Tea Partiers better at science than rest, Ron Paul Homechooling Curriculum credited
15 replies, posted
[QUOTE]A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers.
Yale law professor Dan Kahan posted on his blog this week that he analyzed the responses of more than 2,000 American adults recruited for another study and found that, on average, people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative.
[...]
“I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, [B]I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension,” Kahan wrote.
“But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the tea party,” he continued. “All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the ‘paper’ [/B](New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused Internet sites like Huffington Post and POLITICO). I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly, I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view.”
[/QUOTE]
[URL=http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/tea-party-science-98488.html?ml=po_r]Source[URL]
Although, to quote Dan Kahan himself:
[quote]Next time I collect data, too, I won't be surprised at all if the correlations between science comprehension and political ideology or identification with the Tea Party movement disappear or flip their signs. These effects are trivially small, & if I sample 2000+ people it's pretty likely any discrepancy I see will be "statistically significant"--which has precious little to do with "practically significant."[/quote]
I wouldn't be surprised if a number of them studied it so they could better argue against it, like how die-hard athiests read the bible so they can 'troll' christians.
and educated terrorists are more likely to be engineers. go figure
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/05/brain-food-terrorists-engineering[/url]
Not all that surprising - tea partiers will usually be from more affluent groups who tend to get better results in a lot of tests overall.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;42556728]I wouldn't be surprised if a number of them studied it so they could better argue against it, like how die-hard athiests read the bible so they can 'troll' christians.[/QUOTE]
But the opposite hardly ever happens: Die-hard Christians seriously studying evolutionary theory so they can argue against it.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;42556728]I wouldn't be surprised if a number of them studied it so they could better argue against it, like how die-hard athiests read the bible so they can 'troll' christians.[/QUOTE]
whoever heard of die-hard atheists doing theology degrees
[QUOTE=Turnips5;42556770]whoever heard of die-hard atheists doing theology degrees[/QUOTE]
As a serious history buff I like taking religion classes. They're really interesting.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;42556770]whoever heard of die-hard atheists doing theology degrees[/QUOTE]
If you're going to be sceptical of a subject, and don't want to look like a massive twat while doing so, it's usually worth studying or researching that something.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42556855]As a serious history buff I like taking religion classes. They're really interesting.[/QUOTE]
yeah, but that's what I'm saying: I like to learn about that stuff too, but you probably wouldn't do a whole degree in it. there's a difference between reading bits of the bible and taking a degree in theology just to shut it down as a subject.
...rereading, I don't think anyone actually said anything about doing degrees, so I just created a talking point for no reason. my point still stands, but whoops.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;42556942]yeah, but that's what I'm saying: I like to learn about that stuff too, but you probably wouldn't do a whole degree in it. there's a difference between reading bits of the bible and taking a degree in theology just to shut it down as a subject.
...rereading, I don't think anyone actually said anything about doing degrees in science, so I just created a talking point for no reason. my point still stands, but whoops.[/QUOTE]
a degree in theology isn't worth the cereal box it comes off of.
Just because you're wrong doesn't mean you're dumb.
[QUOTE=Explosions;42556997]Just because you're wrong doesn't mean you're dumb.[/QUOTE]
But why do people rate each other dumb instead of disagree when they don't share opinions then?
Checkmate dumbass. :v:
[QUOTE=Turnips5;42556770]whoever heard of die-hard atheists doing theology degrees[/QUOTE]
my best friend is a staunch atheist studying medieval christian heresies in grad school
I mean, it's not theology in itself, but it does involve him learning quite a lot of theology
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42556964]a degree in theology isn't worth the cereal box it comes off of.[/QUOTE]
You require one to become a catholic priest, so there is some use to it if you are a catholic yourself. When it comes to protestants I think it varies greatly from one to another.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;42556753]Not all that surprising - tea partiers will usually be from more affluent groups who tend to get better results in a lot of tests overall.[/QUOTE]
From what I've studied, the Tea Party demographic isn't an exclusively affluent one. I don't even think it's mostly affluent, to be honest, but I could be wrong.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.