211 comments on DrumBeat: July 10, 2009
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
211 comments on DrumBeat: July 10, 2009
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
- Some predictions on the forthcoming Russian-Ukrainian gas 'crisis'
- The US stimulus and "green jobs" for wind energy
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
- The Bullroarer - Friday 13th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
—Albert Einstein
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
Thanks. Fixed it.
I found that quiz and its results very depressing. Those were really easy questions. I would bet most of us TODers got all of the questions right. But only 10% of Americans got all 12 questions right.
And the demographics weren't that encouraging, either. Young adults know less than any other age group except the over-65s.
Leanan, you are making some assumptions in that statement. Actually, the 10% that got all 12 right are people like myself. I am British living in Germany.
I suspect that 0% of Americans got all 12 right ;-)
EDIT: I take it all back, the demographics are from the telephone survey.
Hey now, hold on right there.....I am in the US, south florida to be exact, and I just took the quiz and got all 12 correct........Does that make me smart??? Is that why I went and spent all that money to get a PhD ?????? Wooo Hooooo.
Well I got all 12 right even though I am over 65, have only a high school education, (plus a few years of technical schools), was born in a sharecroppers shack and grew up on a rural Alabama cotton farm.
I think there is something more at play here rather than only demographics. The question most got right was the one about what prevents heart attacks. The question most missed was a true false, "Electrons are smaller than atoms". The results correct replies were less than 50%. Less than pure chance.
If you just watched TV all day you would soon gather that aspirin helps prevent heart attacks. The word "atom" is often used as a metaphor for something very tiny but the word "electron" is seldom, if ever, used in that regard.
It is the TV culture that is to blame...or perhaps something more sublime.
Ron P.
I'm 62 and I got all of them right. I put down "some college" but I also have a lifelong technical career behind me. Still, I think I could have gotten all 12 right when I was in high school. I sent it to my adult kids who all have one or more degrees from major universities. It will be interesting to see how they do. None of their degrees are science related.
When you were in high school three of the questions could not have existed. :)
I got all 12 right too, but my score was 11 because one of the questions was wrong.
Antibacterials kill bacteria.
Antivirals kill virii.
Antibiotics may kill bacteria AND virii.
The plural of virus is viruses, not "virii." And how can anything "kill" a macromolecular complex if it isn't even alive?
The word "kill" is often used figuratively (e.g. "bill killed in Senate") but yes! "virii" is not proper Latin. The Internet thanks you for picking on it.
Maybe antibiotics will kill bills also.
The point is that antibiotic means: against life (micro-organisms) and a virus doesn't live.
By that logic, biowarfare can't include viruses, either.
Hey, look what patent I found:
BU-4641V, an antibacterial antiviral and antitumor antibiotic.
European Patent Application EP0560149
Name and references Please:
The true/false question, "Antibiotics will kill viruses as well as bacteria," tests whether you understand the definition of "antibiotics." If you answered "true," you were wrong. By definition antibiotics kill bacteria, not viruses. That an antibiotic may kill some viruses does not alter the correct answer.
This American answered all 12 questions correctly.
Antibiotics are there in two forms: bacteriostatica and bactericide. The bactericide antibiotica kill bacteria, the others prevent their division. Of course, ultimately with the same result.
E.O Wilson grew up in rural Alabama. He said the backwoods areas of Alabama were in large part responsible for his becoming a naturalist.
You're in good company.
If people watched "Nova" every week, they would certainly have gotten all of the questions right.
I'm 70, watched(threw it out 8 yrs ago) no TV for many years, lots of technical training schools but no college except for inhouse core curricula and SoftWare Engineering at my previous employer(IBM).
I was born in a house with a midwife in attendance, never paid attention in grade and high school(skipped a lot). IQ tested at 150(if it matters).I am a Kentucky Red Neck. An electronics technician,field engineer,a staff level programmer,mainframe consultant, blacksmith, banjo picker , farmer and now retired and lay pretty much on my ass and do exactly what I want ,when I want.
I got all 12 correct and they were astoundingly simple questions. The planet question was solved by process of elimination.But I thought I heard it before. Taking tests is an art form, or so I believe. Yet this one required zero artwork
And I spend too much time on TOD.
Airdale
You are officially the man!
Daniel Achstatter
Nah,,,I believe every TODer who has a serious bone in his body should and likely will get all 12 right.
Airdale-the banjo picking I cherish,the rest was just killing time
Wooo Hooooo, I just skewed the results by doing this from Yuwrop and got all 12 correct but had to guess about the "no longer a planet", knew that one had recently been reclassified as a "something" but since can't remember the order had a guess and got it right:-)
I don't have a PhD but employ a few:-)
Will try this on my primary school kid tonight.
I got 12 right but then missed the ones about my age and sex.
All the surveys I have taken think I'm a 98 year old Tibetan woman making $100K.
And I am a 100-year old man, living in Afghanistan if they ask for a country, and in Schenectady if they ask for a zip code (12345). My profession varies, from agriculture to art to finance.
Honestly, I see no reason to give them any real info about me for free.
My long lost brother!!!
I too discovered where zip code 12345 really is in much the same way. Afghanistan is usually one of the first in the pulldown list. The ones that really annoy me are the websites that force you to register and then want to send you a confirmation email that you must respond to before you can use the site.
Some sites let you enter a birth year in freeform text instead of with a pulldown. I tried entering dates like 1860, but for some reason they wouldn't accept that. Nor would they accept 2030. But some will accept something like 2008.
Art Vandelay of Vandelay Industries (importer/exporter)
that's always a good one for a survey or anything where you don't want to use a real name
For these kinds of registrations:
NgoSpam@hormel.com
If a "Company" field needs to be filled in:
"North American Veeblefetzer" (The imaginary corporate conglomerate in Mad Magazine satires.)
Aahhh, thank you for clearing up a longstanding puzzle I've had. Yahoo news would sometimes display news from Schenectady for me. Obviously it must be when I happen to be logged into my yahoo account, and I must have entered the 12345 fake zip code for that account.
"Will try this on my primary school kid tonight." my 11 year old got all 12, the 9 year old got 8 and they're both down as 65+
I'm an American and got all 12 right. The amazing, shameful thing is that 90% couldn't. It is not as if these are questions that would stump Nobel prize winners. The thought that kept running through my mind as a saw these questions was "Well, DUH!!!" These were all items that have been in the news within the last few years. Mere attentiveness to the news would have been sufficient to acquire the knowledge to answer these questions, one would not even had to have taken a single college-level science course.
American has become a nation of dummies, and is rapidly becoming the world's laughing stock. This does not bode well at all for our future.
Indeed this was a knowledge quiz, not a science test.
That's right. And even there, it's a joke. But I know people who are much more knowledgeable than me in other areas who might have missed a couple.
I was amused the other night to see my wife topped by her (our) 3 year old grandson. We were watching TV at my son's in-laws, and the word orca was used. My wife asks, what's an orca? My grandson chimes in, it's a whale.
Not a science quiz and even less a science IQ test. Bad results not only in the U.S. but everywhere in the world. Most people are not interested in facts. Shocking though is the result of the climate question.
don't feel like going back and double-checking but I suspect a lot of people missed that one because on the toob they hear "See-Oh-Two" and in the quiz I think they saw a much longer, scary word like carbon dioxide. They don't realize they are the same thing.
This could have been called a current news or discovery channel quiz. It required nothing but remembering what was heard seen in the media.
I do agree with Airdale that the art of taking tests is as important to the outcome as the knowledge required and that IQ testing is at best a crude instrument and probably a mismeasure (Gould).
One other thing.........anyone commenting on this test will be a 12/12er because no one on this site would be able to put their ego back together for at least a couple hours if they botched even one question!
Well, if it makes everyone feel better (or more smug, as the case may be), I botched question #6, so I only had eleven out of twelve correct; consequently, I'll be wearing this attractive and highly visible cap for the remainder of today [points to orange traffic cone on head].
Cheers,
Paul
And we know for sure you are no dunce.. yet that hat looks quite fetching on you!
..Like these guys!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbt30UnzRWw
'When a (Science)Problem comes along..'
Bob
Thanks, Bob. I keep it handy my desk, 'cause ya never know when it will be pressed into service.
Devo provided backup on this song, which I recall was a pretty big hit from Montréal club days.
See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0ImnOLzVBc
Cheers,
Paul
Devo gets too much negative press for the Whip It video. It's like Bobby McFarin's "Don't Worry, Be Happy", both are an anomalous pop hit in an otherwise intelligent collection of music. Devo had songs like "The Corporate Anthem" long before many were aware of the rise of corporatacry, or the dumbing down of the masses with "Freedom of Choice". You have to really listen to their lyrics to get a sense of the deeper intelligence.
Also, they put on a good live show! Saw them in 1979 when they had a thing called "Devo Vision", the precursor to music videos.
Worse than that the dummies are damn proud of themselves...
It's not like we're stupid and trying like hell to become more educated - nope, it appears to me that most people are just fine with BAU regarding their education and basic level of understanding of how the world works.
We celebrate ignorance here like a badge of honor.
I also seem to remember reading an article somewhere that suggested people don't know as much about most things as they THINK they know. So we're either ignorant and proud of it or relatively ignorant while thinking we're pretty damn smart. Yep - sounds like a recipe for disaster to me...
I'm not sure I follow you. Who amongst us considers their ignorance a source of pride? The reality is not all of us are blessed with high IQs or speak seven languages. Some of us are also prone to make seemingly poor choices (e.g., I know a number of otherwise "bright" people who abuse alcohol, do drugs or are involved in abusive relationships); others may be "smart", but completely devoid of any moral fibre. Don't get me wrong, I would be pleased if my auto mechanic were a devote of JS Mills, but Chilton will do just fine. :-)
Cheers,
Paul
It may be different in Halifax, but here in the US, there's a definite hostility toward intellectuals. How did Rush Limbaugh put it? People who are "educated beyond their intelligence."
Well, I like intelligent people, even if I can't understand half of what they say, but the arrogance and egotism that often comes along for the ride can be a tad hard to swallow.
Cheers,
Paul
It's not just that (though that can be part of it).
Exhibit A - the election and re-election of George W. Bush. Now, I don't think he's quite as dim as he's often made out to be, but that man is ignorant (despite his education), and doesn't care that he's ignorant. And that's what people liked about him. He was "one of us," a "guy you could have a beer with." While Gore and Kerry were snooty Ivy Leaguers. Never mind that Bush is as much an Ivy Leaguer as anyone, with degrees from Yale and Harvard. You would not believe the number of Bush supporters I have encountered who insist that Bush got his degree from the University of Texas.
I've worked with nuclear engineers who design and operate CANDU reactors and electrician's helpers who move heavy spools of cable with fork lifts. Switch their roles for a day and see how things work out (ever notice how many frigg'n leavers and nobs are on those damn things?). My point is that I'm not so quick to judge others, particularly by my interpretation of what constitutes "intelligence".
Cheers,
Paul
That's pretty funny Leanan - the GWB story was exactly what came to mind as I wrote my reply to WNC.
Trust me - I like (love) beer as much as the next person and especially like to have one with interesting company - but W did not seem like someone you'd have the least bit interesting conversation with over a beer.
So I'd love the President to be someone you could have a beer with... BUT I'd also like him to be well read, have a somewhat open mind, and most importantly understand that most issues on the planet today are not black and white where you can take one ideology and completely discount the views (or in the case of GWB - the FACTS) of others who knew vastly more about a given subject.
I'd be willing to bet that if you asked those who voted for Bush what quality of his was most important to them it would be exactly that though - that he was the Decider and everything was either right (Republican, christians, America) or wrong (Democrat, terrists, liberals). And never mind getting all scientific about climate change or WMDs or trade policy or or etc. - we don't care about no facts as long as our President is a tough guy.
That to me is symptomatic of an extremely ignorant society. I think it even goes beyond ignorant - I'm not sure what the correct descriptor would be. Ignorant seems to imply that people are uninformed or unaware of things - more of a passive condition due to environmental or socioeconomic factors. But I don't see that as the case here. This is more a form of laziness - in the US I would say that the majority of people could seek out other viewpoints and evaluate them honestly (thru the internet, libraries etc.) but I don't get the impression that many do that. Their lack of complete information on issues is actively sought out by refusing to consider arguments or data contrary to their viewpoint.
And just as you point out, "intellectuals" (the definition of which I think ultimately expanded to include anyone that might think for themselves regarding issues of American exceptionalism) have been lumped in as part of the "liberal elite" - and painted with the extremely broad brush as being anti-American, unpatriotic, (fill in the blank)
On a lighter note, whenever I think of Americans and beer (ha! like they'd know the real stuff), this is what comes to mind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HGPh8Hjyg8
Cheers,
Paul
With regard to the Dover trial Rev Ray Mummert said "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture"
For those who are not familiar with the Dover trial check it out here:
Judgment Day, Intelligent Design on Trial
It is a two hour video in ten minute segments so you can watch it piecemeal. It will be two of the most entertaining hours you ever sat through.
Ron P.
But it gets worse.
Here in Detroit, folks try to KILL you if'n you're trying to get an edumacation.
http://freep.com/article/20090702/OPINION01/907020366/A+spray+of+gunfire...
IMO shootings like this are not random events but planned terrorism by the drug/gang lords similar to tribal terrorism practised in Africa.
Americans are notorious for being anti-intellectual. I find it very difficult to have serious discussions with people on issues that matter. Additionally I have done some reading on gifted education and this is taken as fact. Just look at how well sports are funded when compared to academics.
Clint
I don't think the general populace rejects intelligence, as such; I think it's more a fear that they, individually, will be judged inferior or deficient by others -- that they won't "measure up" in a society that prides itself on its competitive spirit and that is compelled to dissect, catalogue and quantify everything. But the larger question for me is what defines "intelligence"?
Cheers,
Paul
Thanks for your response Paul. You have a good point about Americans and their competitive spirit. I have the same question as you regarding intelligence. I know people who have very high IQs but don't do anything but sit behind a computer or work in lab without interacting with too many people. Is that success? If it makes you happy I guess it is. My personal experience has been that intelligence is wasted without motivation and discipline. There is also something psychologists call "Executive functioning" that is very helpful but missing in a lot of people with high IQs. Most people refer to it as common sense. I grew up being admired by my teachers for my ability but laughed at by peers for my naivete and a tendency to not pay attention to my surroundings. I think this comes from having an intuitive mind and being able to understand abstract concepts. I worked to develop social skills but it has been a very long road and I made some bad choices over the years. The end result is that I have done less than I could have.
I have seen successful people and they have motivation, discipline, and common sense. If one has intelligence in addition to this they can go very far in life. But this is a rare combination and requires very attentive and supportive parenting that most children do not get. This is my present challenge, to be a good parent. Things have changed somewhat from when I grew up, and being academically gifted is not the social handicap it used to be. But I still maintain that children with the ability to understand abstract concepts and learn very quickly are not developed the way they should be. If a person learns twice as fast as the average student what is to be done? Unfortunately most of the money in schools go to struggling students at the expense of the smart ones. Is this wise?
A student that coasts through easy classes does not develop study habits that are necessary for advanced studies. Smart kids are actually at risk of losing interest and developing dependencies on drugs and alcohol. I speak from experience, so please don't doubt me on this.
IQ is a bell curve and the average is 100. A standard deviation is about 15 points and it takes two to be considered gifted in most states. That works out to be 130, which seems surprisingly low. I have read that ideally the IQ of a child does not exceed 145 or so, because after this it becomes difficult to relate to your peers and can cause social issues. In a lot of cases kids that exceed that threshold are thought to be autistic. To me this is a tragedy. These kids need a lot more attention and adult interaction and in a lot of cases don't get it.
This may a long response but at least now you know where I am coming from.
Clint
(edited for grammer)
An IQ above the mean is just as dysfunctional as the equivalent value below it.
I appreciate everything you said, Clint, and thank you for sharing it. There's much to reflect upon in this.
Cheers,
Paul
Thanks Paul. Luckily my son is doing very well, but it has really required a lot of thought and vigilence. I just really feel for the kids who aren't so fortunate.
Regards,
Clint
I was going to reply to Leanan's remarks about the anti-intellectualism as I've been noticing this trend for years and I am still puzzled. Maybe it's a blow-back against the scientist-priests of the nuclear and space race age? But your post on a more personal topic is closer to my experience. I was raised in a blue collar family and had to struggle with my parents and brothers only because I was "smart". It's only been recently in my later 40's where they have finally accepted that I might be on to something, and so they actually listen once in a while.
My father is quite bright but spent a career as a fireman where smarts are only a nail poking out of the board that must get hammered down. This comes from the long standing management culture where the boss has to appear smarter than the subordinates. This has been a constant source of frustration for me since there have been times where I can run figurative circles around my managers and they only feel threatened. That's too bad because my intent is to strengthen the team or collective output.
Maybe we come across some smarts honestly as my great-grand-father came to the U.S. and Canada with Marconi as his assistant for the first trans-Atlantic wireless communications. He also turned Marconi down for the N. American franchise because he didn't like a few of his colleagues. This leads into one of my pet peeves in this day and age, which I call "faux intelligence". Those that fancy themselves learned or intelligent because they've learned a few tricks or key words, but really only have window dressing on the edifice of the mind.
"Smart" gets quotes because I do a lot of stupid things. i.e. me and money, or maybe its just my detachment to the real living and spiritual value. But I genuinely appreciate the simple or elegant solution to a problem as much as a complex one. Whether farmer with hay bale wire, or engineer with second order differential, they are both good. (Of course, to truly appreciate innovative genius with duct tape, one must check out the Red Green Show).
I've had to reply on occasion when someone says, "You're making me look stupid.", with "No, you're doing quite well on your own."
Sorry Clint, long reply to an original long post.
No apologies necessary, I enjoyed reading your post. It's a pleasure to meet someone with a similar experience to mine, and it seems we're the same age too. I'm also glad that someone else is interested in the same questions that I have spent so much time researching. Forgive me if I ramble but I think I know a few things on this subject.
Managers have to deal with people and personalities, as well as knowing job functions. The qualities required for a good manager are sometimes in opposition to the qualities of a gifted individual. I know I have trouble with multi-tasking, but this is an essential skill for a manager. I become very focused on tasks and don't like to be distracted in the midst of figuring out a problem. Good managers also make quick decisions based on their experience and don't hesitate over lack of data or beat themselves up if they make a mistake. Self-confidence is another key requirement. Gifted people if not properly guided become painfully aware of shortcomings and this can affect their confidence.
A good leader also relates well to his followers. There is a saying that to be a good leader you must first be a good follower. I know there are a lot of smart people where I work that really prefer not to have to deal with too many people. One thing I have learned is that skill with people is considered more valuable than technical ability. It amazes that so many people who have so much intelligence have so little regard for others. To be egotistical and demean others for their shortcomings simply shows a lack of maturity and wisdom. And it only aggravates the stereotype that another poster mentioned.
An exploration of the roots of anti-intellectualism in America is something I would be interested in studying, but I can make some good guesses. A lot of it has to do with the things I mentioned above. American attitudes also value optimism and action, not pessimism and careful study. Throughout our history we have valued leaders, captains of industry, pioneers, financiers, ect... I was in Germany before they switched currencies and saw Karl Gauss on one of their bills. Some scientists can get respect here but just look at what is happening with climate change now. This is yet another example of anti-intellectualism; the scientific community has not been successful in convincing the general population. I saw a survey in the paper today that had the number of people who thought global warming was a serious problem at less than 10%!!
I am afraid this site has an uphill battle to convince people, but there are some very smart and motivated people here who understand the things I speak of. There is always hope for the future. Pessimism is in my nature and it may also be the same for anyone else who understands the scale of the problems we face. But we will get no followers with pessimism, especially here in America.
It isn't that our children are dumb. Its the teachers that are dumb.
They 'dumbdown' our children with their folly called 'teaching'.
My daughter is a teacher and has a degree in Instructional Technology. Yet I will state that my daughter is not very intelligent. She is book smart but that means very little. She is very crafty and knows how to play the system.
My son was educated to be dumb by his lower grade school teachers, the New Math and the Open Classroom concept whereby children spend the classroom time wandering around doing exactly as they please while the teacher does her nails.
I finally had to teach my son his arithmetic tables by flash cards.
Duhhhh 5 x 3 = ?
Now he is a CPA and has a Masters in Accountancy yet is pretty slow on
his feet still. I had to do his tax returns even while he was doing his upper grad work!!!
Then it all can't be blamed on the school system for the culture likes them dumb and therefore tries to make them dumb...dumb consumers.
I mean come on...kids who try to act like they are vampires? Really.
My granddaughter for instance at 14. Please.Enough with the black makeup already.
Airdale
The Vampire kids are just trying to fit into the role of Multinational Corps..
Sure, it's a little impressionistic, but nowhere near as dark.
There is this, which is similar.
I think it was actually part of a bigger story in that famous scientific journal - Readers Digest :)
But it may have been based on the article you linked to - thanks for posting that...
WNC wrote: "The amazing, shameful thing is that 90% couldn't."
And a third got only half or fewer right!
And yes, no real conceptual questions. Just facts.
No wonder half of the general public does not "believe" in AGW?CC.
Aren't a disturbingly large portion of the US pop unsure about whether the moon rotates around the earth or the earth around the moon?
No wonder half ... voted for Obama? Or is that somehow different? The above mention that a child should not have an IQ over 145, does the same thing hold true that a child should not have an IQ of less than 55? Is the liberal elite a black guy with his hat on sideways who can’t speak English but can apparently be a fire fighter? … you know the ones Cosby is trying to address. What about the intellectual who doesn’t know which is the working end of a screw driver? (I know one of those but he is a nice guy) Why did someone above edit for grammar?
It goes on and on with all sorts of prejudices whether one realizes it or not. And TOD is not immune. That's OK because this is better than most.
I believe part of the problem is "On the internet, no one knows you are a dog." Here you can call people "stupid" etc. and take your ego trip without a worry. Do you suppose this is part of the reason the politicians have no respect for the people outside their part of the country? Is the internet good or bad? Are people more honest on the internet?
Now that was a good scream.
The internet at one time was good.
That is over. Commercialism won the net. We lost.
There are a few good corners left. This is one. Most is utter worthless tripe and crime and of course hard core in your face porn. That's the biggest seller.
Todays Drudge Report had a extremely valuable photo of Obama man staring fixedly at a 16 year olds ass as she walked up the steps behind him. Surely the man realized that there were cameras on him? That was stupid. Even little GWB would not have been caught like that.
Was this not Italy? Paparazzi capital of the world?
The image is priceless.This will cost him some points dearly for sure. I understand he is now at -5....strongly approve minus strongly disapprove.
Airdale
Airdale
Please. Don't believe everything you read on Drudge. Obama was not checking out that girl's rear. It's clear from the video that he was not staring at anyone:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/31849470#31849470
Leanan,
I did not read anything on Drudge. I just looked at the photo which was at the top. I also did not watch a video.
I saw what everyone else saw who brought up Drudge to check for latebreaking news and caught the photo.
I took it for what it was worth.As I am sure all those who saw the same as I did came to the same conclusion.
Airdale
I doubt it.
I think most Americans these days distrust photos (and even video). You show someone a photo, and the first question is always, "Is it Photoshopped?" Even photos that are indubitably real get the Photoshop accusation. Nobody believes photos any more. And even video...since YouTube, everyone's gotten into video editing, and they understand how easy it is to create illusions.
You said that image was "valuable." I don't think so. I don't think anyone will even remember it in a month.
In any case, I would prefer if you not post this kind of thing here. Same goes for leftwing nuttery, like that theory that Palin's youngest child was really her daughter's. Leave it to political sites like DKos and Free Republic. Politics is not off-topic here, and you're certainly welcome to criticize Obama's policies. But TOD is not the place for unsupported partisan attacks.
I will quote a conservative columnist (Cal Thomas ?) who had the best description of Obama's persona I have yet read.
"He has the political intelligence of Bill Clinton and the steely self control of Vladamir Putin."
He will need every bit of both in the months and years to come.
Alan
Believe me, I did not intend any prejudice. I said that I read somewhere someone else expressed an opinion that ideally a child's IQ would be below 145. And the context this was said in was that a child with an IQ above that would require special attention to prevent problems from developing, just as in the case of a child with a low IQ requiring special attention. This is just being realistic.
The one size fits all system we have does a great disservice to those outside the norm. Other countries have systems where differences in ability are acknowledged and accomodated. Here it is simply unthinkable to separate children by ability and charges of elitism invariably surface when it is done.
Why do we require all children to learn algebra? Is this a necessary life skill? Is it going to make the child successful to set him up for failure if he has poor abstract reasoning skills? Perhaps he has other skills he is very good with. I have good abstract reasoning skills but am envious of people who have a great deal of confidence. In many cases they are more successful than I despite my IQ.
I think there is a difference between having a prejudice and being realistic about differences in ability.
To answer your question I edited for grammer because I am compulsive and hate to make mistakes. It is really not value-added in most cases but we all have our shortcomings.
I think the internet is a great tool for sharing ideas and opinions. I really enjoy getting other perspectives such as yours and learn what I can from them. I also just like to share what I have learned. I agree that calling someone else "stupid" is wrong. It is simply uncouth and unwise.
Kind regards,
Clint
"No wonder half ... voted for Obama?"
then the voters got a lot smarter in 8 short yrs.
Good point.
The larger applicability to politics is not the partisan, that can clearly be played either way. But that if people are ignorant (or willfully defiant) of the basics of science or even critical thinking, they can be easily swayed by lies, slogans and misrepresentations. Of course this has as much to do with basic intellectual honesty as anything else.
A more controversial point--when people are willing to believe lies about people being raised from the dead on the third day...they are more likely to believe lies about Iraq having something to do with 9/11...
Lynford wrote, "No wonder half ... voted for Obama? Or is that somehow different?"
Presumably this was intended as a rhetorical question, but I'll answer it anyway.
It is different than understanding of GW/CC because this requires some basic understanding of basic science, at least, whereas political decisions do not. Did this obvious distinction somehow escape you? Also, polls show that the more educated, and the more educated in the relevant sciences people are, the more they understand GW.
Your so correct WNC. My son taught science in Jr.High, from the late 70s to the late 80s and threw in the towel. Liquidated all his assets, bought his own sail boat, and has been cruising the South Pacific since.
We were discussing this just last year when he was back for a visit, and I mentioned, he would be even more frustrated today, than when he left, Why? He asked. I answered with one word "texting".
For most here, Television, would have been a good answer, for why most of the younger generations missed most, but today, it's "texting" That's all my neighbors kids do all day long and into the night. I asked his youngest girl, why she was so enthused with "texting", wouldn't it be just as easy to call her girlfriend on the phone and "talk", her answer was, "it's more fun" ????????????
Edited: Thanks to Websters New World Dictionary, for correcting the spelling errors.
Second editing: Looks like my Dictionary is out of date. It doesn't list the word "texting"
And not to forget the 'sexting' as well.
Airdale-hey Jody, check this shot!
Well, that was interesting, but I wonder if it was really a 'Science Test' or a Science-in-the-News Test. Got all 12.. and being one of the 10%, so that means I got 120%! WooHoo!
Would I know anything about Stem Cells if I had a Masters in Engineering or a Doctorate in Particle Physics, unless it were a detail that is currently part of the 'science buzz'? It really was somewhat about arcana, not that there's anything wrong with that.
I wasn't totally sure with the Antibiotics answer.. glad my life didn't depend on it.
It would be interesting to see a test that was also built around perception, testing and analysis, or of forming a hypothesis- instead of just reciting established truths.
It's a good thing for Speedy that there wasn't a question about how many Americans might be said to be Scientifically Literate, eh?
Bob
Leanan
Took the quiz. (Too elementary to accurately measure scientific knowledge)
I was however marked wrong on the following question:
3. Which of the following may cause a Tsunami?
I chose: An earthquake under the ocean.
Gee Whiz! I guess it's probably a warm ocean current or that school of fish.
Joe
With the same answer, I was marked right!
me too
That is the right answer. I chose it, and got marked correct.
You can get question by question results on your results page (see the menu at left).
My guess is you accidentally clicked the wrong answer.
You're probably right.
Interesting results from the Pew research was:
I've had personal experience with that fact. Had dinner with some friends and acquaintances the other night and when the topic got around to climate change there seemed to be an inverse correlation between knowledge and optimism. The less the person knew the higher their optimism. But I think I ruined the party when I (gasp!) mentioned that besides climate change there was that little issue about seven billion people (soon to be 9 billion) on a planet that might sustainably support 10% of those numbers. All of sudden there was this sense of the air being sucked out of the room.
Finally in retort somebody says: "Yeah but I think aliens will step in just in time." I immediately started laughing when I heard this. I thought it was a great joke told with impeccable timing but after a few moments I realized that they were serious...
Joe
People choose to not know.
I think it is a psychological defense mechanism..........ignorance is bliss.
Yeah, that's crazy. Everyone knows the Rapture will take place before then.
I got 12 correct too. I was worried about how difficult the questions might be before I clicked on the link, but it turned out they were ridiculously easy. Hard to believe so many people missed them.
I was hoping there would be at least one hard one, one that would make me think a little.
People just don't like to have the mood of the conversation ruined. It seems to me that only a small percentage of people can deal with these issues without becoming despondent. They just don't like to think about it. If you want to be popular you have to crack jokes and make people laugh.
I have learned that people will always blow off issues like this with cracks like "The world is going to end in 2012 anyway." And quote Nostradamus or some such nonsense. And these are engineers!
I said the other day at lunch, (and I didn't really start the conversation, but my views are well-known and it was started with someone trying to get a rise out of me regarding climate change), that my view is really more pessimistic because the world won't end but our problems will just get worse. And we will still be here trying to deal with them.
You really can't expect people to do anything other than to try and lighten things up or change the subject at that point. Changing a person's worldview is really not an easy thing to accomplish. Most people just want things to continue the way they are, despite how unlikely that is. I think progress is being made in small steps but it really takes a lot of patience. And you always want to reassure people that there are solutions, throwing up your hands and saying we're all doomed will get you marginalized very quickly.
Clint
Well, Dmitry Orlov presented this in The Slope of Dysfunction:
Tsunamis can be caused by sediment slides down the continental slope, too. There are cracks hundreds of kilometers long parallel to the edge of the continental shelf off the Carolina coast. If these gave way the resulting tsunamis would devastate the coasts of Africa & America. No earthquake need be involved.
Ya but that is not what caused the one in the Indian ocean a few years ago in late December. It was an earthquake off Indonesia and in the news 24/7 for days. That is the type of info this quiz was after, not science. It is almost like trivial pursuit.
Yep, the 2004 tsunami that killed ~230K people was triggered by an undersea earthquake, the second most powerful quake ever recorded. Ironically, the energy released by that quake was less than that released by a Soviet thermonuclear weapon detonated in 1961. In 1998, however, a tsunami caused by a sediment slump killed 2,200 people along the north shore of Papau New Guinea.
The important thing about that question wasn't what the correct answer was, it was that none of the others could even potentially cause a Tsunami.
Of the potential correct answers to that particular question it was also likely to be the best known due to recent news coverage.
Yeah, I found the questions really easy, however, I once roomed with a girl who asked me if ducks fly and didn't know who the VP of the US was at that time. I know that I am not smart enough to figure out what the fabric of the universe is made of -- pretty pathetic that just about everyone is more stupid and ignorant than me.
The question about Antibiotics is misleading - although I didnt "overthink" it and got it "correct".
Technically there are antibiotics that can kill Virus's although they are usually refered to as antivirals - they are still technically antibiotics. I think they were aiming for the laymans understanding.
Worse yet - the people taking the quiz are the web savvy who stumbled across it - not a nice random cross section of the community. My technically challenged mother for example is less likley to find this quiz than the proverbial room full of monkeys getting shakespear on a typewriter. Which means that the results of the quiz are generally from the more technically proficient end of the spectrum.
Idiocracy anyone?
The results are not from this Internet quiz. They are from a separate poll.
Do you think if we surveyed on the topic of Micheal Jackson that most TODers would score below average? I think I would.
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2009/06/30/michael-jack...
quintessential crotch grabber.
I certainly hope so. Kudos to Speaker Pelosi:
Pelosi says no to Jackson tribute
There was a plastic surgeon who was very respected. Very sharp.
One day he was called to the worst case he had ever seen.
A woman high on pot and cocaine had ridden a horse into a freight train that was traveling at 80 MPH.
The surgeon was sucessful and said this; "All I had to work with was the ass of the horse and some of the woman's hair to resurrect the face. I did a good job I think for now that woman is the Speaker of the US House of Representatives of.
A farmers joke.
Airdale
The difference is that absolutely nothing about Michael Jackson is of any importance whatsoever.
How do you define "life"? Are viruses "alive" or aren't they? If they aren't alive then antibiotics ("against life") or anything else can't "kill" them. Antiviral medications may keep viruses from replicating, is all.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Look up kill in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Kill might refer to:
Kill, to cause the death of an organism, or the act of doing so.
The verb form may also be a general-use metaphor, synonymous with "to terminate" or "to finish"
But viruses aren't organisms. They're macromolecular assemblages comprised of a nucleic acid (RNA or DNA) surrounded by a protein capsid. Whether they are "alive" or not depends on how you define "life." Most definitions involve a metabolic component. Viruses don't metabolize. A sealed jar full of viral particles may set on a shelf for years without doing anything, yet remain infective to a host cell. Even when undergoing replication in a host cell it's the cell that's metabolizing, not the viral components or completed viral assemblages. Antiviral medications don't "kill," as in "to terminate" or "to finish," the viral particle. All they do is interfere with viral replication. My point is that the question is bogus on the grounds that if a virus isn't alive then neither antivirals, antibiotics, or anything else, can kill them.
You don't seem to want to give it up, do you.
Absolutely; The congress "terminated" (killed) the program.
The patron "finished" (killed) the beer.
give it up; none of us here, are counting. -:)
About 25 (arghh) yrs ago in undergrad, I was trying to help a band major with addition and subtraction of fractions in what was labeled 'Math 001'. How TH he got out of an Iowa High school w/o that stunned me.
I have a better one.
A guy I flew with in the Navy had an Electrical Engineering degree from Temple(so he said anyway). He didn't even know Ohm's Law!!
I thought he was kidding but he wasn't.
Needless to say I lost any respect I might have had for Temple University.
Interesting that many wood cabinet shops in the US Midwest have switched to using metric (millimeters) for all their measurements.
Seems that all the new employees are incapable of adding and subtracting fractions and also reading fraction from a ruler accurately. Going to millimeters eliminated fractions and dramatically decreased losses from errors in measurement and adding and subtracting measurements.
Millimeters are fractions too: 1mm = 1/1000m. The metric system is good for a lot of reasons, including error reduction.
The best thing about the metric system is that is consistent with the base ten number system which makes perfect sense.
We should have completely adopted it back in the 70s-80s when there was a push on to do so.
My white ducks are too fat to fly. Wild mallards along the river fly. So do ducks fly or not?
As I walk our two dogs (German Shepherd rescues) through our otherwise serene - or is that obscene - piece of South Florida suburbia I often hear a faint rustle from behind, turn around, only to see a VERY LARGE Muscovy Duck in full flight coming at me (us) at about eye level.
Duck and cover. The dogs go nutz.
Pete
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscovy_duck
Muscovies are cool. They're the only domesticated duck not derived from the mallard. My ducks are white Pekins. I wouldn't mind getting a couple muscovies. Maybe next year...
I know, it's so depressing. The only thing worse is Krugman's mewling for more and more stimulus.
???????????
You fail, sorry :(
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/10/opinion/10krugman.html
It's depressing so few know anything about ... anything.
If it's about knowing what Krugman is writing in the NYT, I'm not worried about missing it.
I get hives looking at that paper.. I think it's haunted.
I'm an idiot. I only got 8 right.