Saying God doesn't exist is like saying that lunch time doesn't exist, or money doesn't exist, or the United States doesn't exist. You can't disprove the existence of an idea; and dismissing the real influence of that idea (both good and bad) and the potential influence of that idea (both good and bad) is asinine.

The ship wasn't sold for 1c; the Navy paid 1c to have the thing dismantled: usually they pay significantly more.

It was dry, but not BAD like Phantom Menace. Phantom Menace was horrendous on numerous levels and, if taken seriously, reduces the quality of the previous movies. This LOTR prequel finally was dry, unless you have some reason to be emotionally invested in the characters because of the book. But it was not a BAD movie, it was not poorly acted, it was not poorly written, and while it could have done with more meaning when it came to the acton (and I personally hate action) every last bit of the film-shooting and editing was done as spectacularly as can be done in a film.

This was not a BAD movie; it just wasn't the movie it could have been. And honestly, you'll never please the fan-boys anyway.

They still sell Heideger's being-in-time : and his entire philosophical shtick is using hyphens!

Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge. It's disgusting that we're loosing the benefits of this amazing pedagogue simply because someone was offended by something he said to someone online.

This is total bullshit.

Quickoffice Pro is a useful program i've been using since I purchased an iPhone 3G. It recently had a bad update that broke it, a mistake on the publisher's part no doubt, but not a scam. Honestly this article reads way to joyously consists of way too little research on the subject.

It's like some people want IOS to suck in the same ways Android does; sorry folks! It sucks in it's own ways.

Clearly you do not understand how calculus works.

HI,

While focused on an academic audience of organizational scholars, I have a friend who was a Steward and has written an ethnographic book about Wikipedia:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/searc...

If you are more interested in accessible information he's also written an editorial regarding Wikipedia for Slate:
http://www.slate.com/articles/...

80 characters: all done in COBOL

Universities have a perverse incentive when it comes to producing doctoral students.

University departments are bureaucratic systems. A bureaucratic system's primary objective is to grow. It may take 20 undergraduate students to 'make' a class. It only takes 10 masters students and 5 doctoral students. The more classes that make: the more professors are needed: the bigger the department.

This means the fastest way to grow your department is to increase the number of doc students. Since almost every Ph.D. is an industry-useless research degree, this, then, leads to the glut of researchers we see today.

The solution has already been hit upon by business schools. The AACSB accredits only 120 universities to produce doctoral students. Of those each field (accounting, finance, marketing, management, information systems) has about 80 universities that are accredited for that sub-field. Each field graduates about 3 students a year. Without an AACSB accredited professor-pool it is hard for a business school to get AACSB accreditation. But why does the business school care?

The masters program produces a degree that is valuable outside of academia and a premium is charged for it. While accreditation is no guarantee that your business school is good, if it does not having it you can be almost certain that it is bad. The MBA is NOT a research degree and in no way prepares you to be a professor.

What is needed is for the highest caliber departments (in each glut field) in the US to join together in an association. The association limits how many doctoral programs are accredited. The association maintains the highest standards for undergraduate, masters, and doctoral programs. The association limits how many doctoral students are admitted relative to the number of research active faculty in a department.

Combine this then with a masters program that is entirely focused on practical work in the field. Do not give doc students a masters and do not focus on research skills that are not valuable in industry in masters programs. Presently: Nursing, Business, and Engineering are all viable directions to go for someone interested in research and teaching. Perhaps you notice a pattern?

And the pay? 150k is not an unheard of starting pay for an assistant professor of accounting.

No, He was a human with a mother.

From Wikipedia:

http://www.kvia.com/news/28836239/detail.html
"A year after the therapy, two of the patients had complete remission of leukemia and one had a partial response to the therapy."


looks like 2 out of 3 people are in full remission... doesn't sound like being only 70% of cancerous tissues removed to me.

This is so wrong it hurts. The point of tenure is so that someone CAN say such things, if such things could be backed up then they would be. The case presented in the video is reasonable but over stated; your conspiracy theory is both unreasonable and overstated.

According to From Hauser, Robert M. 2002. "Meritocracy, cognitive ability, and the sources of occupational success." CDE Working Paper 98-07 (rev). Center for Demography and Ecology, The University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin. Over 10% of social scientists, people in computer related occupations, materials engineers and a non-negligible number of university professors, electrical engineers, lawyers, hard scientists, and general engineers have an IQ under 100. To be fair, though, the bottom 10% of physicians have an IQ under 113

This hardly relegates the jobs of scientist, lawyer or even doctor to the top 1%. With the exception of doctor, which requires being in the top 20%, all of these jobs could be obtained by someone with a sub 100 IQ.

That said, it is not very likely that your theoretical 90 (bottom 25%) is going to get a job outside of sales, police, electrician, mechanic etc.