I remember hearing in a developmental psych class that only 5-10% of the 'standard' gender differences have any biological basis; and the NY Times article on this topic quotes a woman who was angry because, if I remember right, the entire morning of the symposium had been spent dispelling those same myths.
Then I say you were severely misled by the lecturer who said it, since the differences between male and female brains are very large and are not compatible with the idea of environmental or societal pressures.
If the entire morning of the symposium had been spent dispelling myths, then it should have gone for the "Blank Slate" myth first of all. As for the commments of Nancy Hopkins, they were simply sexist, offensive and unscientific.
- Majority of slashdot readers agree with prominent advertising on Slashdot: Switching from Microsoft to Linux is much more expensive than upgrade"
- Climate modelers come clean and admit their models "can't see shit into the future"
- Shock survey shows slashdotters "getting it" on a regular basis.
- Novell release software properly tested and with all features implemented.
- Iraq turns into haven of peace and democratic tranquility thanks to Bush/Blair intervention.
- Israel ditto.
- Randi $1 million prize won by Sylvia Browne after successfully demonstrating power to talk to dead people.
...begins by people who have no idea what they're talking about.
Hurricanes are a natural part of the weather system, folks. The only unnatural thing about the path of Hurricane Frances is the large number of mobile homes, wooden framed building, expensive condos and idiots who refuse to evacuate from all of the above.
The number of Atlantic hurricanes has DECLINED over the last 50 years. Put that in your climate model and smoke it.
And for those fascinated by climate models, here's a kicker from the IPCC 2001:
"In sum, a strategy must recognize what is possible. In climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear system, and therefore that the prediction of a specific future climate is not possible."
I shall use my patented slashdot idiot model to predict that the next few posters will claim that:
- the majority of scientists believe human induced global warming to be a fact (not true, and since when has science ever been decided by popular vote?)
- that "ScienceThinker" is not a scientist (guess what?)
- that there are "ominous signs" of climate change (when weren't there?)
- that the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is unprecedented (no it isn't)...and so on.
Slashdot Mirror
- Majority of slashdot readers agree with prominent advertising on Slashdot: Switching from Microsoft to Linux is much more expensive than upgrade"
- Climate modelers come clean and admit their models "can't see shit into the future"
- Shock survey shows slashdotters "getting it" on a regular basis.
- Novell release software properly tested and with all features implemented.
- Iraq turns into haven of peace and democratic tranquility thanks to Bush/Blair intervention.
- Israel ditto.
- Randi $1 million prize won by Sylvia Browne after successfully demonstrating power to talk to dead people.
...another Linux distribution. Ye gods, how many are there?
How does anything get PULLED by a headwind? Simple physics question, that's all.
...begins by people who have no idea what they're talking about.
...and so on.
Hurricanes are a natural part of the weather system, folks. The only unnatural thing about the path of Hurricane Frances is the large number of mobile homes, wooden framed building, expensive condos and idiots who refuse to evacuate from all of the above.
The number of Atlantic hurricanes has DECLINED over the last 50 years. Put that in your climate model and smoke it.
And for those fascinated by climate models, here's a kicker from the IPCC 2001:
"In sum, a strategy must recognize what is possible. In climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear system, and therefore that the prediction of a specific future climate is not possible."
I shall use my patented slashdot idiot model to predict that the next few posters will claim that:
- the majority of scientists believe human induced global warming to be a fact (not true, and since when has science ever been decided by popular vote?)
- that "ScienceThinker" is not a scientist (guess what?)
- that there are "ominous signs" of climate change (when weren't there?)
- that the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is unprecedented (no it isn't)
GO!