That's great and all, but if I walk into the streets of oh let's say France, I don't need to worry if I'm a Jew that Christians are going to start attacking me.
If you are a Jew in France you have a pretty high propability of Christians attacking you. You should read real news more often, France has a massive racism problem right now. Jews are emigrating from France at an unprecedented scale (WW2 excluded).
Really? I don't find the legitimate ones bad at all. Much better than the SAT for testing raw, innate intelligence. IQ is like a brightness of a flashlight. It's potential. Brighter is better, but it doesn't guarantee you point it at a useful direction, or even use it for anything useful at all other than to study playboy under the bedsheets.
The problem is that IQ as a variable is pretty useless in practice. It has no prognostic validity for success in life or in a job. Motivation is far more important for that, but it's also harder to measure.
I would think if they took recent Nobel Prize winners in the hard sciences, they would be trending above average and by a margin.
Sure, but you would find even more high-IQ persons in quite mundane jobs. IQ is a confounding variable for success. Counter example: most Nobel Prize winners are male, too. Is that the reason for their success?
We could fix this problem easily with barely any significant change to our style of life.
Similarly, residential electricity prices in Germany (note that Germany and Denmark, both with heavily subsidized, high share "green" power generation, have electricity pricing on par with small island nations)
Two points:
First, in Germany renewables are not heavily subsidized (i.e. tax-financed) at all, but instead cross-financed trough averaging production costs of non-renewables and renwables. No tax money involved.
Second, It does not make sense to compare the price per kWh when the overall effiency is so vastly different to the USA
Started a car manufacturing company producing high-tech electric vehicles that make anything produced in Detroit these days look like a Model T.
At the risk of being nit-picky: Musk only invested in Tesla, not started it. The investment was significant and included the right for Musk to call himself co-founder IIRC.
Apple managed to secure virtually the entire output of 1.8" hard drives from Toshiba (the only manufacturer of such drives at the time).
Many players at that time already had 1" hard drives, so 1.8" doesn't sound very impressive (1.8" drives were introduced in 1993 BTW).
The iPhone was the first capacitive touchscreen phone.
No, the LG Prada was the first one. Look it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada
I think the idea that scepticism comes from humanities rather than science is a joke, and shows a complete misunderstanding of falsifiability and Karl Popper's work on the philosophy of science.
You are aware that Popper was a professor at a humanist department, right? That whole "philosophy of science" thing could have been a hint...
Scientists should take courses on Rational Thinking.
That's what the OP said. "Rational Thinking" usually gets taught in a course called logics, which is a subdomain of philosophy, to be found in *drumroll* the humanities department.
Humanist misunderstands what Science and the Scientific method are
Amusingly, the Humanities are the realm where Science and the Scientific method have been invented, where the shortcomings of positivism where highlighted and critical rationalism (="you can't prove a scientific model, only falsify it") got created to solve that problem. Guess you should have taken one of those courses
I'll do you better than that: an interactive tool which shows the data [philanthropy.com]. There's a link on that page detailing how the data was compiled. (Note that IRS data only includes people earning over $50,000 a year.)
... which handily debunks your own claims. GP said: "And proselytizing expenditures and church heating bills don't count." - while your source lumps them together with real charity:
Religion has a big influence on giving patterns. Regions of the country that are deeply religious are more generous than those that are not. Two of the top nine statesâ"Utah and Idahoâ"have high numbers of Mormon residents, who have a tradition of tithing at least 10 percent of their income to the church. The remaining states in the top nine are all in the Bible Belt.
When religious giving isn't counted, the geography of giving is very different. Some states in the Northeast jump into the top 10 when secular gifts alone are counted. New York would vault from No. 18 to No. 2, and Pennsylvania would climb from No. 40 to No. 4.
(emph. mine, source.)
TL;DR: atheists give to charity, christs give to the church.
Correct. For instance, the Nazis actually did great things for Germany's economy and national pride.
Except they didn't do great things for Germany's economy. Neither in workers wages nor in GDP.
Remember to say hello to your bank teller.
