09/28/10
Comments:
Still no reason to mix "nothing in particular" with the agnostics and atheists...they appear to be recorded differently and scored that way, the three choices, while all non- religious, are different.You don't seem to think so, sort of like all the followers of the god of abraham kind of look the same to the rest of the world.
09/28/10
Comments:
Here's the PEW survey's question: (p64)
What is your present religion, if any? Are you Protestant, Roman Catholic, Mormon, Orthodox such as Greek or Russian Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, atheist, agnostic, something else, or nothing in particular? (INTERVIEWER: IF R VOLUNTEERS “nothing in particular, none, no religion, etc.” BEFORE REACHING END OF LIST, PROMPT WITH: and would you say that‟s atheist, agnostic, or just nothing in particular?) Then lots of other options for religions... The ARIS survey finds 15% of these "nones". ARIS describes them as: "This bloc can be described as the non-religious, irreligious and anti-religious bloc. It includes anti-clerical theists, but the majority are non-theists." I pray to Mother Earth for an answer... Who are the "nones"? BTW: The "nones" are the fastest growing religion in the US.... http://b27.cc.trincoll.edu/weblogs/AmericanReligionSurvey-ARIS/reports/ARIS_Report_2008.pdf
09/28/10
Comments:
Why should no "religion in particular" be with agnostics and atheists...they have nothing to do with each other...Oh that's right, so you can lump more people into the "Others" you can ignore.
09/28/10
Comments:
Miguel,
The 1% of surveyed atheists and 4% of surveyed agnostics did well. The 12% who practice "nothing in particular" performed poorly. I think that the "no religion in particular" should have been included in the agnostic/atheists, which would have brought their average score below those of most Judeo-Christians. For almost all groups, the scores were within the margin of error (8.5% for atheist/agnostics)
I don't think anyone wants to touch on the subject that blacks and hispanics did poorly.
http://pewforum.org/uploadedFiles/Topics/Belief_and_Practices/religious-knowledge-full-report.pdf
Sorry, this is a private entry which is only viewable by the owner.
[View Entry]
09/28/10
Comments:
A little more evidence of epistemological closure:US atheists know more about religion than believers, quiz finds
09/28/10
Comments:
Dr. Altemeyer.
I am curious, in your book on sex, when you report that girls masturbated at 14.2 years, how did you obtain this number?
From the research, you indicate that you surveyed the age of each sexual act. If someone was 14 years, 1 day old, they would have reported their age as "14"; the same as someone who was 14 year, 364 days old. You probably sumed up and divided these whole years to get your 14.2 year number.
It would be a simple thing to prove that everyone who reported their age as "14" would be, on average, more likely 14.5 years old (probably higher due to a skewed distribution, but that data would have needed to be accurately captured). So for those who reported their age as "14" you should have used an average age of 14.5 in your calculation (15.5 for "15", etc.).
Your reported data is likely off by at least an average of 0.5 years due to this oversight.
You do think of these things... don't you?
09/27/10
Comments:
Harken' back to the good ol' daze (sic) when King Bush II was the worst president ever...
"The issue may remind you of the Bush administration’s policy of authorizing the National Security Agency to engage in electronic spying, without warrants, on Americans suspected of supporting terrorism--which simply ignored the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that required prior court approval of such surveillance. And indeed, David Winter at the University of Michigan discovered that high RWAs felt Bush’s policy was “both necessary and appropriate” because of terrorism."
- Dr. Altemeyer
-------- TODAY'S NEWS ----------
Obama has renewed the warrantless wiretaps, and now, it seems, is preparing new legislation to expand the wiretaps from telephony, to all electronic communication.
"Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations of the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is "going dark" as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone."
...
"The legislation, which the Obama administration plans to submit to Congress next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering technological innovation."
http://www.startribune.com/nation/103836983.html
09/27/10
Comments:
Making new national heros through "education".
..."George W. Bush has been the most authoritarian president in my lifetime, as well as the worst." -Dr. Altemeyer, professor
..."I would like to shoot George W. Bush, because in my opinion he is the worst president ever. After that was accomplished, I would be known as a national hero."
- Irving Miqui, student
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_48ncxszdHX8lnzQzlwhOEO
09/26/10
Comments:
Doug. I don't think they were authoritarians...I think they were fed up with the unitary executive and the profiteering.Still I always thought it was weird how peace protesters advocate violence. Sort of like how the right wing thought the unitary exec was fine until it was a different party in power.
There IS a difference between a specific threat at a specific individual for specific actions and a threat of generalized armed insurgency.
I'll have to check these guys out...they look interesting, see you on freep.
09/26/10
Comments:
Miguel.
As always, show me a single conservative with a mundane sign and I can find you many, many more "left-wing" authoritarians.
http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621
09/26/10
Comments:
Miguel, I wouldn't go as far as to call it psychosis. While authoritarian followers have some really wrong ideas about reality, they aren't hallucinating, and they aren't incapable of organized thought. I've worked directly with genuinely psychotic people (real, diagnosed, hospitalized psychotics), and I imagine they'd stick out in a roomful of high-RWA folks. (See, I read your stuff.)
Ursus, I gather you discount the well-replicated research because you don't like the result? Hint: yes, that is a trick question. You can't discount scientific research because you don't care for the result, you have to show why the methodology was wrong. Or you can replicate the research and get the opposite result. Either one would be convincing. So far you aren't convincing.
Dr. Altemeyer, thanks for the encouragement. It's just an idea so far, but may become action in the next several weeks. (Oh no, I've put it in writing, now I have to get off the couch and DO something...)
09/26/10
Comments:
Doug...Get back to me when the commie Authoritarians look like this...
AND you STILL miss the point...RWA's aren't necessarily politically right wing. You should fear ALL of them, including those with whom you agree.
Don... You might want to read my posts...some of it is for you to consider.
09/26/10
Comments:
Dr. Altemeyer.
New developments in Obama's orders to assassinate the American citizen. I'm sure you'll ignore these facts, as you ignore the other facts that the left-wingers are authoritarian.
The White House doesn't want to answer to an ACLU lawsuit to challenge the fact that Obama has targeted an American citizen for assassination just for expressing his freedom of speech. Obama claims the governments ability to target Anwar al-Awlaki are a "state secret".
You feign outrage and call King Bush II the most authoritarian president ever, for waterboarding a few known terrorists for a few seconds.
Your neglect of the abuses by the American political left is re-emphasized by your ignorance of fact.
By the way, I bet that when you disagree with any political pundit, you probably turn off the radio, tv or other medium. Your self-directed censorship of fact reinforces your contempt of fact over favoring your brand of politics. Keep ignoring my posts...
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/120907-white-house-invokes-state-secrets-privilege-to-block-lawsuit-on-targetd-killings
09/26/10
Comments:
Dr. Altemeyer.
Thank you for continuing to show your support of persons who desire to change America from a free capitalist society to enslaving socialism. Don doesn't just want to get to know his neighbors, he wants to take all their personal property and force their labor for state goals. My guess is that since you don't have the fortitude to directly discuss your goals, we can only assume that these are also your goals.
Fight? Hell ya. I fight for liberty and capitalism. What are you fighting for? My hypothesis is that you fight for slavery and socialism. It is your goal to promote the totalitarian authoritarianism which you warn. Your vehicle is your research; your gun is your book; your bullets are your words... You and your anti-intellectual online army is already fighting against humanity, against liberty.
Is the fight a just one? Hell ya. As you promote opprobrium against conservatives, you must be challenged. Of course just like any good propagandist, as soon as you are challenged, you hide. I bet that my continued challenges will bring you to assainate me. (You are likely looking into ways to "ban" me.) Your positions cannot stand scrutiny when your goals are understood. I understand your goal. I fight for liberty, and this fight is just.
|