As a former teacher, I have to say that was the biggest steaming pile I've ever seen. The assumptions that idiot makes must have resulted in one of the worst run, least effective classrooms in history.
I taught. I taught students how to think. So every time I see some asshole like you making blanket assertions like you did, it makes me glad I got out.
I was a good teacher, and jackasses who think they know WTF is going on like you ran me off with attitudes exactly like yours. So the next time you bemoan the state of education, remember the shit you've spewed and that you bear some responsibility yourself.
'The teachers are using the same boring techniques that didn't work when I was in school and are boring the crap out of my second grader. He's already turned off by learning every monday through friday and I have to reinvigorate him on the weekend with at-home projects."
I have to wonder how much of your son's attitude is a result of your influence.
Having taught evolution in my science classroom less than 2 years ago, with not a single comment, letter, or intervention of any kind, I can say with 100% certainty that you are talking out of your ass.
"It's not exactly PC to point it out but the average person from South Eastern country like Vietnam is light years ahead intellectually compared to the average Pakistani. Or for that matter the average American or English person."
I think that comment reflects your own education (or lack of) more than reality.
"Back in the day when only one parent worked out of the home, the other parent generally spent an equal amount of hours working in the home. (Cooking, cleaning, etc...) They had no, or very little, time for 'quality time'."
But that comment is just silly.
There is nothing about cooking, cleaning, housework in general that excludes it from ALSO being quality time.
Your assertion that it was one or the other shows that you really have no clue what you're talking about.
You don't think learning to bake with mom was quality time for little Susie?
I see the issue, you think I give two fucks what you can tell. Let me let you in on something, what you "can tell" is not absolutely reflective of reality.
"If you're gonna post something which generalizes to all Muslims..."
Didn't do that. See, again, it's YOUR lack of comprehension that's the problem.
"So, if you ultimately had a point, it wasn't articulated to anyone but yourself."
Check the responses again chief, you'll notice that's wrong.
Now, to cut to the chase, let's lay some reality in you.
When was the last time you considered the possibility that you're mentally deficient? In the future when you don't understand someone's point, stop assuming you're smart enough to do so. Your posting history makes it clear such an assumption is not a good idea.
Do you know what off topic means you fucking retard?
I swear to go sometimes you idiots make me wonder how you type with only a brain stem.
No, we know what happened, I refuted you after one of your idiotic posts, and like the child you are, you used your mod points to retaliate you fucking coward.
"Wait for a trend. That's what the scientists try to explain to you with the "somewhat". It is a hint,hint not to overplay one data point."
Well they're crappy scientists, or at least crappy presenters then.
I don't want my scientists making ambiguous statements like "somewhat" and hinting at things, if they need to say "this is only one data point, do not read too much into it" why don't they say that?
Nothing is gained by the ambiguous presentation made in this case.
"Yes, what an amazing coincidence that we started dumping massive amounts of CFCs into the atmosphere at the same time that the Earth suddenly started needing CFCs to maintain its present state."
OOH A STRAW MAN!!! Love those, fun to read, useless in debates.
The point, which you intentionally avoided, is that there are ALWAYS unintended consequences, and a rush to action, even if seemingly for good reasons, can result in disaster.
"You're asking us to gamble, and bet Earth. The prize: deodorant and a fridge."
1. No we're not, we're asking "you" to avoid jumping to conclusions and acting in ways that are unpredictable and may actually make the situation worse not better. You have no way to predict the long term outcome of said actions, so engaging in them is dangerous and irresponsible.
2. The new refrigerants are less effective and use more energy than the older ones. You have traded one problem for another.
Lastly, I think it would be far more embarrassing to overstate the seriousness of a situation, only to have the actions that result from said overstatement be the eventual cause of disaster.
"What's truly sad is when it's considered "embarrasing" to be overprotective of the only Earth we have when it comes to extremely complex environment analysis, and when it's somehow wrong to err on the safe side."
What's really sad is turning "jumping to conclusions" into "erring on the safe side". What happens if the actions that you deem "overprotective" are actually detrimental in the long run?
There's no way you or anyone else can know that, so claiming it's "erring on the safe side" is completely disingenuous.
"You are a moron, unfit to live, and the error of your birth should be corrected through blunt force trauma."
No, what I am is an individual who trolled you successfully and got you to dance like my private ballerina.
For someone who claims such intelligence, you sure as hell didn't use it when replying to me or you'd realize that a) I don't care what you think and b) I was being intentionally contrary for the purpose of my own amusement.
I used you. I used you to make the last few minutes of my day go by a little aster, and I enjoyed it, and you played your part perfectly, oblivious the whole time.
This is where a man would say "GG sir, GG, you got me."
"Whatever you were trying to communicate, you failed, and for any reasonable interpretation of what you actually said, you were wrong and stupid."
I see, YOUR inability to read for comprehension makes ME stupid. That would be funny if it didn't illustrate exactly how pathetic you are.
"Sorry for "assuming" you have the basic language skills necessary to put your thoughts to paper. "
No, no you were right for assuming that, what you shouldn't have assumed was that your education was sufficient to understand me. I'll gladly accept your apology for your ignorance in advance.
"Actually, I had a rather easy time of it. Try Wikipedia: Abortion related violence [wikipedia.org] "
No, you didn't, you posted yet another abortion bombing rant that is both off topic and irrelevant.
Try reading the comments that proceed you in the future, you'll avoid being wrong again.
And just because I want to, you're listing shit that is over ten years old. Why? Because that's all you have. How much money would you like to wager that I can find more examples of muslim violence last year than you can find examples of abortion clinic bombings in the US in the last ten years?
I never claimed you did, and based on that, I'm beginning to wonder if you might benefit from some basic reading comprehension classes.
"Can you find me instances of people being burned in those countries because of a scientific claim?"
Yeah, easily. It took less than a minute, but why would I? You lied about what I said so why would I treat you any better than a troll who deserves my contempt?
If you wanted backup, you should have avoided lying and asked for it.
"How is "While the muslims do the same but actually set you on fire. In the street. Right now." supposed to be interpreted?"
Exactly how it's written, that being " a consequence of misbehavior in a muslim regime is death by an unpleasant method". If you're not sure, stop fucking assuming and ask like you did.
"Was he supposed to interpret that as 2 or 3 muslims every other year?"
Why would he attribute ANY NUMBER AT ALL? I didn't make any claims on that, so why even bring it up other than to troll? Exactly.
"Any reasonable person would read that assume..."
No guy, any reasonable person wouldn't assume a fucking thing because reasonable people don't make such assumptions, they seek clarification.
Which explains why you assumed what you did quite effectively.
Slashdot Mirror
I read your link.
As a former teacher, I have to say that was the biggest steaming pile I've ever seen. The assumptions that idiot makes must have resulted in one of the worst run, least effective classrooms in history.
I taught. I taught students how to think. So every time I see some asshole like you making blanket assertions like you did, it makes me glad I got out.
I was a good teacher, and jackasses who think they know WTF is going on like you ran me off with attitudes exactly like yours. So the next time you bemoan the state of education, remember the shit you've spewed and that you bear some responsibility yourself.
'The teachers are using the same boring techniques that didn't work when I was in school and are boring the crap out of my second grader. He's already turned off by learning every monday through friday and I have to reinvigorate him on the weekend with at-home projects."
I have to wonder how much of your son's attitude is a result of your influence.
A continuous reinforcement schedule is less effective than other kinds, such as a variable reinforcement schedule.
There's nothing about continually reinforcing behavior that can't be mitigated, as long as the teacher involved understands how to do it.
"Can't teach evolution; churches might write angry letters! "
Having taught evolution in my science classroom less than 2 years ago, with not a single comment, letter, or intervention of any kind, I can say with 100% certainty that you are talking out of your ass.
That goes for your entire post.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/EDUCATION/11/26/education.rankings.reut/index.html
Vietnam is nowhere to be found.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e75e94c0-5df7-11db-82d4-0000779e2340.html
Vietnam is significantly behind the US in every metric listed.
http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsider/snapshot/sf011210.htm
Again, Vietnam is nowhere to be found.
"It's not exactly PC to point it out but the average person from South Eastern country like Vietnam is light years ahead intellectually compared to the average Pakistani. Or for that matter the average American or English person."
I think that comment reflects your own education (or lack of) more than reality.
"Back in the day when only one parent worked out of the home, the other parent generally spent an equal amount of hours working in the home. (Cooking, cleaning, etc...) They had no, or very little, time for 'quality time'."
But that comment is just silly.
There is nothing about cooking, cleaning, housework in general that excludes it from ALSO being quality time.
Your assertion that it was one or the other shows that you really have no clue what you're talking about.
You don't think learning to bake with mom was quality time for little Susie?
"Well, from what I can tell..."
I see the issue, you think I give two fucks what you can tell. Let me let you in on something, what you "can tell" is not absolutely reflective of reality.
"If you're gonna post something which generalizes to all Muslims..."
Didn't do that. See, again, it's YOUR lack of comprehension that's the problem.
"So, if you ultimately had a point, it wasn't articulated to anyone but yourself."
Check the responses again chief, you'll notice that's wrong.
Now, to cut to the chase, let's lay some reality in you.
When was the last time you considered the possibility that you're mentally deficient? In the future when you don't understand someone's point, stop assuming you're smart enough to do so. Your posting history makes it clear such an assumption is not a good idea.
Cheers
"What, you think it wasn't obvious you were trolling from the get-go? "
It wasn't, and your posts prove you're a liar in pretending it was. Nice try liar.
"Further hilarious implication: It crossed your mind that I might care what you think, or that I wasn't being intentionally antagonistic."
No, it didn't, and my posts prove that too liar.
I'm not even a little surprised by your response little guy.
I owned you and you hate it.
But I owned you all the same, and your attempt to pretend otherwise made my day with it's transparency.
See ya little fela, look forward to makig you my bitch again.
"But of course I absolutely meant everything I said about you being a moron."
You meant everything else too, but now to save what little dignity you have left, you have to lie and pretend otherwise.
But we both know the truth, and you can't do a fucking thing about it.
You lose.
You the one who modded me off topic.
Do you know what off topic means you fucking retard?
I swear to go sometimes you idiots make me wonder how you type with only a brain stem.
No, we know what happened, I refuted you after one of your idiotic posts, and like the child you are, you used your mod points to retaliate you fucking coward.
"Wait for a trend. That's what the scientists try to explain to you with the "somewhat". It is a hint,hint not to overplay one data point."
Well they're crappy scientists, or at least crappy presenters then.
I don't want my scientists making ambiguous statements like "somewhat" and hinting at things, if they need to say "this is only one data point, do not read too much into it" why don't they say that?
Nothing is gained by the ambiguous presentation made in this case.
"Yes, what an amazing coincidence that we started dumping massive amounts of CFCs into the atmosphere at the same time that the Earth suddenly started needing CFCs to maintain its present state."
OOH A STRAW MAN!!! Love those, fun to read, useless in debates.
The point, which you intentionally avoided, is that there are ALWAYS unintended consequences, and a rush to action, even if seemingly for good reasons, can result in disaster.
Like this one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_snail
or this one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_hyacinth
or this one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbits_in_australia
How many times do you have to see it happen?
"You're asking us to gamble, and bet Earth. The prize: deodorant and a fridge."
1. No we're not, we're asking "you" to avoid jumping to conclusions and acting in ways that are unpredictable and may actually make the situation worse not better. You have no way to predict the long term outcome of said actions, so engaging in them is dangerous and irresponsible.
2. The new refrigerants are less effective and use more energy than the older ones. You have traded one problem for another.
Lastly, I think it would be far more embarrassing to overstate the seriousness of a situation, only to have the actions that result from said overstatement be the eventual cause of disaster.
"What's truly sad is when it's considered "embarrasing" to be overprotective of the only Earth we have when it comes to extremely complex environment analysis, and when it's somehow wrong to err on the safe side."
What's really sad is turning "jumping to conclusions" into "erring on the safe side". What happens if the actions that you deem "overprotective" are actually detrimental in the long run?
There's no way you or anyone else can know that, so claiming it's "erring on the safe side" is completely disingenuous.
"Talk to any person who got FIOS in Florida and you'll see they cut the cable."
I live in Florida and no they didn't.
"You are a moron, unfit to live, and the error of your birth should be corrected through blunt force trauma."
No, what I am is an individual who trolled you successfully and got you to dance like my private ballerina.
For someone who claims such intelligence, you sure as hell didn't use it when replying to me or you'd realize that a) I don't care what you think and b) I was being intentionally contrary for the purpose of my own amusement.
I used you. I used you to make the last few minutes of my day go by a little aster, and I enjoyed it, and you played your part perfectly, oblivious the whole time.
This is where a man would say "GG sir, GG, you got me."
Let's see what you do.
"No reason to avoid abortion clinic bombings."
Look up "state sponsored" and get back to me when you realize how moronic that attempt of yours was.
"Whatever you were trying to communicate, you failed, and for any reasonable interpretation of what you actually said, you were wrong and stupid."
I see, YOUR inability to read for comprehension makes ME stupid. That would be funny if it didn't illustrate exactly how pathetic you are.
"Sorry for "assuming" you have the basic language skills necessary to put your thoughts to paper. "
No, no you were right for assuming that, what you shouldn't have assumed was that your education was sufficient to understand me. I'll gladly accept your apology for your ignorance in advance.
"Give up dude, you're arguing with a moron."
I must have missed the thread where he argues with you.
"Which is how it was interpreted, as a statement of factual cause and effect"
Your interpretation was wrong.
How hard is it for you to understand that? Is thinking so difficult for you?
Perhaps you can get smarter and return to the conversation in the future.
"You are correct, I see..."
FYP. Next time just say it instead of hiding behind baseless insults.
"But, I seriously doubt that all Muslims would light you on fire."
And since I never argued that point, you can take your straw man somewhere else.
"No, but I can cite examples of violent extremism in the USA."
And that sir, is the point. In the US, it's violent extremism. In many muslim countries, it's state policy.
This point seems to be incredibly difficult for some to grasp.
"Actually, I had a rather easy time of it. Try Wikipedia: Abortion related violence [wikipedia.org] "
No, you didn't, you posted yet another abortion bombing rant that is both off topic and irrelevant.
Try reading the comments that proceed you in the future, you'll avoid being wrong again.
And just because I want to, you're listing shit that is over ten years old. Why? Because that's all you have. How much money would you like to wager that I can find more examples of muslim violence last year than you can find examples of abortion clinic bombings in the US in the last ten years?
Right, thanks.
"It's just necessary to establish an environment where science, and *funding of science* are first tested to be religiously acceptable."
And private funding makes this essentially impossible in a free country.
Nice try though.
"I denied no such thing."
I never claimed you did, and based on that, I'm beginning to wonder if you might benefit from some basic reading comprehension classes.
"Can you find me instances of people being burned in those countries because of a scientific claim?"
Yeah, easily. It took less than a minute, but why would I? You lied about what I said so why would I treat you any better than a troll who deserves my contempt?
If you wanted backup, you should have avoided lying and asked for it.
"How is "While the muslims do the same but actually set you on fire. In the street. Right now." supposed to be interpreted?"
Exactly how it's written, that being " a consequence of misbehavior in a muslim regime is death by an unpleasant method". If you're not sure, stop fucking assuming and ask like you did.
"Was he supposed to interpret that as 2 or 3 muslims every other year?"
Why would he attribute ANY NUMBER AT ALL? I didn't make any claims on that, so why even bring it up other than to troll? Exactly.
"Any reasonable person would read that assume..."
No guy, any reasonable person wouldn't assume a fucking thing because reasonable people don't make such assumptions, they seek clarification.
Which explains why you assumed what you did quite effectively.