Smart Universities....dumb population - Page 2 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 12:20 PM
~BANNED~
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 41,649
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Yea, I know what you mean. Video killed the radio star.
Shane is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 01:36 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,495
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane
Last time I checked I believe only 25% of the USA populace has a 4 year degree. Only around 10% of those have a masters, doctorate, or advanced degree. That leaves a vast naive majority for the too smart by half republicans to easily manipulate and strike fear into.
From my experience the USA does have a very well educated populace when compared to most LARGE/DIVERSE first world countries. Maybe even the best in the world when taken into this significant context. The American populace now suffers from a lack of social and political learning due in no small fact that they have not in the recent history needed such education.
Everyone else is a simpleton who needs liberal guidance.

That is why it takes a whole "village" to work like troglydites and pay taxes to support the ruling elite liberals.

It must be so hard to be surrounded by so many that are so beneath you.

Last edited by DaveN007; 02-01-2007 at 01:52 PM.
DaveN007 is offline  
post #13 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 07:01 PM
~BANNED~
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 41,649
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
^Don't be so hard on yourself.^
Shane is offline  
post #14 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 07:26 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Corkscrew's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2005
Vehicle: 2009 BMW Z4, 2005 SLK 200, 2004 S 280
Location: Bangkok,Thailand
Posts: 1,950
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadBenz94
Um where is your source for that crap??
BELIEFS OF THE U.S. PUBLIC ABOUT EVOLUTION

2009 BMW Z4, 2014 MB 300S BLUETEC HYBRID, 2005 MB SLK 200
Corkscrew is offline  
post #15 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 07:40 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Corkscrew's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2005
Vehicle: 2009 BMW Z4, 2005 SLK 200, 2004 S 280
Location: Bangkok,Thailand
Posts: 1,950
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadBenz94
Um where is your source for that crap??
Political science professor George Bishop of the University of Cincinnati published a paper in 1998-AUG listing and interpreting 1997 poll data. "Bishop notes that these figures have remained remarkably stable over time. These questions were first asked about 15 years ago, and the percentages in each category are almost identical. Moreover, the profiles of each group has been constant. Just as when these questions were first asked 15 years ago, creationists continue to be older, less educated, Southern, politically conservative, and biblically literal (among other things). Women and African-Americans were more likely to be creationists than whites and men. Meanwhile, younger, better educated, mainline Protestants and Catholics were more likely to land in the middle as theistic evolutionists." 1

With the elderly representing a gradually increasing part of the U.S. population, one would expect that the creationist view would receive increasing support. In fact, there appears to be a gradual erosion of support for the creationist view. It is barely statistically significant. The sample size is about 1,000 so the sampling error is within +/- 3.2%, 19 times out of 20. It will take a decade or two to determine if a significant shift has really happened.

By any measure, the United States remains a highly religious nation, compared to other developed countries. And its citizens tend to hold more conservative beliefs. For example, the percentage of adults who believe that "the Bible is the actual word of God and it is to be taken literally, word for word" is 5 times higher in the U.S. than in Britain. Church attendance is about 4 times higher in the U.S. than it is in Britain. 1 Similarly, according to one opinion poll, belief that "Human beings developed from earlier species of animals..." is much smaller in the United States (35%) than in other countries (as high as 82%).

2009 BMW Z4, 2014 MB 300S BLUETEC HYBRID, 2005 MB SLK 200
Corkscrew is offline  
post #16 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 07:56 PM
Surely A Large Human
 
Qubes's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jun 2006
Vehicle: '08 C219
Location: Between Earth and Mars
Posts: 34,252
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corkscrew
Political science professor George Bishop of the University of Cincinnati published a paper in 1998-AUG listing and interpreting 1997 poll data. "Bishop notes that these figures have remained remarkably stable over time. These questions were first asked about 15 years ago, and the percentages in each category are almost identical. Moreover, the profiles of each group has been constant. Just as when these questions were first asked 15 years ago, creationists continue to be older, less educated, Southern, politically conservative, and biblically literal (among other things). Women and African-Americans were more likely to be creationists than whites and men. Meanwhile, younger, better educated, mainline Protestants and Catholics were more likely to land in the middle as theistic evolutionists." 1

With the elderly representing a gradually increasing part of the U.S. population, one would expect that the creationist view would receive increasing support. In fact, there appears to be a gradual erosion of support for the creationist view. It is barely statistically significant. The sample size is about 1,000 so the sampling error is within +/- 3.2%, 19 times out of 20. It will take a decade or two to determine if a significant shift has really happened.

By any measure, the United States remains a highly religious nation, compared to other developed countries. And its citizens tend to hold more conservative beliefs. For example, the percentage of adults who believe that "the Bible is the actual word of God and it is to be taken literally, word for word" is 5 times higher in the U.S. than in Britain. Church attendance is about 4 times higher in the U.S. than it is in Britain. 1 Similarly, according to one opinion poll, belief that "Human beings developed from earlier species of animals..." is much smaller in the United States (35%) than in other countries (as high as 82%).
The only thing more foolish than a pollster is the fool who believes him.

Qubes is offline  
post #17 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 08:05 PM
~BANNED~
 
deathrattle's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2005
Vehicle: 1992 W126 300 SE
Location: Head in the clouds
Posts: 11,045
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
^^^^^^

"The only thing more foolish than a pollster is the fool who believes him."

Why?
deathrattle is offline  
post #18 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 08:23 PM
Surely A Large Human
 
Qubes's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jun 2006
Vehicle: '08 C219
Location: Between Earth and Mars
Posts: 34,252
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by deathrattle
^^^^^^

"The only thing more foolish than a pollster is the fool who believes him."

Why?
Because only in the rarest of circumstances can any of the following questions be answered favorably (meaning they don't stand up to intellectual scrutiny).

Public Agenda: About Polling

And secondly, because even the most complete, diverse, well thought out and considered polls reflect matters of opinion.

Take for example the way in which questions are phrased - this is information you rarely see in stupid ass polls like the ones mentioned here. How would you answer the following question.

"Do you believe that God or some other entity was responsible in some way for the existence of mankind, the earth, space, and so forth?"

versus

"Do you fully understand Darwin's theory of evolution and believe it to be the complete explanation for man's presence on earth?"

How would you answer those questions, if you didn't know what I was getting after?


Also, who you ask has a lot to do with the outcomes. Demographic information is pretty easy to come by. You can pick out neighborhoods that are likely to be religious/agnostic just by knowing whether or not residents of that area have graduated college/make decent money. If you poll nothing but college graduates under 30 in rich suburbs of San Francisco, you're probably going to get results skewed toward Darwinism. Make those same calls in Okmulgee, and they're going to be skewed toward Creationism.


So the integrity of the poll - who they asked, and how they asked the questions - is always of dubious status. If you believe they ask only average Joe's the questions straight-up, then the results seem plausible. This is so rarely the case, that virtually any poll could be taken that proves or disproves any given point of view.

Given these facts, using poll results to bolster ones case is akin to bringing a lawsuit on behalf of a scarecrow.

Foolish.
Qubes is offline  
post #19 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 08:37 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
Corkscrew's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2005
Vehicle: 2009 BMW Z4, 2005 SLK 200, 2004 S 280
Location: Bangkok,Thailand
Posts: 1,950
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBNCGAR
Because only in the rarest of circumstances can any of the following questions be answered favorably (meaning they don't stand up to intellectual scrutiny).

Public Agenda: About Polling

And secondly, because even the most complete, diverse, well thought out and considered polls reflect matters of opinion.

Take for example the way in which questions are phrased - this is information you rarely see in stupid ass polls like the ones mentioned here. How would you answer the following question.

"Do you believe that God or some other entity was responsible in some way for the existence of mankind, the earth, space, and so forth?"

versus

"Do you fully understand Darwin's theory of evolution and believe it to be the complete explanation for man's presence on earth?"

How would you answer those questions, if you didn't know what I was getting after?


Also, who you ask has a lot to do with the outcomes. Demographic information is pretty easy to come by. You can pick out neighborhoods that are likely to be religious/agnostic just by knowing whether or not residents of that area have graduated college/make decent money. If you poll nothing but college graduates under 30 in rich suburbs of San Francisco, you're probably going to get results skewed toward Darwinism. Make those same calls in Okmulgee, and they're going to be skewed toward Creationism.


So the integrity of the poll - who they asked, and how they asked the questions - is always of dubious status. If you believe they ask only average Joe's the questions straight-up, then the results seem plausible. This is so rarely the case, that virtually any poll could be taken that proves or disproves any given point of view.

Given these facts, using poll results to bolster ones case is akin to bringing a lawsuit on behalf of a scarecrow.

Foolish.
According to Newsweek in 1987, "By one count there are some 700 scientists with respectable academic credentials (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) who give credence to creation-science..." That would make the support for creation science among those branches of science who deal with the earth and its life forms at about 0.14% 5 However, the American public thinks very differently.

The Gallup Organizations periodically asks the American public about their beliefs on evolution and creation. They have conducted a poll of U.S. adults in 1982, 1991, 1993 and 1997. By keeping their wording identical, each year's results are comparable to the others.


Newsweek and Gallup

2009 BMW Z4, 2014 MB 300S BLUETEC HYBRID, 2005 MB SLK 200
Corkscrew is offline  
post #20 of 49 (permalink) Old 02-01-2007, 08:59 PM
~BANNED~
 
deathrattle's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2005
Vehicle: 1992 W126 300 SE
Location: Head in the clouds
Posts: 11,045
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBNCGAR
Because only in the rarest of circumstances can any of the following questions be answered favorably (meaning they don't stand up to intellectual scrutiny).

Public Agenda: About Polling

And secondly, because even the most complete, diverse, well thought out and considered polls reflect matters of opinion.

Take for example the way in which questions are phrased - this is information you rarely see in stupid ass polls like the ones mentioned here. How would you answer the following question.

"Do you believe that God or some other entity was responsible in some way for the existence of mankind, the earth, space, and so forth?"

versus

"Do you fully understand Darwin's theory of evolution and believe it to be the complete explanation for man's presence on earth?"

How would you answer those questions, if you didn't know what I was getting after?


Also, who you ask has a lot to do with the outcomes. Demographic information is pretty easy to come by. You can pick out neighborhoods that are likely to be religious/agnostic just by knowing whether or not residents of that area have graduated college/make decent money. If you poll nothing but college graduates under 30 in rich suburbs of San Francisco, you're probably going to get results skewed toward Darwinism. Make those same calls in Okmulgee, and they're going to be skewed toward Creationism.


So the integrity of the poll - who they asked, and how they asked the questions - is always of dubious status. If you believe they ask only average Joe's the questions straight-up, then the results seem plausible. This is so rarely the case, that virtually any poll could be taken that proves or disproves any given point of view.

Given these facts, using poll results to bolster ones case is akin to bringing a lawsuit on behalf of a scarecrow.

Foolish.
The link you posted stresses the difference between scientific and unscientific polls and upholds Gallup for being conducted properly. The questions asked are quoted and the margin of error calculated. I really don't understand your point, or for that matter why you are so fired up on this issue?
And for your specimen questions, I would answer an unequivocal 'no' and 'yes'-what is the problem there?

Last edited by deathrattle; 02-01-2007 at 09:01 PM.
deathrattle is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Global population estimated to have topped 6.5 bil.: U.S. census body+ firstmb Off-Topic 2 05-14-2011 12:01 AM
    U.S. Universities Brainwashing Foreign Students Alfa Off-Topic 29 09-20-2005 10:12 AM
    Will reducing the Interstate speed limit to 65 help reduce population? tiggerfink Off-Topic 23 03-17-2005 11:05 PM
    I SHALL DEFEND THE RIGHT OF DUMB-BELLS TO BE DUMB UNTIL MY DYING DAY. Arizona Charlie C208/A208 CLK-Class 2 07-10-2002 11:56 AM
    I SHALL DEFEND THE RIGHT OF DUMB-BELLS TO BE DUMB UNTIL MY DYING DAY. Arizona Charlie R170 SLK-Class 37 06-28-2002 11:54 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome