Comment Re:Furthe proof that men and women think different (Score 1) 634
I wad implying that he was basing his opinion on feeling rather than a rational, evidence backed argument, thereby giving an excellent demonstration of an irrational man.
I wad implying that he was basing his opinion on feeling rather than a rational, evidence backed argument, thereby giving an excellent demonstration of an irrational man.
Ah pedantry. So fun. I believe most people prioritize emotions, which means I must therefore believe most women prioritize emotions being a proper subset and all. If you think men are more rational than women than I put it to you that you don't know many men or women.
Regarding lead in the water, you don't know the half of it. People harp on all the wrong contaminants. It's like this bullshut about vaccines and autism. Two (!) cases involving autism and vaccines have gone to court, and in both cases, the "victim" had some preexisting condition. The fact is, the really horrible American diet, with excessive sugar and pesticides and all kids of other crap, has far more impact on developing autism symptoms.
The original theory was that by putting fluoride into drinking water, it'll get into developing teeth, which are chemically altered to be harder. Then they figured out that that doesn't happen; it just reacts directly with teeth in the mouth. But we have fluoride toothpaste that does just as well and doesn't get swallowed quite as much. Then there's the issue of toxicity, which apparently is essentially nil except for people with thyroid problems, where the fluorine can displace iodine.
The conspiracy theorists actually play on the thyroid thing. The idea is that fluoride induces hypothyroidism, which slows people down and makes them more docile, and a docile populace is what governments want, because they rock the boat less. But I think this is a case of opportunism, kinda like how creationists will accept scientific theories whenever they appear to support their delusions. The theory that it was a communist plot predates any hypotheses about thyroid effects. I don't think there's any evidence that fluoride will *induce* thyroid problems.
Pehaps you have trouble with Context. Is there some rule that I am only allowed to address specific issues from this article in question?
No, you have trouble with context. You posted a bunch of random crap unrelated to the article (according to you) and magically expected me to deduce from the context that it wasn't about the article in question but was instead an off topic rant.
We have been inundated with articles about how STEM (of which engineering is included in as a career) workers are indeed pigs,
No we haven't.
First off, let us speak of reframing as referenced. How is that not changing the overall scope of the work.
It's changing the motivation for the work, not necessarily the work itself.
Because science is about the truth,
This article is about engineering, not science. Engineering is about building stuff. Or is this one of the times I'm meant to deduce from context that you've wandered off topic?
And seriously, if the entire basic nature of STEM has to be radically changed in order to suit a particular group
If *invalid-premise* then *conclusions-void*.
Now stop being an asshat.
Nope.
It's pointless to ask for evidence on something that has no objective definition
Then it's equally invalid to make hard claims about things with no objective definition. Either way, the original claims are without merit.
You just dredged up some well buried memories and gave me a good laugh in the process.
For those of you less familiar with late 1980s advertisements during CITV (was it called CITV then?) on channel 3 in the UK, you may wish to refer to the wikipedia page:
Oh I remember you! You're the guy who makes up stuff about me in all the gender related threads.
Hello! Good to see you again. I await your crazy claims about me with a great deal of fascination and interest
Well, we found the guy who's never been romantically involved with a woman. Get a girlfriend, then come back to us in a year and see if you still support that statement.
Women are no more irrational than men. The fact that you appear to believe otherwise is a pretty good demonstration that I'm correct.
I'm prepared to accept that you're being an inveterat pedant, however and aren't actually indicating that there are any gender differences in this regard.
You are a fucking retard.
Touche my man, touche.
Nothing in that stream says that the man became an engineer to help others.
That's nice, but I didn't claim that. I dispute that no man ever would become an engineer for the good of society.
Like I said:
You can take whatever opinions you've formed of me simply because I'm a man and shove them up your ass.
It is reasoning like yours that sexism exists. You assume you can make glib assumptions that cover the mental state of 3.5 billion people.
A clue: you can't.
Ah I see, instead of having a reasoned argument, you jump straight into invective. I think that means you basically have no reasoned arguments with which to support your view point and have instead resorted to supporting it entirely on emotion.
By the way: almost all engineering courses have modules at some point so that students can pick things which are to their interest.
What is it with articles liek this makes people simply switch off their brains completely.
The link you sent me doesn't have a single mention of emotions anywhere at all.
Huh?
I'm asking to clarify how the OP believes that male and female emotions are different. You know, these thingies:
and let people do for a living that which they like and enjoy doing?
The "didn't read TFS" is strong in this one, Luke.
The cost of feathers has risen, even down is up!
