So you admit that the entire group are paid shills but you still copied and pasted their talking points.
97% of climate scientist believe that global warming is happening and is man made, why would I bother looking at points made by a group with economic interest opposing the clear majority of specialist? If a doctor and a second opinion both said surgery is necessary would you be saying that you didn't need it because Bubba across the street said it wasn't necessary?
Young earth, no evolution, no climate change. Evidence and the scientific method is completely discounted. I can't think of how you could more more actively anti-science. Well I suppose Copernicus comes to mind but still.
And what really pisses me off is that these are the same people who complain about the U.S. science scores compared to other countries.
You don't have a position. You are the student who is asked, what is 2+2 and you answer that is probably a number. Technically correct but meaningless. So go you, take both sides and claim victory. There either is a god or isn't. Wow.
You certainly never address my concerns and philosophy as an atheist but seem to have no problem speaking for me. I came to become an atheist because of the problem of evil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil. If somehow there is a god, despite the complete lack of evidence, it is a prat and not worth my time.
25K is a bit low in MI but not by much for a first year teacher.
Mean or Median for teacher salaries? You should know that mean is easily skewed higher. Anyhow, I see absolutely no contradiction. Think about starting salary verse the maximum contract rate 15 years in. The mode salary for an NFL player is $285,000. The median salary is 770,000. The mean salary is 1,400,000. Math is good, you should use it.
PLEASE calculate our salary hourly. As I'm staying up grading tonight and writing tests over the weekend and grade finals over Thanksgiving I'll keep that in mind. There is no way we are payed in the top 75% of the country if you calculate our actual hours instead of your perceived hours; but we are educated higher than 90% of the country.
I worked a half dozen years in the private sector before becoming a teacher. I work a hell of a lot harder now. And I use to have to work on New Years Day (Year End) etc. while working insurance. Still not close, teachers work harder.
Now make sure that the flunkie is working 60 hours a week during the 9 months on and paying thousands of dollars a year during the 3 months off for mandatory continuing education. Bit of a time killer there too. How many of those flunkies have a Masters?
Most of the high schoolers I teach need a strong adult in the room. My district has a much higher failure rate when high schoolers try NovaNet or PLATO.
That crazy teacher pay. I took a 15000 pay cut to be a teacher and the hours are equivalent once you factor in summers. During the school year I work well over 40 hours a week.
Unions are not the problem. Continuing Education in Michigan, a strong union state, is very stringent. I'm finishing up my Master's Degree right now and it isn't because this is a good time for me right now. After I earned the mandated 18 hours towards the Masters, it is hard not to finish. And the pay is a livable wage but certainly not extravagant. Moreover, try teaching the lazy child of a School Board Member and then tell me unions aren't a good idea.
Glad you have all of one data point to make your point. Core subject too.
Seems like Slashdot posts every education story at 9:00 AM when teachers are busy working. Wouldn't want any teachers to weigh in would we?
Khan Academy as a substituted for me? I wanted to post on the last story about Khan because it is ridiculously bad, but again, 500 posts and the discussion started at 9:00 AM. Anyhow, the world might "be flat" but pushing all k12 online or with computer courses will be an unmitigated disaster. I'm not worried about it.
I'm actually partial to Alice 3d from Carnegie Mellon. http://www.alice.org/ The original creator also did "The Last Lecture." YouTube it, pretty powerful.
I have a feeling we agree much more than we disagree. I consider mathematics and logic the underpinnings of computer science. And while there is a great deal of overlap between math and science, I consider math outside the sciences. It might just be my take on the lack of "scientific method" or that math tends to be more "pure."
So anyhow, I quibble, but I've always thought of the hard sciences: Biology, Physics, Chemistry, etc. The soft sciences: Psychology, Sociology, etc. And then you have math and formal logic living outside the sciences but clearly supporting them.
Computer science and engineering are not science. Your ramblings about biology are incoherent. And then you just discount the take on physics.
Remember, Congress has the power of the purse. How do you think funding of the National Science Foundation will work with nuts like this on the Science Committee?
Slashdot Mirror
Now remember the part where 97% of climate scientist said that they believe Hypothesis 1 and that the evidence exists for Hypothesis 1.
I know it is crazy. They keep bringing out data and publishing models and everything.
So you admit that the entire group are paid shills but you still copied and pasted their talking points.
97% of climate scientist believe that global warming is happening and is man made, why would I bother looking at points made by a group with economic interest opposing the clear majority of specialist? If a doctor and a second opinion both said surgery is necessary would you be saying that you didn't need it because Bubba across the street said it wasn't necessary?
It might surprise you to learn that The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is not actually democratic or a republic.
You do realize that "The Friends of Science" are not scientist. Actually they are political activist (shills) being paid by oil companies.
Go buy some coastal property somewhere. Just make sure you sign a waiver forfeiting governmental help a couple of decades from now.
I'm going with actively anti-science.
Young earth, no evolution, no climate change. Evidence and the scientific method is completely discounted. I can't think of how you could more more actively anti-science. Well I suppose Copernicus comes to mind but still.
And what really pisses me off is that these are the same people who complain about the U.S. science scores compared to other countries.
Yes, scientific grants clearly dwarf the money the oil companies have.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/49399132@N00/6941179877/
See if you can follow along.
You don't have a position. You are the student who is asked, what is 2+2 and you answer that is probably a number. Technically correct but meaningless. So go you, take both sides and claim victory. There either is a god or isn't. Wow.
You certainly never address my concerns and philosophy as an atheist but seem to have no problem speaking for me. I came to become an atheist because of the problem of evil http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil. If somehow there is a god, despite the complete lack of evidence, it is a prat and not worth my time.
Atheist have killed more than all religions combined? Eh what? Citation is certainly needed here.
Every contract that I've looked at has a different class size limit for gym and music.
Teacher salaries aren't stagnant. Everyone in my district took a 10% pay cut.
25K is a bit low in MI but not by much for a first year teacher.
Mean or Median for teacher salaries? You should know that mean is easily skewed higher. Anyhow, I see absolutely no contradiction. Think about starting salary verse the maximum contract rate 15 years in. The mode salary for an NFL player is $285,000. The median salary is 770,000. The mean salary is 1,400,000. Math is good, you should use it.
PLEASE calculate our salary hourly. As I'm staying up grading tonight and writing tests over the weekend and grade finals over Thanksgiving I'll keep that in mind. There is no way we are payed in the top 75% of the country if you calculate our actual hours instead of your perceived hours; but we are educated higher than 90% of the country.
I worked a half dozen years in the private sector before becoming a teacher. I work a hell of a lot harder now. And I use to have to work on New Years Day (Year End) etc. while working insurance. Still not close, teachers work harder.
Now make sure that the flunkie is working 60 hours a week during the 9 months on and paying thousands of dollars a year during the 3 months off for mandatory continuing education. Bit of a time killer there too. How many of those flunkies have a Masters?
Most of the high schoolers I teach need a strong adult in the room. My district has a much higher failure rate when high schoolers try NovaNet or PLATO.
Not a problem. Khan is not a great website.
That crazy teacher pay. I took a 15000 pay cut to be a teacher and the hours are equivalent once you factor in summers. During the school year I work well over 40 hours a week.
Unions are not the problem. Continuing Education in Michigan, a strong union state, is very stringent. I'm finishing up my Master's Degree right now and it isn't because this is a good time for me right now. After I earned the mandated 18 hours towards the Masters, it is hard not to finish. And the pay is a livable wage but certainly not extravagant. Moreover, try teaching the lazy child of a School Board Member and then tell me unions aren't a good idea.
Glad you have all of one data point to make your point. Core subject too.
Seems like Slashdot posts every education story at 9:00 AM when teachers are busy working. Wouldn't want any teachers to weigh in would we?
Khan Academy as a substituted for me? I wanted to post on the last story about Khan because it is ridiculously bad, but again, 500 posts and the discussion started at 9:00 AM. Anyhow, the world might "be flat" but pushing all k12 online or with computer courses will be an unmitigated disaster. I'm not worried about it.
I'm actually partial to Alice 3d from Carnegie Mellon.
http://www.alice.org/
The original creator also did "The Last Lecture." YouTube it, pretty powerful.
I have a feeling we agree much more than we disagree. I consider mathematics and logic the underpinnings of computer science. And while there is a great deal of overlap between math and science, I consider math outside the sciences. It might just be my take on the lack of "scientific method" or that math tends to be more "pure."
So anyhow, I quibble, but I've always thought of the hard sciences: Biology, Physics, Chemistry, etc.
The soft sciences: Psychology, Sociology, etc.
And then you have math and formal logic living outside the sciences but clearly supporting them.
No he doesn't get the economies of scale. He was taught at home.
Citation?
And absolutely no confounding variables at all here.
Computer science and engineering are not science. Your ramblings about biology are incoherent. And then you just discount the take on physics.
Remember, Congress has the power of the purse. How do you think funding of the National Science Foundation will work with nuts like this on the Science Committee?