Total Posts:100|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Study: Tea Party Smarter Than Liberals

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 4:17:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers."

http://www.politico.com...

All over on Facebook I see Liberals and Moderates scoff at Ted Cruz and call him an idiot and proclaim the Tea Party is ignorant.

I simply have to stand in utter astonishment when a pea brain keyboard warrior on CNNs FB page calls Ted Cruz a retard, a Princeton / Harvard Magna Cum Laude grad who studied economics in his teens and is a worldwide debate champion who was ranked the #1 college debater in the nation at age 23 who then became a Supreme Court litigator.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 4:21:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
>inb4 someone calls this retarded.

All I would like to know is how substantial the margins were and where and among whom the poll was conducted. If I polled the right people, I could make it look like people approved of Nickelback marrying Miley Cyrus more than they approved of congress, so the details of the study would be much appreciated.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 4:51:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 4:21:32 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
>inb4 someone calls this retarded.

All I would like to know is how substantial the margins were and where and among whom the poll was conducted. If I polled the right people, I could make it look like people approved of Nickelback marrying Miley Cyrus more than they approved of congress, so the details of the study would be much appreciated.

A Liberal Yale Professor conducted the study and was shocked and embarrassed at the results. Hardly a right-wing pollster. Politico is the one reporting this, not Fox News.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"2,000 American adults recruited for another study and found that, on average, people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative. However, those who identified as part of the tea party movement were actually better versed in science than those who didn"t, Kahan found"

How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 5:03:18 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM, imabench wrote:
"2,000 American adults recruited for another study and found that, on average, people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative. However, those who identified as part of the tea party movement were actually better versed in science than those who didn"t, Kahan found"

How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?

^That's why I question the margins. If they're only more literate by 0.1337%, then it's really not much of a poll.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 5:04:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM, imabench wrote:
How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?

Because if you're more educated you'll lean farther right. You're retarded with your idiotic assumption that the scale for intelligence involves conservative vs ultra conservative.

John McCain = Conservative = Not that smart

Ted Cruz = Ultra Conservative = Princeton Harvard Magna Cum Laude graduate Supreme Court litigator
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 5:14:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 5:04:41 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM, imabench wrote:
How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?

Because if you're more educated you'll lean farther right. You're retarded with your idiotic assumption that the scale for intelligence involves conservative vs ultra conservative.

John McCain = Conservative = Not that smart

Ted Cruz = Ultra Conservative = Princeton Harvard Magna Cum Laude graduate Supreme Court litigator

Ronald Reagan = Conservative = Smart

Joe Bieden = Liberal = Dumb

My Aunt from Kansas = Ultra Conservative = Joe Bieden's level or less.

We have proven
(loading...1%)
(loading...25%)
(loading...48%)
(loading...99%)
(loading...100%)

Jack sh!t.
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 5:23:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 4:17:24 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
"A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers."

http://www.politico.com...

All over on Facebook I see Liberals and Moderates scoff at Ted Cruz and call him an idiot and proclaim the Tea Party is ignorant.

I simply have to stand in utter astonishment when a pea brain keyboard warrior on CNNs FB page calls Ted Cruz a retard, a Princeton / Harvard Magna Cum Laude grad who studied economics in his teens and is a worldwide debate champion who was ranked the #1 college debater in the nation at age 23 who then became a Supreme Court litigator.

I have looked at the analysis, and it does not compare tea partiers directly with liberals at any point. You can say that tea party republicans are smarter than non tea partiers, and I can say left-leaning people are smarter than right-leaning people, and we would both be right. Of course, under your view, anyone who isn't as extreme as you is a left-wing nutjob, so I don't see how this'll make a difference...
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 5:37:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The original source never compared the scientific literacy of those who consider themselves part of the Tea Party against the scientific literacy of those who consider themselves liberals; the source explicitly compares the scientific literacy of Tea Party members against non-Tea Party members - including non-Tea Party conservatives - and previously the sources showed that liberals scored higher on scientific literacy than conservatives (including the Tea Party).

The correlation between scientific literacy and being a liberal or being a member of the Tea Party is trivially small. The correlation coefficient r varies between 1 and -1. When r = 0, the data is said to be uncorrelated. The r value found in the study was .05 for both (pretty uncorrelated) and the findings were more statistically significant showing that liberals were more scientifically literate than conservatives. But still trivially small.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 6:32:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
1) For those interested in the data - http://www.culturalcognition.net...

2) The tea party sample is done against non-tea party members. To be clear, that means that:

a) Liberals know more about science than conservatives
b) Self-labelled Tea party-ers know more about science than non-tea-party members.

This does not conclude:

c) Self-labelled Tea party-ers know more about science than liberals.

And this definitely does not conclude:

d) "Tea party smarter than liberals".

Moroever, there is criticism of the methodology, though I do not understand a lot of it (a professor is posting a higher-level paper using jargon that I won't pretend to understand) such as the heavy use of algebra and CRT. This leads us to doubt some veracity of the statement.

However, all that said, the article is definitely interesting, and does lead to good foundations to possibly showing that tea party members are smarter than most give credit. Perhaps additional studies done based on the preliminary findings here, with different testing methods (to avoid testing biases) and larger samples. Good find, but with many things is taken a bit further than can be done.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 6:37:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 5:37:33 PM, Enji wrote:
The original source never compared the scientific literacy of those who consider themselves part of the Tea Party against the scientific literacy of those who consider themselves liberals; the source explicitly compares the scientific literacy of Tea Party members against non-Tea Party members - including non-Tea Party conservatives - and previously the sources showed that liberals scored higher on scientific literacy than conservatives (including the Tea Party).

The correlation between scientific literacy and being a liberal or being a member of the Tea Party is trivially small. The correlation coefficient r varies between 1 and -1. When r = 0, the data is said to be uncorrelated. The r value found in the study was .05 for both (pretty uncorrelated) and the findings were more statistically significant showing that liberals were more scientifically literate than conservatives. But still trivially small.

Didn't notice the r values, good spot. Though note the conservative/liberal r value is exactly the same: this implies that all sides are basically the same on the issue.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 7:31:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 6:32:05 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
1) For those interested in the data - http://www.culturalcognition.net...

2) The tea party sample is done against non-tea party members. To be clear, that means that:

a) Liberals know more about science than conservatives
b) Self-labelled Tea party-ers know more about science than non-tea-party members.

This does not conclude:

c) Self-labelled Tea party-ers know more about science than liberals.

And this definitely does not conclude:

d) "Tea party smarter than liberals".

Moroever, there is criticism of the methodology, though I do not understand a lot of it (a professor is posting a higher-level paper using jargon that I won't pretend to understand) such as the heavy use of algebra and CRT. This leads us to doubt some veracity of the statement.

However, all that said, the article is definitely interesting, and does lead to good foundations to possibly showing that tea party members are smarter than most give credit. Perhaps additional studies done based on the preliminary findings here, with different testing methods (to avoid testing biases) and larger samples. Good find, but with many things is taken a bit further than can be done.

Agree, and will point out that the title of this thread is highly misleading and inaccurate. I've most certainly heard the claim repeatedly that the Tea Party mainly consists of highly educated, very religious, and rather prosperous elements of the GOP as well as independent voters. I would say that they're a grassroots libertarian movement.
http://www.cbsnews.com...

Considering that the Tea Party does take rather specific positions mainly dealing with the specifics of the budget, I would hope they have an ability to discern which parts of the budget are undesirable, i.e. higher education.

Regardless, I would say though that the Tea Party doesn't seem to display political tact, and that perhaps they can work a bit on their political acumen. Either that or expand their political base.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 8:29:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 6:32:05 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
1) For those interested in the data - http://www.culturalcognition.net...

And I was right. Those percentages aren't even close to substantial.
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/17/2013 9:52:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 5:04:41 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM, imabench wrote:
How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?

Because if you're more educated you'll lean farther right.

Um, no. If you're more educated you'll usually lean in a more free-thinking, skeptical, independent-minded, and especially anti-authoritarian manner. I'd be very surprised if it went much further than that. Actually, I have seen that the more educated you are, the more you'll consider themes of social/communal solidarity/cohesion (at least consider, not necessarily subscribe to, but any moderately intelligent person who confronts this theme will admit that it has to be taken into account to some extent - "no man is an island, entire of itself" as the famous poem goes).

I'll be honest and admit my general unfamiliarity with the political spectrum outside America - I know Roy is especially knowledgeable on this - but it seems that in this country, the further right you go, the more you prioritize the "family unit" in particular and the more you view other people solely as means to the ends of your individual goals. I think this is primitive at best, sociopathic at worst, and I associate it with much less education especially in terms of biology/evolution and most of the humanities like history, literature, philosophy, etc.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 5:41:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 8:29:11 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 10/17/2013 6:32:05 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
1) For those interested in the data - http://www.culturalcognition.net...

And I was right. Those percentages aren't even close to substantial.

Congratulations: your ego is so large that you managed to ignore the fact that people have came to that conclusion both without reading what you put, as well as before you put anything.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 5:42:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 7:31:41 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Considering that the Tea Party does take rather specific positions mainly dealing with the specifics of the budget, I would hope they have an ability to discern which parts of the budget are undesirable, i.e. higher education.

What do you mean by this part?
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 10:59:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 5:42:29 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 10/17/2013 7:31:41 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
Considering that the Tea Party does take rather specific positions mainly dealing with the specifics of the budget, I would hope they have an ability to discern which parts of the budget are undesirable, i.e. higher education.

What do you mean by this part?

I'm just contrasting what I hope will come out of the Tea Party, with what I fear may come out of it.

Basically, given what I see as their detailed objections to certain aspects of the federal budget, such attention to detail would be a sign of a good education, or so I would hope.

If, however, people with such detailed objections are not highly educated, then their detailed objections, if ever turned into actionable policy, would do the US more harm than good. That would be my fear.

Hopefully this is a bit clearer than what I said originally.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
MassiveDump
Posts: 3,423
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 11:15:01 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 5:41:58 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:29:11 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 10/17/2013 6:32:05 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
1) For those interested in the data - http://www.culturalcognition.net...

And I was right. Those percentages aren't even close to substantial.

Congratulations: your ego is so large that you managed to ignore the fact that people have came to that conclusion both without reading what you put, as well as before you put anything.

Well, that was a bit unprofessional of a tone, wasn't it.

I was questioning the margins back in post number two, if your highnesses memory goes back that far.

So lol inb4u.
TheAntidoter
Posts: 4,323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 11:30:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 11:15:01 AM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 10/18/2013 5:41:58 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 10/17/2013 8:29:11 PM, MassiveDump wrote:
At 10/17/2013 6:32:05 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
1) For those interested in the data - http://www.culturalcognition.net...

And I was right. Those percentages aren't even close to substantial.

Congratulations: your ego is so large that you managed to ignore the fact that people have came to that conclusion both without reading what you put, as well as before you put anything.

Well, that was a bit unprofessional of a tone, wasn't it.

I was questioning the margins back in post number two, if your highnesses memory goes back that far.

So lol inb4u.

He's just saying that the conclusion that you came to before you posted the second time was obvious based on past criticisms such as your own.

So you were in the right that you did question the margin, but not posting the second post before you did gave him doubt about how fast it took you to reach the conclusion.

(I do not speak for any party involved)
Affinity: Fire
Class: Human
Abilities: ????

Nac.

WOAH, COLORED FONT!
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 4:31:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 5:04:41 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM, imabench wrote:
How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?

Because if you're more educated you'll lean farther right. You're retarded with your idiotic assumption that the scale for intelligence involves conservative vs ultra conservative.

Reminds me of that article my sociology teacher had me read recently, of how a Polish dude tortured and ultimately murdered his wife's son trying to control the competition he saw living with other men as. Reminds me of that dude who entered a playground in Ireland recently and stabbed a little boy in the chest before making after a little girl who luckily got away, of that dude who was also suspected of having murdered a grandmother, of that dude who was trying to control what he saw the world as.

Seriously guys, this whole controlling dealie is f*cking stupid as f*ck................... more educated = more scared. I remember the time I was thought to check for signs of a stroke in CPR training; spent the next 5 months looking in the mirror to see if I was having a stroke every time I got too stoned lol

This doesn't relate to intelligence, just madness.
LayTheologian
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 12:10:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 4:17:24 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
"A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers."

http://www.politico.com...

All over on Facebook I see Liberals and Moderates scoff at Ted Cruz and call him an idiot and proclaim the Tea Party is ignorant.

I simply have to stand in utter astonishment when a pea brain keyboard warrior on CNNs FB page calls Ted Cruz a retard, a Princeton / Harvard Magna Cum Laude grad who studied economics in his teens and is a worldwide debate champion who was ranked the #1 college debater in the nation at age 23 who then became a Supreme Court litigator.

When you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. In this case, shutting down the government and nearly causing a global recession is the stupid game and facing accusations of foolishness is the prize.

While I don't necessarily believe Ted Cruz is a moron, I think it's far more charitable to ascribe his actions to stupidity or ignorance than to malice. However, if I were to decide which I thought was more likely, I would say that it is highly likely that his actions are a result of destructive or malicious intent (that is, he feels he can gain more from causing problems than from allowing things to proceed smoothly) than from stupidity. I would say that it is far more likely that he just pretends to be as stupid as he seems so he doesn't face accusations of deliberately destroying the economy.

That said, I also regard with skepticism the use of academic achievements within the soft sciences or the arts to support one's claims. He's clearly intelligent, but that doesn't necessarily mean his actions in this situation are anything approaching correct: he could be acting from a radically different set of values (valuing, for instance, the preservation of wealth for the wealthy over equitable treatment) or he could be attempting to make claims on subjects of which he has no knowledge (a J.D., for instance, confers no understanding of economics or moral philosophy).
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 12:38:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
There are so many things about this study, the OP and the general discussion that follows which causes me to literally lol.
Tsar of DDO
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 2:11:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/20/2013 12:10:04 AM, LayTheologian wrote:
When you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. In this case, shutting down the government and nearly causing a global recession is the stupid game and facing accusations of foolishness is the prize.

While I don't necessarily believe Ted Cruz is a moron, I think it's far more charitable to ascribe his actions to stupidity or ignorance than to malice. However, if I were to decide which I thought was more likely, I would say that it is highly likely that his actions are a result of destructive or malicious intent (that is, he feels he can gain more from causing problems than from allowing things to proceed smoothly) than from stupidity. I would say that it is far more likely that he just pretends to be as stupid as he seems so he doesn't face accusations of deliberately destroying the economy.

That said, I also regard with skepticism the use of academic achievements within the soft sciences or the arts to support one's claims. He's clearly intelligent, but that doesn't necessarily mean his actions in this situation are anything approaching correct: he could be acting from a radically different set of values (valuing, for instance, the preservation of wealth for the wealthy over equitable treatment) or he could be attempting to make claims on subjects of which he has no knowledge (a J.D., for instance, confers no understanding of economics or moral philosophy).

Ted Cruz temporarily slimmed down the government 15%, tried to decrease spending from a government that's $90 trillion in unfunded liabilities and $17 trillion in debt, he's trying to stop the government takeover of individual healthcare premiums, stop people from losing doctors, being pushed into part time work, and skyrocketed premiums due to Obamacare.

How evil! Wrong. And let's be clear, Ted Cruz urged the House to fund the entire Federal government except Obamacare. He shutdown Obamacare, Democrats shutdown the government. The Dems tactic of forcing a "clean CR" was a dirty, malicious tactic to get everything they want with no compromise. Ted Cruz is trying to save America and stop big tyrannical government. And you say that's evil!

You are a retarded Redcoat who hates freedom!
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
SweetTea
Posts: 22
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 8:23:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
So, the Tea Party "knows" more Science. Yet, they all "use" religion to get elected. And every national ticket with a Tea Party candidate fails. Hmmm. If they were so smart, wouldn't they have solved that problem by now?
slo1
Posts: 4,342
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 9:48:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/17/2013 4:17:24 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
"A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers."

http://www.politico.com...

All over on Facebook I see Liberals and Moderates scoff at Ted Cruz and call him an idiot and proclaim the Tea Party is ignorant.

I simply have to stand in utter astonishment when a pea brain keyboard warrior on CNNs FB page calls Ted Cruz a retard, a Princeton / Harvard Magna Cum Laude grad who studied economics in his teens and is a worldwide debate champion who was ranked the #1 college debater in the nation at age 23 who then became a Supreme Court litigator.

I don't care how intelligent Ted Cruz is, but when one believes that our foreign policy towards Israel should be be formulated and maintained via a dictate in the bible versus the constitution of the united states then "yous be dumb."

The tea party is now officially smarter than me, but it does not change the fact that wrong is wrong.

PS. Thank goodness he did not get Sara Palin in the 2000 sample size. It would have broken his computer when he ran the data.
Beverlee
Posts: 721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 10:49:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
This doesn't say that Tea Party people are smarter, it says that they tend to have a better understanding of basic science education.

The first line of the article says, "A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers."

Plus, then he goes on to say that other studies have shown "that on average, people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative."

Damn, dude. There is some heavy irony here... cuz you said that liberals were not as smart as conservatives, but you didn't read the article you used to prove it...
LayTheologian
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 11:10:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/21/2013 2:11:08 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/20/2013 12:10:04 AM, LayTheologian wrote:
When you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. In this case, shutting down the government and nearly causing a global recession is the stupid game and facing accusations of foolishness is the prize.

While I don't necessarily believe Ted Cruz is a moron, I think it's far more charitable to ascribe his actions to stupidity or ignorance than to malice. However, if I were to decide which I thought was more likely, I would say that it is highly likely that his actions are a result of destructive or malicious intent (that is, he feels he can gain more from causing problems than from allowing things to proceed smoothly) than from stupidity. I would say that it is far more likely that he just pretends to be as stupid as he seems so he doesn't face accusations of deliberately destroying the economy.

That said, I also regard with skepticism the use of academic achievements within the soft sciences or the arts to support one's claims. He's clearly intelligent, but that doesn't necessarily mean his actions in this situation are anything approaching correct: he could be acting from a radically different set of values (valuing, for instance, the preservation of wealth for the wealthy over equitable treatment) or he could be attempting to make claims on subjects of which he has no knowledge (a J.D., for instance, confers no understanding of economics or moral philosophy).

Ted Cruz temporarily slimmed down the government 15%, tried to decrease spending from a government that's $90 trillion in unfunded liabilities and $17 trillion in debt, he's trying to stop the government takeover of individual healthcare premiums, stop people from losing doctors, being pushed into part time work, and skyrocketed premiums due to Obamacare.

How evil! Wrong. And let's be clear, Ted Cruz urged the House to fund the entire Federal government except Obamacare. He shutdown Obamacare, Democrats shutdown the government. The Dems tactic of forcing a "clean CR" was a dirty, malicious tactic to get everything they want with no compromise. Ted Cruz is trying to save America and stop big tyrannical government. And you say that's evil!

You are a retarded Redcoat who hates freedom!

Item one: the Affordable Care Act is the law. There is a right way to get rid of laws and a wrong way. The right way requires a majority and presidential signature, just as both of those are required to institute a law in the first place. Once a law passes, it should be subject to repeal by the majority, not to those who attempt to do an end run around the established process by refusing to fund the government.

Item two: the examples of European countries show us that austerity is not the answer to rising debt.

Item three: I don't know if you're aware of this, but refusing to raise the debt ceiling causes a default. A default by the US would almost certainly plunge the global economy into another recession.
LayTheologian
Posts: 17
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 11:14:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 4:31:10 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/17/2013 5:04:41 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM, imabench wrote:
How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?

Because if you're more educated you'll lean farther right. You're retarded with your idiotic assumption that the scale for intelligence involves conservative vs ultra conservative.

Reminds me of that article my sociology teacher had me read recently, of how a Polish dude tortured and ultimately murdered his wife's son trying to control the competition he saw living with other men as. Reminds me of that dude who entered a playground in Ireland recently and stabbed a little boy in the chest before making after a little girl who luckily got away, of that dude who was also suspected of having murdered a grandmother, of that dude who was trying to control what he saw the world as.

Seriously guys, this whole controlling dealie is f*cking stupid as f*ck................... more educated = more scared. I remember the time I was thought to check for signs of a stroke in CPR training; spent the next 5 months looking in the mirror to see if I was having a stroke every time I got too stoned lol

This doesn't relate to intelligence, just madness.

The plural of "anecdote" is not "fact."
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 11:26:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/21/2013 11:14:29 AM, LayTheologian wrote:
At 10/18/2013 4:31:10 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 10/17/2013 5:04:41 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/17/2013 4:56:50 PM, imabench wrote:
How in the hell is it possible for liberals to be more scientific literate then conservatives, but still be less scientifically literate then ultra conservatives?

Because if you're more educated you'll lean farther right. You're retarded with your idiotic assumption that the scale for intelligence involves conservative vs ultra conservative.

Reminds me of that article my sociology teacher had me read recently, of how a Polish dude tortured and ultimately murdered his wife's son trying to control the competition he saw living with other men as. Reminds me of that dude who entered a playground in Ireland recently and stabbed a little boy in the chest before making after a little girl who luckily got away, of that dude who was also suspected of having murdered a grandmother, of that dude who was trying to control what he saw the world as.

Seriously guys, this whole controlling dealie is f*cking stupid as f*ck................... more educated = more scared. I remember the time I was thought to check for signs of a stroke in CPR training; spent the next 5 months looking in the mirror to see if I was having a stroke every time I got too stoned lol

This doesn't relate to intelligence, just madness.

The plural of "anecdote" is not "fact."

This stuff is all hugely obvious. What do you want me to do? Traumatise numerous people with experiments to prove it? This is the same stuff as those who've been abused then turning to abuse. There's huge evidence of this happening, but correlation you say? It's subjective? Shut the f*ck up dude