Bennett, please stop trying to do science. You're not good at it. If you don't know what you're doing, and clearly you demonstrated that with the laughable "survey", there are places to get information about conducting proper research studies. They are called "graduate education programs in survey research" for the DIY crowd (here's a good one), and then there are for-hire services that can do them for you. Either way, get some help before you embarrass yourself again.

I didn't know Mom posted the "F" graded assigments on the fridge?

He posted an ad hoc, anecdotal, unscientific "survey" and generated 101 responses and then claims credibility, and you commend him?!?! You must have been dropped on your head, too, then, yes?

No, you don't understand how real research and statistics work, try reading these: https://explorable.com/statist... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... http://stats.stackexchange.com... http://www.sciencebuddies.org/... It's obvious Bennett has no academic credentials beyond a bachelor's degree or maybe even High School Diploma given his drivel above.

Fuck Bennett Haselton and the idiots that promote his idiotic posts! Yes, you timothy! and any other "editor" that posts his crap!

I agree with the OP, but not with what you said. The Internet has enabled and emboldened those that would be passive agressive under face-to-face circumstances to be much more animalistic and capable of carrying out their threats. Why? Because the consequences for saying such things is minimalized and in a lot of cases supported by other people thinking and saying the same things. The disconnect from any real consequences and the support whackos can find on the Internet, definitely makes it, not the whole human race, the sick place to be. Hell, I like to build things and get information from the Internet, but I wouldn't want to live there! It's a vile nasty place filled with juvenile behavior and sick twisted world views, for the most part. All you have to do is read some comments on news sites and the like some time if you really want to see how scary it is!

That's the first car analogy that I've seen actually not be fallacious posted to /. Congrats!

And therein lies the problem: the police lineup.

The whole lineup process is usually rigged, and can easily be rigged to single out an individual from a pack of "suspects". The lineup is the problem as that tool can too easily be manipulated to garner eyewitness testimony from someone that only "thinks" that's the person they saw and is then coached to say they are "positive" that's the person they saw. And yes, I like the example noted above of "My Cousin Vinny". It's somewhat comically presented, but the fact is people have been wrongfully convicted from dubious "eyewitness testimony" for centuries! Forensic evidence has been helping to curtail these type of wrongful convictions, but sometimes long after the fact.

Yep, and they conveniently leave out that W signed the Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq in 2008 that got us out, including the time table for doing so.

Apparently, he was writing a book... because at no time during either of his positions under the Obama administration did I ever hear him say one word about "we must leave troops in Iraq" or anything even close to that. Maybe someone can find a quote or video for me, but this sounds a lot like pandering to a base constituency to buy his book given how popular Obama bashing is these days.

Who says he earned it? Trolls and just plain socipathic and psychopathic people don't need reasons to hate. Reason rarely factors into their behavior at all. They hate someone because they have a different viewpoint, or they called a shitty piece of code (possibly written by one of these psychopaths) a shitty piece of code. And from his post I would say that he is definitely re-evaluating his position, much to the loss of the Open Source community.

Spoken like a true Anonymous Coward. I find it hypocritical of you to throw stones and call someone else a coward while posting as an AC on /.

It's also called science, which some people want to nay say as it self corrects its assumptions based on new data. The whole point of scientific theories and models is that they change over time as new information is added. Why people go off on this as if it were proof that science is "wrong" is mind boggling. Even if it is "wrong" as of today, it wasn't wrong based on the information we had before today! New data changes the model and we get a more accurate answer.

Correct, which means nay saying is also dubious based on the results of one study. Most rational people, however, tend to err on the side of caution and not the side of apathy. More studies will follow as graduate students build on the previous research and add to the findings. This is how research works. Once a concensus is reached then scietific facts change to incorporate this new data. At that time, anyone is welcome to their dissent of the facts. They are also welcome to a unicorn, a lifetime subscription to Fox News and a flying pig.

Really? Simple thermodynamics must escape you. Heat is energy. That energy once absorbed has to go somewhere. In the case of warming the surface or oceans the heat radiates back toward space (eventually), but a portion is reflected back toward Earth causing a sustainable rise in overall global temperatures due to thickness and composition of the atmosphere. Yes, as the oceans warm up currents change and the whole three dimensional system is thrown out of balance and tries to rebalance itself within the new parameters, much like the air above the oceans and land does. The problem is that new balance may not be suitable for life as we know it to continue and we have mass extinctions and food shortages as a potential outcome. This is all simple Earth Science stuff learned in grade school.

Except we're talking about billions of people, not one hundred, so yes, orders of magnitude and percentages do apply in context. Nice try. And yes, if AIDS had become a pandemic like Ebola threatens to become I would definitely take a 1% chance of getting AIDS if it meant that I would not get AIDS at all should the vaccine work. The bottom line on that is if I didn't get the vaccine the odds of contracting the disease could be much higher than 1% of six billion (and change). Some of us do have the capacity to work with numbers larger than 100, and do floating point math on those numbers in our heads, i.e., we're over the age of 12 years.