Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(NPR)   One in four Americans think the sun goes around the Earth. No word how many think the Earth is actually flat and located atop four elephants which themselves are balanced upon a giant turtle   (npr.org) divider line 265
    More: Fail, Americans, turtles  
•       •       •

6974 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Feb 2014 at 5:45 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-15 03:04:25 PM  
The proof that Americans are dumb is not that some of them believe that Sol orbits Earth, it's that some of them believe that's materially different than saying Earth orbits Sol, and try to use that nonexistent difference to belittle the other side.

It's bigendian vs. littleendian -- both sides are wrong and you all look like idiots for arguing about it.  Until and unless you're talking about other plants, geo-centerism and helio-centerism are the same model.
 
2014-02-15 03:23:31 PM  

profplump: Until and unless you're talking about other plants, geo-centerism and helio-centerism are the same model.


You might be in the wrong thread.
 
2014-02-15 03:40:39 PM  

profplump: The proof that Americans are dumb is not that some of them believe that Sol orbits Earth, it's that some of them believe that's materially different than saying Earth orbits Sol, and try to use that nonexistent difference to belittle the other side.

It's bigendian vs. littleendian -- both sides are wrong and you all look like idiots for arguing about it.  Until and unless you're talking about other plants, geo-centerism and helio-centerism are the same model.


Well, it's like this: they both orbit a common center of mass, which is inside the diameter of the Sun, so while the Earth doesn't orbit the CENTER of "Sol", it effectively does orbit the object itself. Now you have to factor in Newton's laws and it becomes obvious that the smaller mass orbits the larger mass. It also becomes obvious that the Earth orbits "Sol" when, as you say, you look at other planets, since those also orbit around the same center of mass within the diameter of the sun. The same holds true for most orbit relationships unless the mass difference is less pronounced, like a binary star system. The Sun only "orbits" the Earth if one purely takes a visual frame of reference, which is silly.
 
2014-02-15 03:51:41 PM  

gad: A racist and ignorant Tea Party is something that you can see without anyone from a rabid left or racist right pointing out to you.


Once again, you are making claims that have been shouted by the rabid leftists.  The left has never been able to demonstrate racism within the Tea Party.  Conservatives have been able to demonstrate that there is no institutional racism anywhere in the tea party.  But none of that will matter to you because you are obviously not interested in facts.  Facts would only make your irrational hate-speech hard to justify.
 
2014-02-15 04:03:43 PM  
A particular individual:

The real controversy about The Bell Curve wasn't the raw data, but the authors' argument that we shouldn't waste money helping the inferiors since their genes doom them to failure. I'm paraphrasing, of course.

/DNRTFB


You should,  it is a good book,  but not written for the 99%

The authors even had the gall to suggest that since you were reading their book it was likely you were in the top 1% of the curve.
 
2014-02-15 04:05:57 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Ker_Thwap: socodog: Not a single mention of how and where the sample group was chosen. Junk science meets yellow journalism.

Trying to attach the survey answers to any one demographic or political group is just assinine. This is Fark, though.

Agreed, it's not even just the sample that's the concern.  It could have been poor phrasing of the question.

Well, except for the fact that they linked directly to the detailed National Science Foundation report itself right there in the article. (PDF)


Do you see a copy of the survey questions in that link?  I don't.  Do you see the actual phrasing of the question?  I don't.  I have no confidence that they phrased the question properly, nor that they took steps to ensure that the concept was explored in at least two separate questions.

We've all taken a test and had that WTF moment when we encountered an ambiguously phrased question.  Sometimes people have brain farts as well, and just read the question incorrectly.  That's why it's best to duplicate questions phrased slightly differently.

Just use the start of the universe question as an example.  The average person will think "Yeah, I heard something about the BBT" and check the box.  Some people will think... hmm, just a theory.  The ones who really study the topic will have an even more in depth answer about what they believe is the most probable cause.  So, basically these clowns lump everyone into right and wrong, this tells me it's a crappy survey and use of statistics.
 
2014-02-15 04:14:55 PM  

Bad_Seed: If you haven't already, I suggest you check out Stephen Jay Gould's "The Mismeasure of Man". He mainly talks about IQ testing, but he's brilliant unpicking the fallacies and assumptions that always seem to accompany biological determinism.


Not really.  Gould's logic is flawed and he does a very poor job with the science.  I understand what he's trying to do, and it's a laudable goal, but it's clear he compromised on scientific rigor and honesty in order to push a sociopolitical agenda.

Gould's done much, much better in other books he's written.
 
2014-02-15 04:16:44 PM  

MyRandomName: Solid State Vittles: Book lurning is for librals. I wasn't evolutioned from some farking munkey you idiots.

And yet democrats received the largest amount of votes from those without a high school education. Liberals always conveniently ignore this point.


Did they?  Citation?

I'm a liberal and I wasn't conveniently ignoring the point as I was totally unaware of it.
 
2014-02-15 04:21:52 PM  

Lenny_da_Hog: Yes. And the fact that every "Tea Party" candidate has run on the GOP ticket has escaped you.


Tea Partiers tend to run on Republican tickets because Republicans are a close to a conservative party as we have in this country.  Maybe you've noticed, however, how often Tea Party candidates primary established Republicans?  The Tea Party is aware that a 3rd party will gain nothing so they have attached themselves to Republicans. There isn't much love lost between them and the old, established order.
 
2014-02-15 04:24:32 PM  

profplump: The proof that Americans are dumb is not that some of them believe that Sol orbits Earth, it's that some of them believe that's materially different than saying Earth orbits Sol, and try to use that nonexistent difference to belittle the other side.

It's bigendian vs. littleendian -- both sides are wrong and you all look like idiots for arguing about it.  Until and unless you're talking about other plants, geo-centerism and helio-centerism are the same model.


Read up on the history of navigation. It makes a serious material difference. And you not grasping that is why having people reach adulthood still ignorant of such a basic fact is a huge problem. It would be one thing if such people were humble, non-vocal, didn't weigh in on or preach about or vote regarding these subjects they're so ignorant about, but they do. Aggressive ignorance, rather like your lunatic both sides are wrong claim, is bad for society.
 
2014-02-15 04:29:37 PM  

zimbomba63: MyRandomName: Solid State Vittles: Book lurning is for librals. I wasn't evolutioned from some farking munkey you idiots.

And yet democrats received the largest amount of votes from those without a high school education. Liberals always conveniently ignore this point.

SSSSHHHH!  Don't mention that.  Just remember, "they're all above average, every last one of them", and you won't have any trouble around here.  Anyway, since they don't like the result, that survey is highly flawed and should be disregarded out of hand, otherwise, you are fascist, racist, homophobe, sexist,....


It must be fun to image that liberals are this dishonest. I guess it makes you feel better about yourself.
 
2014-02-15 04:41:20 PM  

Ker_Thwap: VendorXeno: Meanwhile, no, my "rant" isn't hard to follow. Anti-science comes aggressively from only one quarter. There's only one faction pushing creationism and insisting evolution is invalid. It's not equally distributed among the various social straights. That's simply ignorance or dishonesty.

You're trying too hard.  Creationists are a tiny goofy fraction, of a small fraction of a certain religion.  There's a lot of press because it's fun to mock them.  But they're hardly prevalent.  From what I've seen, they don't even hate science, they only hate evolution science, which is even weirder.

There are social conservatives, there are fiscal conservatives.  It's admittedly fun to demonize an entire political party based on the actions of the few extremists, but it's not wise to do so, for many reasons.

/Atheist here.


But they are prevalent. Among the US right wing over a third reject evolution. Over half reject climate science. And yes, reject. They don't fight science with science, they reject the science. And their fiscal side stems from the same thinking. See Romney's black people just want free stuff comments. The same bad thinking drives both their social and fiscal platforms and it isn't a silly little side show the big smart fiscal conservatives put up with, it is endemic to the political mind frame.
 
2014-02-15 04:46:34 PM  

Mr. Right: gad: A racist and ignorant Tea Party is something that you can see without anyone from a rabid left or racist right pointing out to you.

Once again, you are making claims that have been shouted by the rabid leftists.  The left has never been able to demonstrate racism within the Tea Party.  Conservatives have been able to demonstrate that there is no institutional racism anywhere in the tea party.  But none of that will matter to you because you are obviously not interested in facts.  Facts would only make your irrational hate-speech hard to justify.


From the endless monkey and kenya signs about Obama to their rabid assaults on women's health to their insistence that businesses should be able to refuse service based on skin color to adopting pushing anti-homosexual laws as a major plank in their platform, it is glaringly obvious that the tea party is overwhelmed with bigots of every stripe. I'd like to claim that not grasping this us the sort if ignorance referenced in this article, but there's really no way your claim could have been honest.
 
2014-02-15 04:55:31 PM  

VendorXeno: Ker_Thwap: VendorXeno: Meanwhile, no, my "rant" isn't hard to follow. Anti-science comes aggressively from only one quarter. There's only one faction pushing creationism and insisting evolution is invalid. It's not equally distributed among the various social straights. That's simply ignorance or dishonesty.

You're trying too hard.  Creationists are a tiny goofy fraction, of a small fraction of a certain religion.  There's a lot of press because it's fun to mock them.  But they're hardly prevalent.  From what I've seen, they don't even hate science, they only hate evolution science, which is even weirder.

There are social conservatives, there are fiscal conservatives.  It's admittedly fun to demonize an entire political party based on the actions of the few extremists, but it's not wise to do so, for many reasons.

/Atheist here.

But they are prevalent. Among the US right wing over a third reject evolution. Over half reject climate science. And yes, reject. They don't fight science with science, they reject the science. And their fiscal side stems from the same thinking. See Romney's black people just want free stuff comments. The same bad thinking drives both their social and fiscal platforms and it isn't a silly little side show the big smart fiscal conservatives put up with, it is endemic to the political mind frame.


Yeah, you're still being too general.  Sure there are extremists.  "Prevalent" is a pretty fuzzy word.  You can also say that liberal extremists are also prevalent, who drive their policy by socialist, throw money at the poor without regard to the results, endemic political mind frames... and it would be just as useless a statement to work with.

I'm a moderate, so I tend to piss off extremists on both sides of the aisle.  Every few years, one political party will try to claim a cause for their own.  We're the education party, NO, we're the education party!  We want to help the poor, NO, we want to help the poor!  This is just the most recent chip on the table.  Step back a bit and you realize they both want to solve the problem, they just have different ideas on what's the most effective way to do so.  Well, that a whole lot of political graft.  This is just an example of one side trying to claim "science."  Admittedly, the religious nutbags do make really easy targets.  I suspect most conservatives would be thrilled if they'd just shut up.
 
2014-02-15 04:59:33 PM  

Mr. Right: Lenny_da_Hog: Yes. And the fact that every "Tea Party" candidate has run on the GOP ticket has escaped you.

Tea Partiers tend to run on Republican tickets because Republicans are a close to a conservative party as we have in this country.  Maybe you've noticed, however, how often Tea Party candidates primary established Republicans?  The Tea Party is aware that a 3rd party will gain nothing so they have attached themselves to Republicans. There isn't much love lost between them and the old, established order.


And they joined the appropriate GOP caucus when elected, and the GOP has voted in unison in both the house and senate. Nothing changed. A couple of off-year races getting challenged didn't do much harm to the GOP, but now they're ready to rein it back in for the next big election cycle. It didn't really matter if Joe Miller or Lisa Murkowski would have won the Alaska Senate seat, because they both would have joined the Senate minority caucus and would have voted in lock-step.

It's been just enough rope to hang themselves. The extremists are being marginalized by their own over-exposure, and it will make it easier for the GOP to rebrand them under some other logo in a couple of years.

There is no Tea Party. It doesn't exist. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary and marketing brand of the GOP. Every previous incarnation of that same anger/judgment demographic, all the way back to Jerry Falwell's original mailing lists, has served the same purpose -- Attract rural working class voters who live in a small-town mentality, and use that mentality to get them to vote away their own interests in exchange for a few crumbs of anger.

If you want to be angry and judgmental for any reason at all, vote to cut taxes for the rich and the GOP will pay lip service to all the anti-everyone-else-but-me anger. Doesn't matter whether it's Christian fundamentalism, racism, or hating that slut Mrs. Johnson who wears her dresses way to high.
 
2014-02-15 05:05:52 PM  

Ker_Thwap: VendorXeno: Ker_Thwap: VendorXeno: Meanwhile, no, my "rant" isn't hard to follow. Anti-science comes aggressively from only one quarter. There's only one faction pushing creationism and insisting evolution is invalid. It's not equally distributed among the various social straights. That's simply ignorance or dishonesty.

You're trying too hard.  Creationists are a tiny goofy fraction, of a small fraction of a certain religion.  There's a lot of press because it's fun to mock them.  But they're hardly prevalent.  From what I've seen, they don't even hate science, they only hate evolution science, which is even weirder.

There are social conservatives, there are fiscal conservatives.  It's admittedly fun to demonize an entire political party based on the actions of the few extremists, but it's not wise to do so, for many reasons.

/Atheist here.

But they are prevalent. Among the US right wing over a third reject evolution. Over half reject climate science. And yes, reject. They don't fight science with science, they reject the science. And their fiscal side stems from the same thinking. See Romney's black people just want free stuff comments. The same bad thinking drives both their social and fiscal platforms and it isn't a silly little side show the big smart fiscal conservatives put up with, it is endemic to the political mind frame.

Yeah, you're still being too general.  Sure there are extremists.  "Prevalent" is a pretty fuzzy word.  You can also say that liberal extremists are also prevalent, who drive their policy by socialist, throw money at the poor without regard to the results, endemic political mind frames... and it would be just as useless a statement to work with.

I'm a moderate, so I tend to piss off extremists on both sides of the aisle.  Every few years, one political party will try to claim a cause for their own.  We're the education party, NO, we're the education party!  We want to help the poor, NO, we want to help the poor!  This is just the mos ...


When over half of a faction holds a view, like anti-climate science, to the point that it is part of their immediate platform, that's not fuzzy. You do come off as the classic moderate though, pissing off both sides by never listening to either while still constantly trying to describe them all. I myself am a transcendent. I pay attention to, and think about, what people say, what they do and what appears to have merit. The current US right wing is predominantly anti-science. Your repeated claims that this is just a fringe group without serious influence is flat out wrong, a claim without substance or support.
 
2014-02-15 05:15:14 PM  

VendorXeno: Mr. Right: gad: A racist and ignorant Tea Party is something that you can see without anyone from a rabid left or racist right pointing out to you.

Once again, you are making claims that have been shouted by the rabid leftists.  The left has never been able to demonstrate racism within the Tea Party.  Conservatives have been able to demonstrate that there is no institutional racism anywhere in the tea party.  But none of that will matter to you because you are obviously not interested in facts.  Facts would only make your irrational hate-speech hard to justify.

From the endless monkey and kenya signs about Obama to their rabid assaults on women's health to their insistence that businesses should be able to refuse service based on skin color to adopting pushing anti-homosexual laws as a major plank in their platform, it is glaringly obvious that the tea party is overwhelmed with bigots of every stripe. I'd like to claim that not grasping this us the sort if ignorance referenced in this article, but there's really no way your claim could have been honest.


Every claim you've made there is unfounded.  Except for the ones that have been definitively proven false.  There are nutjobs running around who have done some of those things.  But they have never had a connection to the Tea Party.

I'd say that you must get all of your information from MSNBC in order to be so badly informed about the Tea Party.  You and your dozens of fellow  viewers.  One thing the leftists have successfully learned, however, is that if you lie big enough, often enough, the gullible will follow.
 
2014-02-15 05:24:09 PM  

Mr. Right: VendorXeno: Mr. Right: gad: A racist and ignorant Tea Party is something that you can see without anyone from a rabid left or racist right pointing out to you.

Once again, you are making claims that have been shouted by the rabid leftists.  The left has never been able to demonstrate racism within the Tea Party.  Conservatives have been able to demonstrate that there is no institutional racism anywhere in the tea party.  But none of that will matter to you because you are obviously not interested in facts.  Facts would only make your irrational hate-speech hard to justify.

From the endless monkey and kenya signs about Obama to their rabid assaults on women's health to their insistence that businesses should be able to refuse service based on skin color to adopting pushing anti-homosexual laws as a major plank in their platform, it is glaringly obvious that the tea party is overwhelmed with bigots of every stripe. I'd like to claim that not grasping this us the sort if ignorance referenced in this article, but there's really no way your claim could have been honest.

Every claim you've made there is unfounded.  Except for the ones that have been definitively proven false.  There are nutjobs running around who have done some of those things.  But they have never had a connection to the Tea Party.

I'd say that you must get all of your information from MSNBC in order to be so badly informed about the Tea Party.  You and your dozens of fellow  viewers.  One thing the leftists have successfully learned, however, is that if you lie big enough, often enough, the gullible will follow.


Michelle Bachmann, a prominent Tea Party member, has championed anti-homosexual policy both in the GOP and in the Tea Party, both places where it is popular. Rand Paul, son of Ron Paul for whom the Tea Party initially formed around, and also a prominent Tea Party congressperson, is on record as saying he believes private business should be allowed to discriminate based on race. You are flat out wrong. You are also profoundly ignorant and blatantly dishonest and no longer worth conversing with.
 
2014-02-15 05:31:28 PM  

Mr. Right: Every claim you've made there is unfounded.  Except for the ones that have been definitively proven false.  There are nutjobs running around who have done some of those things.  But they have never had a connection to the Tea Party.


Show me one instance of a major Tea Party idol condemning the dog-whistling or the "nutjobs" running around doing those things. Any of them caught distributing racist e-mails have just given the standard non-apology-apology of, "I'm sorry IF I offended anyone!" Nobody in the Tea Party condemns racism, because they're afraid of alienating racists. All anger is welcome.

That's why it's dog-whistling. Even Allen West didn't condemn those behaviors -- he just deflected, the same as they all do, to saying, No, it's not us, it's THEM! The ENEMY is the racists! Obama! Holder! Anyone who says racism exists is a racist!!

It's all about hating someone else. That's why the Tea Party has no ideas on how to solve any problems -- all they have to do is be against things, like education, stable meals, access to healthcare, and job opportunities for people who aren't them.
 
2014-02-15 05:31:44 PM  

Mr. Right: gad: A racist and ignorant Tea Party is something that you can see without anyone from a rabid left or racist right pointing out to you.

Once again, you are making claims that have been shouted by the rabid leftists.  The left has never been able to demonstrate racism within the Tea Party.  Conservatives have been able to demonstrate that there is no institutional racism anywhere in the tea party.  But none of that will matter to you because you are obviously not interested in facts.  Facts would only make your irrational hate-speech hard to justify.


Let's not worry so much about what the Left says.  Let's try asking racists how much they agree with the Tea Party.  Or, hey, ask Glenn Beck.  You can hardly accuse him of being a rabid leftist.
 
2014-02-15 05:34:37 PM  

Mr. Right: I'd say that you must get all of your information from MSNBC in order to be so badly informed about the Tea Party.  You and your dozens of fellow  viewers.  One thing the leftists have successfully learned, however, is that if you lie big enough, often enough, the gullible will follow.


Perhap, but not as successfully as the Far Right has learned about Rovian Projection.
 
2014-02-15 05:52:08 PM  

Copper Spork: kidgenius: It's not so much that there is a correlation between intelligence and political affiliation, but that people with certain political leanings appear to be actively hostile toward education in general, not to mention science.

Right. Try telling lefties that some groups of people are genetically predisposed to be more intelligent than others, and wait for the witch hunt.


I'm left, and worked in a genetics lab. So, no witch hunt for me.
 
2014-02-15 06:31:25 PM  

Mr. Right: Every claim you've made there is unfounded. Except for the ones that have been definitively proven false. There are nutjobs running around who have done some of those things. But they have never had a connection to the Tea Party.

I'd say that you must get all of your information from MSNBC in order to be so badly informed about the Tea Party. You and your dozens of fellow viewers. One thing the leftists have successfully learned, however, is that if you lie big enough, often enough, the gullible will follow.


ITT: Mr. Right being continuously and hilariously wrong. I gotta give you props, you stick with a line and never waver.

Keep it up, Big Guy, we're hanging on your every word.
 
2014-02-15 06:35:40 PM  
politicalfilm.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-02-15 06:42:13 PM  

VendorXeno: When over half of a faction holds a view, like anti-climate science, to the point that it is part of their immediate platform, that's not fuzzy. You do come off as the classic moderate though, pissing off both sides by never listening to either while still constantly trying to describe them all. I myself am a transcendent. I pay attention to, and think about, what people say, what they do and what appears to have merit. The current US right wing is predominantly anti-science. Your repeated claims that this is just a fringe group without serious influence is flat out wrong, a claim without substance or support.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/four-americans-believe-strict-crea ti onism.aspx

Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Dec. 10-12, 2010, with a random sample of 1,019 adults, aged 18 and older, living in the continental U.S., selected using random-digit-dial sampling.
For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.


So basically more Republicans than Democrats believe in the Easter Bunny.  But the percentages aren't really that far off.  I like to treat people as individuals rather than pigeonholing them into neat little categories to demonize them.  I do all my demonizing on an individual basis. Don't make assumptions about me, I listen to everyone, don't be insulting.

Again, you're generalizing.  Anti science on on the single issue of evolution is not anti science on every issue.  As for global warming, a lot of people are simply anti reactionary based on politicizing the subject for their own personal gain.  They can believe in the science science and disagree with the political science on the best way to address the concerns.
 
2014-02-15 06:48:29 PM  
Entitled blue staters?

/DRTFA
 
2014-02-15 06:55:14 PM  

Ker_Thwap: VendorXeno: When over half of a faction holds a view, like anti-climate science, to the point that it is part of their immediate platform, that's not fuzzy. You do come off as the classic moderate though, pissing off both sides by never listening to either while still constantly trying to describe them all. I myself am a transcendent. I pay attention to, and think about, what people say, what they do and what appears to have merit. The current US right wing is predominantly anti-science. Your repeated claims that this is just a fringe group without serious influence is flat out wrong, a claim without substance or support.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/four-americans-believe-strict-crea ti onism.aspx

Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Dec. 10-12, 2010, with a random sample of 1,019 adults, aged 18 and older, living in the continental U.S., selected using random-digit-dial sampling.
For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

So basically more Republicans than Democrats believe in the Easter Bunny.  But the percentages aren't really that far off.  I like to treat people as individuals rather than pigeonholing them into neat little categories to demonize them.  I do all my demonizing on an individual basis. Don't make assumptions about me, I listen to everyone, don't be insulting.

Again, you're generalizing.  Anti science on on the single issue of evolution is not anti science on every issue.  As for global warming, a lot of people are simply anti reactionary based on politicizing the subject for their own personal gain.  They can believe in the science science and disagree with the political science on the best way to address the concerns.


Again, I am not generalizing in the fashion you're insisting. Repeating it won't make it magically true. The anti-science trend only makes it onto the platform of one faction. As for your idea that people just hate the politicization of global warming, utter bullshiat. For one thing, it isn't a polarized political issue. It's one faction vs. science itself. This can in large part be demonstrated by the lack of the same argument in so many other political cultures. When NASA scientists post data showing a global warming trend and right wing pundits call it bullshiat, right wing politicians lie about it a majority of right wing voters state they don't believe it, that's science denial. That is not your myth of just hating the politics. Your whole description is fictional. As for insulting you, you brought up the generalization of pissing off both sides, not me.
 
2014-02-15 07:17:55 PM  

VendorXeno: Again, I am not generalizing in the fashion you're insisting. Repeating it won't make it magically true. The anti-science trend only makes it onto the platform of one faction. As for your idea that people just hate the politicization of global warming, utter bullshiat. For one thing, it isn't a polarized political issue. It's one faction vs. science itself. This can in large part be demonstrated by the lack of the same argument in so many other political cultures. When NASA scientists post data showing a global warming trend and right wing pundits call it bullshiat, right wing politicians lie about it a majority of right wing voters state they don't believe it, that's science denial. That is not your myth of just hating the politics. Your whole description is fictional. As for insulting you, you brought up the generalization of pissing off both sides, not me.


When you say one side is anti science, that doesn't fit with my personal experience.  I personally know freaking scientists who believe in god assisted evolution.  It's frankling baffling to me, but there it is.  I also have an annoying super religious preachy brother in law who doesn't believe in strict creationism, also kind of baffling.  I've dated women who believe in creationism, but don't believe it should be taught in schools.  My mother in law used to be a brainless super liberal strict creationist, then she married my super conservative father, and now she's a super conservative brainless strict creationist.  Many people just aren't single issue voters.

If you don't think global warming has been politicized, I'm not sure how to dissuade you of that notion.  I guess I'm just a lot more jaded than you.  We're currently having a political debate that's in part about how anyone who doesn't believe in every single global warming study is anti science.  That should tell you something.

I'm a math major/statistics fan.  The current state of surveys is flat out horrible.  Even when a survey is done properly on occasion, people still manage to draw goofballs conclusions from it.

It's been fun chatting with you, but I've got to bail for a bit.  Maybe I'll check back later if you want to respond.
 
2014-02-15 07:26:14 PM  
Nothing a few more corporate tax cuts can't fix. Oh, also bust up the teacher's union just to be sure.
 
2014-02-15 07:31:35 PM  

VendorXeno: Michelle Bachmann, a prominent Tea Party member, has championed anti-homosexual policy both in the GOP and in the Tea Party, both places where it is popular. Rand Paul, son of Ron Paul for whom the Tea Party initially formed around, and also a prominent Tea Party congressperson, is on record as saying he believes private business should be allowed to discriminate based on race. You are flat out wrong. You are also profoundly ignorant and blatantly dishonest and no longer worth conversing with.


ciberido: Let's not worry so much about what the Left says. Let's try asking racists how much they agree with the Tea Party. Or, hey, ask Glenn Beck. You can hardly accuse him of being a rabid leftist.


We now arrive at the crux of the problem.  You think you get to define what racism, sexism, homophobia, and discrimination is.  It's a trick as old as Lenin and his usurpation of the term Bolshevik at the 2nd Party Congress way back about a dozen years before the 1917 revolution.  Give or take - it's been a long time since I studied the exact sequence of events prior to the creation of the Soviet Union.

If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? Five? No, calling a tail a leg don't make it a leg.  Abe Lincoln.
 
2014-02-15 07:38:44 PM  

Mr. Right: We now arrive at the crux of the problem. You think you get to define what racism, sexism, homophobia, and discrimination is. It's a trick as old as Lenin and his usurpation of the term Bolshevik at the 2nd Party Congress way back about a dozen years before the 1917 revolution. Give or take - it's been a long time since I studied the exact sequence of events prior to the creation of the Soviet Union.


Okay, please tell me how, say, attempting to ammendments banning gay marriage AND civil unions for homosexuals is not discrimination.

Let's hear YOUR definition of these words, Mr. Humpty.
 
2014-02-15 07:48:44 PM  

Mr. Right: Are you not aware of the many attempts at accommodation with Palestinians that nearly every Israeli political party has tried?  All to no avail because Palestinians are the intransigent ones?


Yeah. You should go and learn about the entire situation, and how Israel has expanded over the decades.

/They need their lebensraum, I guess.
//There's definitely an irony in Zionists taking up nationalism as much as the Nazis did.
///Slashies.
 
2014-02-15 07:57:22 PM  

Theeng:

Honestly, I find it more baffling that people equate intelligence with political affiliation.

Ker_Thwap: VendorXeno:   Creationists are a tiny goofy fraction, of a small fraction of a certain religion.
/Atheist here.


I would argue that this "goofy" fraction, make more sense than any of the Christians who don't believe in creationism.

If you don't buy into all of it, how do you buy into any of it?
 
2014-02-15 08:13:40 PM  

Mr. Right: We now arrive at the crux of the problem. You think you get to define what racism, sexism, homophobia, and discrimination is. It's a trick as old as Lenin and his usurpation of the term Bolshevik at the 2nd Party Congress way back about a dozen years before the 1917 revolution. Give or take - it's been a long time since I studied the exact sequence of events prior to the creation of the Soviet Union.


Oh, FFS. Plonk.
 
2014-02-15 08:30:41 PM  
I am dubious of the survey.  I question the surveyors methods and motivation.
 
2014-02-15 09:30:01 PM  
Elected liberal officials fear islands will capsize.
 
2014-02-15 09:52:19 PM  

Mr. Right: VendorXeno: Michelle Bachmann, a prominent Tea Party member, has championed anti-homosexual policy both in the GOP and in the Tea Party, both places where it is popular. Rand Paul, son of Ron Paul for whom the Tea Party initially formed around, and also a prominent Tea Party congressperson, is on record as saying he believes private business should be allowed to discriminate based on race. You are flat out wrong. You are also profoundly ignorant and blatantly dishonest and no longer worth conversing with.

ciberido: Let's not worry so much about what the Left says. Let's try asking racists how much they agree with the Tea Party. Or, hey, ask Glenn Beck. You can hardly accuse him of being a rabid leftist.

We now arrive at the crux of the problem.  You think you get to define what racism, sexism, homophobia, and discrimination is.


profile.ak.fbcdn.net

Rovian projection indeed.  You're a farking mirror.
 
2014-02-15 09:54:53 PM  

theorellior: Mr. Right: We now arrive at the crux of the problem. You think you get to define what racism, sexism, homophobia, and discrimination is. It's a trick as old as Lenin and his usurpation of the term Bolshevik at the 2nd Party Congress way back about a dozen years before the 1917 revolution. Give or take - it's been a long time since I studied the exact sequence of events prior to the creation of the Soviet Union.

Oh, FFS. Plonk.


I dunno, keep him around for the humor value, I guess.
 
2014-02-15 10:07:04 PM  
Heliocentrism is not 100% right, either.

More accurately, the Earth and Sun revolve around their mutual center of gravity.  Of course, since the Sun is so much more massive than the Earth, the CoG is actually in the Sun's interior but not exactly the center.  On top of that, you have to add the gravitational tug of the other planets, asteroids, and satellites.  If you're really picky, you have to add the gravitational tug of distant stars and also have to take relativistic effects into account as well.  Just sayin'...
 
2014-02-15 10:26:12 PM  

Psycat: Heliocentrism is not 100% right, either.

More accurately, the Earth and Sun revolve around their mutual center of gravity.  Of course, since the Sun is so much more massive than the Earth, the CoG is actually in the Sun's interior but not exactly the center.  On top of that, you have to add the gravitational tug of the other planets, asteroids, and satellites.  If you're really picky, you have to add the gravitational tug of distant stars and also have to take relativistic effects into account as well.  Just sayin'...


And together the sun and earth (with their shared CoG) orbit the center of our galaxy.
That and much more can be learned from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life -Galaxy Song
 
2014-02-15 10:26:54 PM  

socodog: Not a single mention of how and where the sample group was chosen. Junk science meets yellow journalism.

Ker_Thwap: Agreed, it's not even just the sample that's the concern. It could have been poor phrasing of the question.

Lenny_da_Hog: Well, except for the fact that they linked directly to the detailed National Science Foundation report itself right there in the article.

Ker_Thwap: Do you see a copy of the survey questions in that link? I don't. Do you see the actual phrasing of the question? I don't.


The NSF report indicates the science knowledge questions were from the NORC GSS, which is about as well known in sociology as use of water as a solvent in chemistry; but if you'd like to read up on the details of the methodology, you can try here, particularly Appendix A of the codebook. There's also a handy on-line interface to the data at Berkeley's SDA website, including a searchable code book listing exact wording for the EARTHSUN question.

HTH, HAND.
 
2014-02-15 10:29:39 PM  

You Cant Explain That: I would argue that this "goofy" fraction, make more sense than any of the Christians who don't believe in creationism.

If you don't buy into all of it, how do you buy into any of it?


Well, that's just religion in general.  Some people think the old books are parables, just meant to instruct.  Some think they're the word of god.  Every religion is fragmented into a bazillion sects, give or take a zillion.  I doubt you can find any two people that agree on every single aspect of their religion's teachings.  I suppose debating it all gives them a hobby.

I suppose specific to this thread, the "goofy ones" aren't the one's who believe in creationism in a general spiritual sense that a divine creator set everything in motion.  Hell, practically every culture/religion has an interesting creation myth, that's just basic history where people long ago got introspective and attempted to explain the unexplainable.  The goofy ones are those who would force "their" version to be taught at public schools.
 
2014-02-15 10:54:00 PM  

abb3w: socodog: Not a single mention of how and where the sample group was chosen. Junk science meets yellow journalism.
Ker_Thwap: Agreed, it's not even just the sample that's the concern. It could have been poor phrasing of the question.
Lenny_da_Hog: Well, except for the fact that they linked directly to the detailed National Science Foundation report itself right there in the article.
Ker_Thwap: Do you see a copy of the survey questions in that link? I don't. Do you see the actual phrasing of the question? I don't.

The NSF report indicates the science knowledge questions were from the NORC GSS, which is about as well known in sociology as use of water as a solvent in chemistry; but if you'd like to read up on the details of the methodology, you can try here, particularly Appendix A of the codebook. There's also a handy on-line interface to the data at Berkeley's SDA website, including a searchable code book listing exact wording for the EARTHSUN question.

HTH, HAND.


Just anecdotaly- Do you know anyone who thinks the sun revolves around the earth?
 
2014-02-15 11:02:40 PM  

abb3w: socodog: Not a single mention of how and where the sample group was chosen. Junk science meets yellow journalism.
Ker_Thwap: Agreed, it's not even just the sample that's the concern. It could have been poor phrasing of the question.
Lenny_da_Hog: Well, except for the fact that they linked directly to the detailed National Science Foundation report itself right there in the article.
Ker_Thwap: Do you see a copy of the survey questions in that link? I don't. Do you see the actual phrasing of the question? I don't.

The NSF report indicates the science knowledge questions were from the NORC GSS, which is about as well known in sociology as use of water as a solvent in chemistry; but if you'd like to read up on the details of the methodology, you can try here, particularly Appendix A of the codebook. There's also a handy on-line interface to the data at Berkeley's SDA website, including a searchable code book listing exact wording for the EARTHSUN question.

HTH, HAND.


Your Googling skills far exceed mine.

"1044. Now, I would like to ask you a few short questions like those you might see on a television game show. For each statement that I read, please tell me if it is true or false. If you don't know or aren't sure, just tell me so, and we will skip to the next question. Remember true, false, or don't know. j. Now, does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?"

So, phone interview.  They explain the proper responses will be true, false, or aren't sure.  Then give true, false, or don't know as options.  Then they ask a question over the phone that requires a specific answer other than true or false.  So the proper response would be true and false?  Yeah, this is a poorly constructed question.

There was also no other question that attempted to duplicate the question, to prevent this kind of misunderstanding.

Were the people taking the poll given consistent instructions on how to interpret a true or false answer to this question?

This question tells me more that some people are more easily confused than others, have poor hearing.  I am not impressed by their survey techniques.  Remember, true or false, or was that false or true?
 
2014-02-15 11:03:20 PM  

RottenEggs: Entitled blue staters?


Non-right answers tended to come from older folk, low education (EG: only HS diploma or less), pure "moderate" political identification (to a lesser degree from conservatism), those who regard the Bible as Inerrant, and blacks -- though the last effect weakens a lot if you factor in the others, but doesn't go away. There's not much correlation on Census region, though there might be less of the problem in New England and more of a problem in the Derp South; again, most of that seems to be from other demographic differences.

Frederick: I am dubious of the survey. I question the surveyors methods and motivation.


See previous attempt to be informative.
 
2014-02-15 11:05:32 PM  
This is why we will continue to have plenty of people to fill minimum wage jobs.
 
2014-02-15 11:13:59 PM  

offmymeds: A quarter of Americans surveyed could not correctly answer that the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around, according to a report out Friday from the National Science Foundation.

WE'RE NUMBER 1!!! WE'RE NUMBER 1!!! USA!!! USA111!!!

[i.chzbgr.com image 500x301]


apparently you didn't read the article, you stupid fark:

As alarming as some of those deficits in science knowledge might appear, Americans fared better on several of the questions than similar, but older surveys of their Chinese and European counterparts.
Only 66 percent of people in a 2005 European Union poll answered the basic astronomy answer correctly. However, both China and the EU fared significantly better (66 percent and 70 percent, respectively) on the question about human evolution.
 
2014-02-15 11:20:35 PM  

abb3w: RottenEggs: Entitled blue staters?

Non-right answers tended to come from older folk, low education (EG: only HS diploma or less), pure "moderate" political identification (to a lesser degree from conservatism), those who regard the Bible as Inerrant, and blacks -- though the last effect weakens a lot if you factor in the others, but doesn't go away. There's not much correlation on Census region, though there might be less of the problem in New England and more of a problem in the Derp South; again, most of that seems to be from other demographic differences.

Frederick: I am dubious of the survey. I question the surveyors methods and motivation.

See previous attempt to be informative.


I maintain my position

/although I should do my own research and not steal the work of others
//stolen from Ker_Thwap, but I suspected as much
 
2014-02-15 11:21:41 PM  

Frederick: abb3w: socodog: Not a single mention of how and where the sample group was chosen. Junk science meets yellow journalism.
Ker_Thwap: Agreed, it's not even just the sample that's the concern. It could have been poor phrasing of the question.
Lenny_da_Hog: Well, except for the fact that they linked directly to the detailed National Science Foundation report itself right there in the article.
Ker_Thwap: Do you see a copy of the survey questions in that link? I don't. Do you see the actual phrasing of the question? I don't.

The NSF report indicates the science knowledge questions were from the NORC GSS, which is about as well known in sociology as use of water as a solvent in chemistry; but if you'd like to read up on the details of the methodology, you can try here, particularly Appendix A of the codebook. There's also a handy on-line interface to the data at Berkeley's SDA website, including a searchable code book listing exact wording for the EARTHSUN question.

HTH, HAND.

Just anecdotaly- Do you know anyone who thinks the sun revolves around the earth?




There is a Farkette who, while she won't discuss it, has proclaimed that she's a geocentrist, and has a link to a creationist website in her profile that states that the Earth is the center of the universe, just as the bible says it is.
 
2014-02-15 11:24:34 PM  

Frederick: Just anecdotaly- Do you know anyone who thinks the sun revolves around the earth?


Like most people, I don't usually ask those I know about that particular belief directly. However, my circle of acquaintance is far from a representative sample, being grossly deficient in all of the demographic sources of non-right answers I mentioned; so, it seems unlikely.

Ker_Thwap: Your Googling skills far exceed mine.


Nah; I've just been playing with the SDA/GSS as a tool for arguing politics on Fark since some time circa 2011. I recognized the question as part of the science knowledge pool that includes EVOLVED.

Ker_Thwap: So, phone interview.


friendsoftype.com


Go re-read the NORC codebook Appendix A.

Ker_Thwap: They explain the proper responses will be true, false, or aren't sure.


That's part of the section introduction; question section 1044 starts with 1044a HOTCORE, which along with eight other questions uses that True/False/Dunno format, before switching format slightly for subquestions 1044j and 1044k (the latter of which is only asked if the former is correct).
 
Displayed 50 of 265 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report