

m00: Biological Ali: I was explaining to you that the people who gave the wrong answer to this question weren't using the reasoning you're describing here, and indeed meant something that is incredibly, thoroughly wrong. The people who gave the right answer, on the other hand, either did understand it perfectly while giving the right answer, or reasoned "incorrectly" in the same way that a person who completes a calculation using Newtonian values is "incorrect".

As I said before, being pedantic is one thing, but suggesting that the people who gave the wrong answers were "technically correct" in some way (or that the people who gave the right answers were wrong in some comparable way) is just silly.

Well, I am the kind of person to answer scientific-sounding questions on a survey pedantically. But my main point was that surveys/questions like that should use accurate language. Can you imagine being on the gameshow "who wants to be a millionaire" and the question is like "what is the orbit of the earth around the sun"?

a)circular
b)rhomboid
c)parabolic
d)triangular

and you KNOW the answer they are looking for is a) but it's not really correct. I dont know about you, but my head would explode.


I'm the same way.  My wife still hasn't learned to ask me questions.   i.e. she asks "is the dishwasher clean or dirty?"   ... the answer to that question is going to be 'yes'.   "Do you want to make dinner or go out to eat?"   Again, the answer to that question is going to be 'yes'.
 
2013-03-14 03:28:13 PM

BalugaJoe: God is an American.


Late to the party.

I like you.
 
2013-03-14 03:28:52 PM

Nytfall: thisisyourbrainonFark: You all are sheeple. Seriously, explain this:

[i.ytimg.com image 320x180]

/linkage:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
//(volume warning)

After that, I feel like I know how Hawking feels everyday.  Her stupidity destroyed my nervous system.


That's medication level derp right there.
 
2013-03-14 03:29:17 PM

TheWhoppah: The effect is somewhat muted by the rise of the "cry it out" Ferberizer method of leaving infants to cry themselves to sleep. Ferberizing infants breaks their will and teaches them that they are all alone in the world and that hope is foolish. You can't trust or love anyone, even your own parents. The cry-it-out method is "sold" to frazzled moms as a way to help children sleep but that is bullshiat. Who does it really help? Mom's employer. These ferberized babies will grow into adults with serious fear and trust issues... in other words, they will be receptive to the rhetorical musings of the Republican Fear Machine.


You know how I know you've never tried the Ferber method?
 
2013-03-14 03:29:35 PM

100 Watt Walrus: Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: meat0918: Joe Blowme: Onkel Buck: This is all well and good, but now we need to concentrate on getting Dihydrogen Monoxide banned! Its all over the planet and we dont have a lot of time left!

This is my Earth day crusade, we need to let people know 7000 die per year in the US alone from Dihydrogen Monoxide. When will the EPA step up and rule it a polutant?

I've gotten more than one wannabe crunchy hippy with that one.  The last one was very pissed at me, I think in part because her husband played along.

You would not believe the numbers i get signing that petition every year for earth week. granted most are right our of high school but still. The powers that be asked me not to do it again this year, it made someone feel dumb.

I would believe you.  I almost want to go and gather signatures this year around town, just to see how many I get.

You should do it anyways.

I already have the form printed and planned on leaving it in the reception/Commons area on a clip board with a little sign.

Is there some purpose to doing this, or do you just have so much time on your hands that you have nothing better to do?

I mean, if you do something with these surveys other than just laugh at the stupid hippies, what is it? Do you do this, then point out to them what they've just signed? Or do you just chuckle to yourself and feel smug?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for exposing people to their own stupidity. But pray tell, what's the practical upshot of your particular incarnation of this prank?


To paraphrase the movie 6th sense : "they don't know that they are dumb"    pointing it out rarely helps but, we keep doing it hoping that one day we'll reach one person and make a difference.
 
2013-03-14 03:30:08 PM

Tuxedocat: rufus-t-firefly: Molavian: You should see the percentage that believes in gun control.

I wonder how many think more guns = more safety.

Since we have 300 million people, and 200 million privately-owned firearms, shouldn't our murder rate be REALLY low?

I wonder what how many of those who were murdered had a firearm on them at the time, or if those murdered even owned one.


Yeah, when are families going to stop their selfish grieving and realize that it was their now deceased "victim" kin that are to blame. Why didn't they have a gun on them? Good guys with guns don't hit innocent bystanders. God wouldn't allow that.
 
2013-03-14 03:32:44 PM

tripleseven: As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."


Um, the last 3 IE exploits?
 
2013-03-14 03:32:53 PM
Sh'yeah... and unicorns might fly out of my butt....
 
2013-03-14 03:34:33 PM

tylerdurden217: Tuxedocat: rufus-t-firefly: Molavian: You should see the percentage that believes in gun control.

I wonder how many think more guns = more safety.

Since we have 300 million people, and 200 million privately-owned firearms, shouldn't our murder rate be REALLY low?

I wonder what how many of those who were murdered had a firearm on them at the time, or if those murdered even owned one.

Yeah, when are families going to stop their selfish grieving and realize that it was their now deceased "victim" kin that are to blame. Why didn't they have a gun on them? Good guys with guns don't hit innocent bystanders. God wouldn't allow that.


I like to think that IF God existed, a lot of behavior we presently see in humanity would not exist.  Looking out upon the world I can't believe that an all-knowing, all-powerful, eternally-loving God created a devil to blame all the bad stuff on.  Any decent deity would've been able to keep the bad stuff away in the first place, right?
 
2013-03-14 03:35:37 PM

pciszek: CygnusDarius: Ergo, dinosaurs were delicious, and good with raspberry and chile sauce?

Isaac Asimov wrote a short story about that.


By story, you mean cooking recipe?.
 
2013-03-14 03:35:53 PM

fredklein: tripleseven: As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."

Um, the last 3 IE exploits?


Versus the last three firefox vulnerabilities?
 
2013-03-14 03:36:47 PM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: So many of these are arbitrary. There are a couple animals thought to have been the source for the unicorn. When you're dealing with two bodies moving through space without a fixed reference point, you could say either one is revolving around the other - the math is just much easier one way. And a huge chunk of internet transmission goes through satellites, meaning your cloud computing data is passing through actual clouds.


I won't argue about unicorns... but the rest of this is science, and I'll school you bit.

Two bodies in space DO have a fixed reference point, each other.  Relative motion is simple to determine, and the math only works at all if you do it correctly.  Your arbitrary reasoning is spacious at best.

The internet does not go through satellites.  Not even a little bit of it.  Please, seriously, STFU.
 
2013-03-14 03:41:51 PM
Y'all act like Papa Bear doesn't know what he's talking about.  The tide comes in, the tide goes out - you can't explain that...lol

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/stephen-colbert-defends- pa ppa-bear-oreilly
 
2013-03-14 03:46:04 PM

m00: Well, I am the kind of person to answer scientific-sounding questions on a survey pedantically. But my main point was that surveys/questions like that should use accurate language. Can you imagine being on the gameshow "who wants to be a millionaire" and the question is like "what is the orbit of the earth around the sun"?

a)circular
b)rhomboid
c)parabolic
d)triangular

and you KNOW the answer they are looking for is a) but it's not really correct. I dont know about you, but my head would explode.


Which is closest, within a margin for error?

Does your head also explode when you "draw a line" on a piece of paper? (Remember, lines are perfectly straight, infinite, and 1 dimensional, a pencil "line" isn't.) Face it, there is a certain... looseness... to language. "Gimme a second" doesn't mean exactly 1/60 of a minute. "Loan me a couple bucks" doesn't necessarily mean exactly 2 dollars (or male deer). And so on.

Now, one should always make sure to specify whether or not one is being literal or not. Saying "the Earth travels in a circle around the sun" is not, strictly speaking, literally true. But it is true enough for common meaning. Imagine something like this:

imgs.xkcd.com

but with "Is the Earth's orbit a triangle/square/circle?" and "It's not actually a circle, it's an ellipse! Haha!" in there instead.
 
2013-03-14 03:47:29 PM

tripleseven: fredklein: tripleseven: As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."

Um, the last 3 IE exploits?

Versus the last three firefox vulnerabilities?


Compare the severities and numbers of vulnerabilities between IE and FF.
 
2013-03-14 03:48:32 PM

andrethered1: You can' t see electricity or air either, just the results, yet everyone believes in it, too.


Sight is only one of the 5 primary senses.
 
2013-03-14 03:49:25 PM
100% of conservatives and Republicans believe that all facts or arguments that make them look bad are made up by libs and Commies.

Since no fact or argument presented by a non-Conservative non-Republican is genuine, the only person who can contradict a conservative Republican is another, more powerful Conservative Republican.

These are called RINOS. They have one or two horns. Fortunately for truthiness, the White RINO is going extinct, and the Black RINO is a completely mythical creature that no one has ever seen apart from the few examples on stage at a Republican National Convention. There is therefore no outside force that can alter the mind of Conservative Republican. Conservative Republicans thus only change their minds in those rare magical moments during which they choose to contradict themselves.

And yes, God could make a burrito so hot that even he couldn't eat it, but God is a Republican and chooses never to do such a thing except when he does. Republican conservatives believe that you should not waste food unless it could feed a poor person.
 
2013-03-14 03:49:28 PM

tripleseven: fredklein: tripleseven: As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."

Um, the last 3 IE exploits?

Versus the last three firefox vulnerabilities?


I'll take that bet.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html# Fi refox
4 critical problems, 1 that allows remote code execution (the actually bad part)

http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id -9 900/Microsoft-Internet-Explorer.html

I can't count that high, so you'll have to tally for your self.
 
2013-03-14 03:52:02 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Bear in mind that a  lot of people give deliberately stupid answers to these kinds of obvious polling questions.


Exactly.  In high school we all had to do a survey about our attitudes towards drugs and alcohol.  It was shocking how many of us had been smoking at age 8, were drunk every day before noon, and/or were hardcore drug addicts.  The school had an assembly with counselors to educate us on the dangers of our poor choices.  Schmucks.
 
2013-03-14 03:58:32 PM

Karac: Me and Andy Dufresne got it.


Hey there, Ms. Fussybritches.
 
2013-03-14 03:59:04 PM

ginandbacon: Jesus rode on a unicorn in the clouds chasing the earth around the sun!


I think the movie was called Legend
 
2013-03-14 04:01:29 PM

Almea Tarrant: Some 'Splainin' To Do: Bear in mind that a  lot of people give deliberately stupid answers to these kinds of obvious polling questions.

Exactly.  In high school we all had to do a survey about our attitudes towards drugs and alcohol.  It was shocking how many of us had been smoking at age 8, were drunk every day before noon, and/or were hardcore drug addicts.  The school had an assembly with counselors to educate us on the dangers of our poor choices.  Schmucks.


I guess i was too lawful good to lie on those stupid things.
 
2013-03-14 04:07:26 PM
62% believe what they read on Huffington post.

Stupid 'mericans....
 
m00
2013-03-14 04:09:50 PM

SquiggsIN: I guess i was too lawful good to lie on those stupid things.


Are you sure it's not just that lying creates a contradiction between reality and the spoken representation of reality (language/communication?). And that the logical mind seeks to resolve contradiction.

:p
 
2013-03-14 04:11:30 PM

Ned Stark: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: St_Francis_P: I think most people realize that cloud computing requires man-made clouds; the natural ones can't hold enough data. I'm sure they use something like the artificial snow machines at ski resorts.

Now the concept of "real cloud" computing fascinates me.  Could you actually store data in a mist?  What happens when it rains?  Would stratus clouds hold less data than cumulus clouds?

There are online random number generators online that use current whether data to get the randomness.


I get confused often enough that "whether" I am going to do this or that is truly random.
 
m00
2013-03-14 04:11:45 PM
Squiggs, do you play Halo?
 
2013-03-14 04:14:45 PM

Satanic_Hamster: What about alicorns?

[images3.wikia.nocookie.net image 640x460]


I prefer the blue ones, but this one is okay.
 
2013-03-14 04:22:30 PM

m00: Squiggs, do you play Halo?


I don't own an XBox so no.
 
2013-03-14 04:27:47 PM

m00: I dont know about you, but my head would explode.


Sure, whatever. As long as you realize that this pedantry is meaningless in terms of how normal people communicate.
 
2013-03-14 04:28:53 PM

Biological Ali: m00: I dont know about you, but my head would explode.

Sure, whatever. As long as you realize that this pedantry is meaningless in terms of how normal people communicate.


Some of us never claimed to be normal.  Never in my life (i'm guessing) has anyone described me as 'normal'.
 
m00
2013-03-14 04:29:25 PM

SquiggsIN: m00: Squiggs, do you play Halo?

I don't own an XBox so no.


I don't know why, but your comment reminded me of this. I guess in my head I was thinking of a FARK alignment chart.

cdn.duelinganalogs.com
 
2013-03-14 04:33:32 PM

m00: SquiggsIN: m00: Squiggs, do you play Halo?

I don't own an XBox so no.

I don't know why, but your comment reminded me of this. I guess in my head I was thinking of a FARK alignment chart.

[cdn.duelinganalogs.com image 600x863]


... i was a lawful good twerp when i was younger.  i didn't really start my hellraising until about 21.
 
2013-03-14 04:39:23 PM

macdaddy357: If brains were dynamite, most Americans could not blow their noses.


You should probably say "nitro glycerine" instead of "dynamite". I mean, you need a blasting cap to set off dynamite and your post said nothing along the lines of, "If brains were dynamite and hypothalami were blasting caps yada yada..." or "If brains were old dynamite--sweating nitro--and The Incredible Hulk punched you in the cerebellum: the resulting explosion would not have enough force to blow a snot-bubble yada yada..."

Get with the program.
 
2013-03-14 04:41:50 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: "......Twenty four percent believe dinosaurs and man hung out together....."

Absolutely. Raquel Welch would never lie to

with me.

/obscure?
//perhaps for the younger farkers.....


FTFY ;)

/or me
//dammit
 
2013-03-14 04:43:29 PM
Huh. Big surprise that the country just keeps becoming more intractably polarized. When you've convinced yourself that the only reason anyone could ever have for disagreeing with you is that they're so stupid as to be beyond help, there's not much point in exerting any energy attempting to understand, sympathize, or compromise, is there? Better to just add them to the list of the worst people in the world and call it a day.

Unfortunately this tool's entire premise is contradicted by his conclusion. The whole article is about how stupid half of the country is and why, oh why can't they all be highly-evolved, open-minded intellectual geniuses like him. Which of course means they'd also be liberal and atheist. It takes a special kind of insufferable prick to think so highly of himself that he's convinced if everyone in the world were just smart and well-read like him they'd all come to exactly the same conclusions and hold the same beliefs. He *is* the ultimate evolution of a human that we all should strive to emulate, so...obviously!

In the same column the guy describes his perspective as being the more nimble and open minded one and then proceeds to conclude that smart = liberal = atheist and stupid = conservative = religious. He is so evolved and his perspective is so nimble and open minded that he can't seem to fathom a single exception. And he's so intellectual that when proofing his column he apparently missed this glaring contradiction.

As I see it there are two possibilities: either he has his head so far up his arse that he actually believes he knows everything and is always right and if you don't agree with him... well you're just STUPID, gosh! You know, like a teenager. Or he's just one more columnist troll, spewing out inflammatory blather he only partially believes designed to draw maximum attention so maybe someday he'll become the celebrity that he obviously yearns to be with every fiber of his being. Like a liberal, un-famous Rush Limbaugh. So take your pick - ignorant ass or phony attention whore, or some combination. Either way his column is a piece of crap that I now have to scrap off the bottom of my brain and in the future will be careful to avoid. Just like teenagers and Rush Limbaugh.
 
2013-03-14 04:47:02 PM

Dinkledort: Huh. Big surprise that the country just keeps becoming more intractably polarized. When you've convinced yourself that the only reason anyone could ever have for disagreeing with you is that they're so stupid as to be beyond help, there's not much point in exerting any energy attempting to understand, sympathize, or compromise, is there? Better to just add them to the list of the worst people in the world and call it a day.

Unfortunately this tool's entire premise is contradicted by his conclusion. The whole article is about how stupid half of the country is and why, oh why can't they all be highly-evolved, open-minded intellectual geniuses like him. Which of course means they'd also be liberal and atheist. It takes a special kind of insufferable prick to think so highly of himself that he's convinced if everyone in the world were just smart and well-read like him they'd all come to exactly the same conclusions and hold the same beliefs. He *is* the ultimate evolution of a human that we all should strive to emulate, so...obviously!

In the same column the guy describes his perspective as being the more nimble and open minded one and then proceeds to conclude that smart = liberal = atheist and stupid = conservative = religious. He is so evolved and his perspective is so nimble and open minded that he can't seem to fathom a single exception. And he's so intellectual that when proofing his column he apparently missed this glaring contradiction.

As I see it there are two possibilities: either he has his head so far up his arse that he actually believes he knows everything and is always right and if you don't agree with him... well you're just STUPID, gosh! You know, like a teenager. Or he's just one more columnist troll, spewing out inflammatory blather he only partially believes designed to draw maximum attention so maybe someday he'll become the celebrity that he obviously yearns to be with every fiber of his being. Like a liberal, un-famous Rush Limbaugh. So take y ...


internet outrage +1  (this is fark, what were you expecting?)
 
2013-03-14 04:50:46 PM

xria: The Snow Dog: powhound: Believing in UFO's isn't a stretch. I wish one would come take me from this crazy planet.

I wish authors were smart enough not to use "UFO" interchangeably with "alien spacecraft." You'd be a moron to deny UFOs exist. Alien spacecraft? Notsomuch.

Alien spacecraft almost certainly exist. The unlikely bit is any of them are coming to earth to fart about secretly experimenting about stuff we have been broadcasting out the details of light years in all directions.


I believe they exist. The age and vastness of the universe makes it a near certainty in my book. But I'm not going to call anyone a moron for NOT believing until after we have proof. Then all the people who say that they are a conspiracy or made-up or just don't for whatever reason believe--they will be morons.

It's like the life on Mars question. I believe we'll find evidence of some sort of previous (or ongoing) "life" there. But until the facts are in: I'll refrain from calling people morons when they say they don't believe that Martian life is a reality.
 
2013-03-14 05:11:08 PM
God, this thread is weird.

I just came in to biatch about HuffPo's leap of illogic: "no intellectual conservatives".
 
2013-03-14 05:23:53 PM

Kahabut: tripleseven: fredklein: tripleseven: As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."

Um, the last 3 IE exploits?

Versus the last three firefox vulnerabilities?

I'll take that bet.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html# Fi refox
4 critical problems, 1 that allows remote code execution (the actually bad part)

http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id -9 900/Microsoft-Internet-Explorer.html

I can't count that high, so you'll have to tally for your self.


They only have a list fir IE exploits that starts in 2008 and ends in 1-9-2013

For Mozilla, the page shows vulnerabilities from back in versions 1.0 to 2.0.0.15 (2005 to 2008) and are now up to version 19.0.2.
Here is a more current version of vulnerabilities for Mozilla. There are obvious very large changes from 2011 to present: Known issues
Not trying to slam Firefox- just trying to show that they've been doing a lot of work to avoid allowing their product to screw their customers and the browser is free and still better than IE.
IE still has issues from way back when it first was designed. Why would those problems still exist?
 
2013-03-14 05:38:27 PM

Karac: For asteroids floating in deep space perhaps.  But for the Earth and Sun - no, you can't.  It's pretty easy to prove that the Earth revolves around the Sun because the center of it's orbit is actually INSIDE the sun.


WaitWhatWhy: Not really because gravity. Yeah, the math for the relative motion can be set up either way, but once you factor in the forces involved, saying the sun revolves around the earth is like saying that when you jump off the diving board, the earth falls up towards you.


MindStalker: The sun being MUCH more massive can't possibly be affected by the earth gravity enough to revolve around the earth (it wobbles a bit, but it doesn't fall down). Your statement is only true for similarly sized bodies. You could also make the argument that the Earth revolves around the Moon, but it would be equally false.


pciszek: Not all frames of reference are created equal.  Inertial frames of reference have the property that you can actually apply the laws of physics to them.  There is no inertial reference frame in which the sun goes around the Earth.


Bacontastesgood: If you simplify any observation to the point that it is utterly meaningless, then it is inane, that's for sure.  Knowledge of the planets goes back at least to the Sumerian civilization.


For all of you biatching at Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich, here's what Stephen Hawking has to say on the subject (from The Grand Design):  Ptolemy's model of the cosmos was adopted by the Catholic Church and held as official doctrine for fourteen hundred years. It was not until 1543 that an alternative model was put forward by Copernicus. So which is real? Although it is not uncommon for people to say Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong, that is not true. As in the case of the goldfish, one can use either picture as a model of the universe. The real advantage of the Copernican system is that the mathematics is much simpler in the frame of reference in which the sun is at rest.

These examples bring us to a conclusion:There is no picture- or theory-independent concept of reality. Instead we adopt a view that we call model-dependent realism: the idea that a physical theory or world picture is a model (generally of a mathematical nature) and a set of rules that connect the elements of the model to observations. This provides a framework with which to interpret modern science.
 
2013-03-14 05:38:35 PM
I believe that there are disk-shaped and triangle-shaped craft that are propelled in an exotic fashion. I do not believe they are manned by aliens, though.

Sincerely,

Viktor Schauberger
 
2013-03-14 05:39:21 PM

XplodedSynapses: Kahabut: tripleseven: fredklein: tripleseven: As an aside, the same computer genius friend insisted she install firefox on her work computer.

I asked her why.

"It's safer"

Ok, well, can you give me three examples of how?

"Hur Dur..."

Um, the last 3 IE exploits?

Versus the last three firefox vulnerabilities?

I'll take that bet.
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html# Fi refox
4 critical problems, 1 that allows remote code execution (the actually bad part)

http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id -9 900/Microsoft-Internet-Explorer.html

I can't count that high, so you'll have to tally for your self.

They only have a list fir IE exploits that starts in 2008 and ends in 1-9-2013

For Mozilla, the page shows vulnerabilities from back in versions 1.0 to 2.0.0.15 (2005 to 2008) and are now up to version 19.0.2.
Here is a more current version of vulnerabilities for Mozilla. There are obvious very large changes from 2011 to present: Known issues
Not trying to slam Firefox- just trying to show that they've been doing a lot of work to avoid allowing their product to screw their customers and the browser is free and still better than IE.
IE still has issues from way back when it first was designed. Why would those problems still exist?


I am on your side here.  Firefox is ten times the browser that IE ever dreamed of being.  Far more importantly (as you pointed out) Firefox is made by people for people to use.  IE is made by a company to make money.
 
2013-03-14 05:41:12 PM

Satanic_Hamster: What about alicorns?

[images3.wikia.nocookie.net image 640x460]


dashie.mylittlefacewhen.com
 
2013-03-14 05:41:45 PM
I must be in the other 32% somewhere.
 
2013-03-14 05:42:23 PM

special20: I must be in the other 32% somewhere.


...as I do give 110%, you know.

/yeah
 
2013-03-14 05:44:56 PM

hardinparamedic: JarynFrostwing: [fc03.deviantart.net image 850x549]
You think that's bad, some of us believe in pegasi as well. 8D

That's Wildfire!



Great, so now I know what OC and Cutie Mark actually means.  Thanks a farking ton.
 
2013-03-14 05:49:14 PM

Carn: m00: "Do unicorns exist?" is also a poorly phrased question. It should be "Has there been any scientific discoveries of fossil records, bones, or physical remnants of the mythological creature known as a 'unicorn'?" Because the actual answer to the question "do unicorns exist" is who knows? Nobody has directly observed a unicorn, but nobody has directly observed pretty much anything in string theory. A lack of observation doesn't prove something doesn't exist. All we can say is that we haven't observed something, we do/don't have evidence for something. We can prove something does exist, but we can't prove the negative.

Hypothesis: Unicorns exist.
Supporting Evidence: none.
Conclusion: Hypothesis is false.

That's how science and rational thought work.  If evidence were to suddenly appear that a unicorn exists or may have existed in the past, you re-evaluate at that point.  As for string theory, scientists are relatively certain that they have witnessed the Higgs boson in recent experiments.  String theory predicted that this particle existed and until they found evidence, there was a lot of justified resistance to the theory.  The particle's existence and its behavior will go a long way toward theoretical physicists being able to support or disprove string theory.

The burden of proof is on the person making the hypothesis, otherwise anything imaginary must be real because no evidence exists to prove or deny the claim.


You know how I know you don't understand the difference between theoretical physicists and experimental physicists?
 
2013-03-14 06:00:31 PM
The duocorn is real. Here's one.

i.imgur.com

/this thread needs more duocorns
 
2013-03-14 06:06:39 PM
The author complains about the level of intelligence that news is written for...by writing for The Huffington Post.
I wish hypocrisy was a leathal condition, I really do.
 
2013-03-14 06:09:09 PM
I am so smart! I am so smart! S-M-R-T!
 
2013-03-14 06:15:37 PM

brantgoose: 100% of conservatives and Republicans believe that all facts or arguments that make them look bad are made up by libs and Commies.

Since no fact or argument presented by a non-Conservative non-Republican is genuine, the only person who can contradict a conservative Republican is another, more powerful Conservative Republican.

These are called RINOS. They have one or two horns. Fortunately for truthiness, the White RINO is going extinct, and the Black RINO is a completely mythical creature that no one has ever seen apart from the few examples on stage at a Republican National Convention. There is therefore no outside force that can alter the mind of Conservative Republican. Conservative Republicans thus only change their minds in those rare magical moments during which they choose to contradict themselves.

And yes, God could make a burrito so hot that even he couldn't eat it, but God is a Republican and chooses never to do such a thing except when he does. Republican conservatives believe that you should not waste food unless it could feed a poor person.


Wow. I thought Ashley Judd was the dumbest person in America until I read this. We have a new winner.
 
2013-03-14 06:17:46 PM
What a smug self-satisfying arsehat.
Someone isn't stupid because they disagree with you.
 
2013-03-14 06:24:25 PM
That was not complex our analytical, and if satire was poorly executed..
 
2013-03-14 06:27:35 PM
I have to call bullshiat.  1 out of 5 people thinks the sun revolves around us?  No farking way.
Even the most idiotic evangelical young Earth creationists I've ever talked to didn't believe that.  I think whatever poll or study came to that particular conclusion was skewed by jokesters.
 
2013-03-14 06:54:01 PM
They say 3 percent of the people use 5 to 6 percent of their brain
97 percent use 3 percent and the rest goes down the drain
I'll never know which one I am but I'll bet you my last dime
99 percent think we're 3 percent 100 percent of the time

64 percent of all the world's statistics are made up right there on the spot
82.4 percent of people believe 'em whether they're accurate statistics or not
I don't know what you believe but I do know there's no doubt
I need another double shot of something 90 proof
I got too much to think about

Too much to think about
Too much to figure out
Stuck between hope and doubt
It's too much to think about

They say 92 percent of everything you learned in school was just bullshiat you'll never need
84 percent of everything you got you bought to satisfy your greed
Because 90 percent of the world's population links possessions to success
Even though 80 percent of the wealthiest 1 percent of the population
Drinks to an alarming excess
More money, more stress

It's too much to think about
Too much to figure out
Stuck between hope and doubt
It's too much to think about
Pick it now

84 percent of all statisticians truly hate their jobs
They say the average bank robber lives within say about 20 miles of the bank that he robs
There's this little bank not far from here I've been watching now for a while
Lately all I can think about's how bad I wanna go out in style

And it's too much to think about
Too much to figure out
Stuck between hope and doubt
It's too much to think about
That's right
It's too much to think about
Amen
It's too much to think about
 
2013-03-14 06:55:26 PM

Voiceofreason01: Wait, why did the author pick on Kansas? Is this one of those "flyover country" things where we pretend that a large portion of the country doesn't count because some people live there that have opinions that we disagree with? How "progressive".

/Mark Morford sounds like a douchbag


Ah there we go again confusing "opinions" with "facts"
 
2013-03-14 07:01:35 PM
Voiceofreason01:
/Mark Morford sounds like a douchbag

Ahem (cough) I agree on that.  But he's generally correct.
And "flyover country" does have a problem confusing reality with reality.
Prove me wrong!  I dares yas
 
2013-03-14 07:51:58 PM
If you enjoyed his basic conclusion that all christian are morons and that everyone would believe exactly the same as him if only they weren't so darn STUPID, you should know that when this classy piece of work is not writing his troll column he's also a yoga instructor.  He has a neat little video on YouTube where gives you a little taste of all the spiritual engergy garbage you'd expect him to be into.  But of course that's not stupid at all, because HE believes it.

http://www.youtube.com/w atch?v=zZkKIWIO6NI
 
2013-03-14 10:44:18 PM

xria: If you like those sorts of joke, you should try to see "Brass Eye" if you haven't before (the second episode about drugs is particuarly hilarious).



But the best episode was the paedophilia episode, packed to the gills with media whores trying to attach themselves to a cause. I'm thinking Phil Collins saying he's talking nonsense, Neil Fox's claim that paedophiles are genetically closer to crabs than people ("There's no actual evidence for it, but it is a scientific fact."), and Richard Blackwood's warnings of keyboards that smell of hammers.

It's really unfortunate that so many people failed to see it for the beautiful satire it is. It aired in a time of tabloid panic about paedophilia, when the gutter press was regularly stirring up panic about paedophiles. The now happily defunct News of the World had a paedo name-and-shame thing going on, where, I don't know, they probably published pictures of random people and claimed they were nonces. It aired after a paediatrician's home had been graffitied by the mob claiming her to be a paedophile, FFS.

Chris Morris held his mirror up to the media, and was brutally attacked by the tabloid press, like this:

i.imgur.com

Yes, the Star (it's like the Daily Mail, but less pretentious) actually printed an article criticising the programme opposite an article celebrating a 15 year old's tits.

If you want to see the Daily Mail's opinion on young women's tits, by the way, their code word is "all grown up". Go put it in to the Fail online's search box and... the results will speak for themselves.

/Fark the gutter press.
//Hypocritical twunts.
 
2013-03-14 11:01:08 PM
It is this bizarre, circular, catch-22 kind of question, asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist, given how higher education leads to more developed critical thinking (you already know the vast majority of university professors and scientists identify as Democrat/progressive, right?) which leads straight to a more nimble, open-minded perspective.

And you write more better concise sentences, apparently.
 
2013-03-14 11:53:48 PM
You better damn well believe in angels.

/ that is all.
 
2013-03-14 11:54:01 PM

Voiceofreason01: Wait, why did the author pick on Kansas?


What's the Matter With Kansas?
 
2013-03-15 12:13:36 AM
Don't know how this was missed...
media.tumblr.com
 
2013-03-15 06:39:45 AM
I believe in Santa Klaus.
 
2013-03-15 07:29:42 AM

fishman1776: They say 3 percent of the people use 5 to 6 percent of their brain
97 percent use 3 percent and the rest goes down the drain
I'll never know which one I am but I'll bet you my last dime
99 percent think we're 3 percent 100 percent of the time

64 percent of all the world's statistics are made up right there on the spot
82.4 percent of people believe 'em whether they're accurate statistics or not
I don't know what you believe but I do know there's no doubt
I need another double shot of something 90 proof
I got too much to think about

Too much to think about
Too much to figure out
Stuck between hope and doubt
It's too much to think about

They say 92 percent of everything you learned in school was just bullshiat you'll never need
84 percent of everything you got you bought to satisfy your greed
Because 90 percent of the world's population links possessions to success
Even though 80 percent of the wealthiest 1 percent of the population
Drinks to an alarming excess
More money, more stress

It's too much to think about
Too much to figure out
Stuck between hope and doubt
It's too much to think about
Pick it now

84 percent of all statisticians truly hate their jobs
They say the average bank robber lives within say about 20 miles of the bank that he robs
There's this little bank not far from here I've been watching now for a while
Lately all I can think about's how bad I wanna go out in style

And it's too much to think about
Too much to figure out
Stuck between hope and doubt
It's too much to think about
That's right
It's too much to think about
Amen
It's too much to think about


I've never seen anyone reference this before!   I love this song, this is awesome!
 
2013-03-15 08:22:48 AM

Dinkledort: The whole article is about how stupid half of the country is and why, oh why can't they all be highly-evolved, open-minded intellectual geniuses like him.


You don't have to be a genius not to believe in angels and fairies. Although I suppose it would help.
 
2013-03-15 11:02:33 AM

Mambo Bananapatch: Dinkledort: The whole article is about how stupid half of the country is and why, oh why can't they all be highly-evolved, open-minded intellectual geniuses like him.

You don't have to be a genius not to believe in angels and fairies. Although I suppose it would help.


Perhaps you didn't read my other post where I supplied a link to this hypocrite going on about spiritual energy cleansing garbage that he teaches in his yoga classes. So I guess the way it works is that you can be a critical thinking intellectual and still believe in that mumbo jumbo, just not Christian mumbo jumbo. Or maybe it's that you can believe whatever mumbo jumbo you want as long as you're liberal. Oh I don't know! So many rules!

Another interesting tidbit is that I got myself a login for that website and added comments calling him out on this stuff, and guess what... that's right, DELETED. No curse words, threats or even inaccuracies in them, just logical arguments pointing out how he might not be quite the open minded intellectual he's ripping half the country for not being. And he was nice enough to prove my point by immediately squelching any reasoned comment contrary to the fiction in his column.

All evidence points to him being exactly the opposite of the open-minded intellectual model he wants everyone to think he is. He might just be the devil. No, wait! I don't believe in that, I'm not stupid! He might just be an energy stifler with a dark aura.
 
2013-03-15 07:32:15 PM
Looks like some Farker landed on Failblog:

i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-03-15 07:46:15 PM
The biggest failure of science is an inability to use the phrase "we dont know".
 
2013-03-15 07:56:39 PM
I know Morford to be the kind of guy who will promise an informant anonymity and then publish one's name and place of business.  He likely teaches yoga to meet weak minded woman.
 
2013-03-15 11:45:58 PM

Frederick: The biggest failure of science is an inability to use the phrase "we dont know".


That is in fact the most frequently-used phrase in science, indeed it's displayed in giant waving banners and broadcast through megaphones from even the most miniscule scientific endeavor, since, of course, it is

the ENTIRE REASON for science.
 
2013-03-15 11:59:29 PM

BuckTurgidson: Frederick: The biggest failure of science is an inability to use the phrase "we dont know".

That is in fact the most frequently-used phrase in science, indeed it's displayed in giant waving banners and broadcast through megaphones from even the most miniscule scientific endeavor, since, of course, it is

the ENTIRE REASON for science.


Citation?  Maybe one scientific paper with the conclusion: "We dont know".

Thank you, Ptolemy for you arrogance.
 
2013-03-16 12:08:12 AM

Frederick: BuckTurgidson: Frederick: The biggest failure of science is an inability to use the phrase "we dont know".

That is in fact the most frequently-used phrase in science, indeed it's displayed in giant waving banners and broadcast through megaphones from even the most miniscule scientific endeavor, since, of course, it is

the ENTIRE REASON for science.

Citation?  Maybe one scientific paper with the conclusion: "We dont know".

Thank you, Ptolemy for you arrogance.


Just how drunk are you, at this moment?
 
2013-03-16 04:06:58 AM

unchellmatt: m00: "...asked almost exclusively by intellectual liberals because intellectual conservatives don't actually exist."

There we go...

Yeah, that turned me off the article entirely. I know quite a number of people who consider themselves "conservative" who:

- Aren't delusional enough to believe the US was founded as a "Christian" nation
- Understand how the universe works
- Don't watch FOX

Now, are they in line with the rank and file, or the current batch of Tea Party coonts in office? No. But they are intelligent, well read, and not against intellectualism.




I think a lot of people failed to notice this was in the humor section.
 
2013-03-16 04:30:31 AM

Frederick: The biggest failure of science is an inability to use the phrase "we dont know".


Replace "science" with "religion" and you are correct. Religions insist on filling on the blanks just for the sake of not saying "I don't know".
 
2013-03-16 12:58:46 PM

Frederick: Citation? Maybe one scientific paper with the conclusion: "We dont know".


You'd probably have to be living in a cave to be unaware of studies and experiments that result in inconclusive findings. Anyway, absolutely anyone, with any interest in science knows there is a ton we don't know, and has heard scientist after scientist say exactly that on a slew of topics. There have been articles about the problems inconclusive science can cause or about people rushing to embrace inconclusive studies. Science magazines have devoted entire issues to what we don't know. Publications from top universities have done the same. Scientists form groups to help make it clear that we don't have all the answers and can't get them right away. And yes, scientific papers routinely indicate that the results are inconclusive. This is common. It is routine. Such inconclusive results often make the news.

In sort, I don't know what you're talking about.
 
Displayed 521 of 521 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report