taks

i pointed out potential logical and/or unscientific flaws with the original poll data and was promptly told to shut up. eldar, if you haven't noticed, those in favor of the ideas behind this thread are not looking for debate... they merely want others that believe as they do to point out how smart they all are. ironic, oddly, that the discussion revolves around being smarter, yet at the same time, unwilling to listen to criticism. kinda violates the most holy of scientific concepts: the scientific method. very ironic. taks

i saw that... the numbers thing they used to do way back when... had something to do with caesar, i believe (er, one of the caesers i think). taks

i'm now like everyone else... i have sou, too... awwwww. i feel so... included. mark

it's fully 3-D... you just can't control your character along the z-axis. he does move along the z-axis, however... taks

einstein speaking, eh? it's generally considered rude, btw, to do a line item dissection of somebody's post. it makes it hard to follow. so what was that about intelligence? taks

you just gotta sling some insults, don't you? can't live without them... go back and read my posts. i said, specifically, that polls like these are typically agenda driven. somebody has a point to prove, and it's usually obvious what that point is. show me the actual questions used in these polls, for the entire poll, and i may reevaluate. you stated the polls first. why don't you show me these polls are statistically significant or YOU shut up. you just don't get science, do you? people like you are the reason polls are worthless, yes, in general this time. taks

that doesn't make their agenda any less apparent. studies show what they want, tendency, trend, fact... i bet i could poll 100 scientists and 90% would agree that polls are worthless. oh, and yes, i have personal access to many more than 100 scientists... taks

funny, but did i say they definitively were or did i say probably? pay attention. like i said, it's easy to pick out agenda driven polls. if you'd like me to provide a list of religious references that have 180 or so IQs i can. many more conservatives in the engineering ranks than just about any other professional career. taks

they used to be... back in the 70s and early 80s. ability to learn is actually what it is designed to measure. however, even that is only valid within a certain context. people learn different things different ways. IQ tests typically look at analytical skills, particularly pattern recognition. taks

actually, they show biases. to begin with, the "results" of such polls rarely state the exact question asked. it is very easy to write a question in such a way to get the answer you want in the first place. next, taking a poll on one campus at a liberal college will certainly skew results. i could run a poll at a private catholic school and you'd see vastly different results. agenda driven ideologues (right or left) cast data in a manner consistent with their ideology, with or without intent. you have to turn on your skew filter when reading any poll. taks

smarter words are not often typed. taks

they're all probably bogus, too. these are studies that are normally run by people with agendas. probably done by the same kind of folks that do studies pointing out that all the republican presidents have very low IQs compared to democrats. they want to prove something. lacking in ethics is an understatement. in the engineering world, where some of the smartest individuals you'd ever care to meet exist, the populace is mixed in terms of beliefs. most (75% or so) actually fall into the middle somewhere believing in god but not necessarily religion (there is a difference). given that 95% of the world population believes in a higher power, it's pretty easy to see the problem with such "studies." i am an atheist in case you were wondering. taks

andybody that reads a book then sees the movie will probably like the former over the latter. the same goes if you see the movie first then read the book. unfortunately, i read, and loved, all of the books in HGttG. well, mostly harmless was mostly boring, but still had it's moments that made it a good overall read. the problem with this story is the pure idiocy of everything. it's like a british version of the simpsons meets south park meets family guy. everything we would consider normal is turned on its head and it's all happening at the same time. if you ask me, that makes comparisons between books and movie rather weak... at least in terms of raw content. it's just not possible to capture that essence in a 2 hour movie. i hope i will enjoy the movie, though i probably won't be able to see it till it hits pay per view. however, my expectations are not high. taks

electrical engineer. systems and signal processing, actually. i focus on new business capture (a sort of business development role). taks

an even greater thing is that it doesn't work. i get to sit back and laugh while proponents are continually made to look like fools. the concept of socialism is only in its second century and yet it has more failures than capitalism ever will. every social program in the world is failing. i love it when history proves such things right over and over and over and over... uh, boy you missed out on this argument. the primary reason private schools do well is profit. duh. this is as simple as it gets. those schools that are efficient and hence profitable, will succeed. that's the beauty. they only need to worry about making money and the rest takes care of itself, as has been proven over and over and over and over... i don't know how many times private schools have to outdo public shools before people get they message that they really are better. and it drags down anybody that is even remotely better than the bottom. oh, and btw, the private schools don't have to turn down lower skilled children to look better. they provide a better education, period, which is why they do better. some are selective, but only some. opportunity. not a meal ticket. socialism isn't inefficient because of people, btw. do some research, socialism is inefficient because it does not have a price adjustment mechanism (which capitalism does). no matter how good some school administrator is, he cannot judge the true worth of the service he provides. only the market can do that. taks

did you miss the part about they provide a better education for LESS MONEY! so tell me, if they spend less per student, why are they able to pay their teachers better? you just made the argument for capitalism and didn't even know it. not unusual, however. you're not serious, are you? this is one of the most ridiculous things to come out of you yet. btw, i wasn't an immigrant, nor "stupid white trash" (notice only those that don't have an argument seem to use inflammatory language) yet i managed well enough and i'm now working on a phd. hmmm... i suppose that's why they do better on standardized tests, particularly college entrance exams? exactly where did you uncover this ridiculous evidence? coincidentally, this is something you actually refuted in #2 above... you know the whole "better teachers" bit? taks

hehe, the socialist bashing the largest social expriment in history! public schools suffer from the granddaddy of all problems: a lack of competition. they are inefficient. public schools will always lag behind (on average) their private counterparts and will always cost more money to run. there are exceptions, of course, as the so-called magnet schools often do well. but they only take the brightest kids in the first place, which skews the results significantly (the upper 10% can probably learn by themselves and do just as well). the problem is not money, it's socialism. it is inherently inefficient. why do private schools produce a better quality education at a lower cost per student (half as much, in some cases even less)? competition of the marketplace. well, that's not really the point of school. it's not the minutia (sp?) they're trying to get across. the point of schooling is to teach critical thinking skills. to provide the tools necessary to survive in life. you've only forgotten 95% of the stuff you don't need anyway. that said, even these skills are not being taught in schools these days. on a related side note, i plan to home-school my son. he's 2 years old and can already read numbers, count to 40 and knows his ABCs. he'll be reading by the time he's 3. public and private schools will simply get in his way. one other issue with the state mandated youth camps is that they only move as quickly as the slowest member in the class. the rest end up bored and hate the experience. taks

if it is incorrect, it could have negative implications. might get folks boiling frogs to find out. ick. taks

i call shenanigans! useless information still needs to be true, just not worth much taks

exactly how am i trolling, mkreku? note, btw, that i did not resort to calling you names, either. something you carelessly do on a regular basis. so much for your self-righteousness. also, all i did was point out the problem with using such ads as the basis for a line of thought. the ad didn't show anything at all... the fact that you conveniently mentioned it was an ad was irrelevant. critical thinking skills are lacking in the world, and such stray statements (the urban legends) are clearly evidence of that fact. the point is that you saw and ad and thought it was true. that's not useless information, it's flat out wrong. useless does not mean incorrect. that's my bit of useless information. taks

you're joking, right, mkreku? that was your evidence? sorry pal, but they likely weren't even heating the container the second time. they were just trying to make a point using a silly urban legend. taks

and liberals don't? boy aren't you self righteous! way to go for hypocrisy. again. taks

assuming it ain't at a buck an hour, 1.50 w/OT! taks

i read the letter, btw, from the wife of an EA employee... whine. it seemed to me that everybody working there knew what to expect before taking the job. she was just pissed because it turned out to be true. "oh no, you actually have to work to earn your pay?!!!" guess what, it's not unusual to have to actually work for a living. i do. good luck, oerwinde... so has there been any verdict yet? taks

oh, gold and platinum are very different.... gold NWN = NWN plus current patches up to time of release plus SoU. platinum NWN = NWN plus current patches up to time of release plus SoU plus HotU. taks