rhaig 0 #126 June 23, 2010 Quote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #127 June 23, 2010 Quote Quote Quote To say that someone who enters and jumps in all rounds in a 4-way competition is better than someone who doesn't is off the mark. That's what a degree means. Someone who entered college and completed all their classes. At our school you have to PASS all your classes with a "C" average or better. Just completing them gets you nothing. I thought about that while writing that. I should have added it. doing too many things at once People who graduate from college with above a C average are more likely to be able to multi-task Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #128 June 23, 2010 Quote To say that someone who enters and jumps in all rounds in a 4-way competition is better than someone who doesn't is off the mark. That's what a degree means. Someone who entered college and completed all their classes. I think if you compare those who compete in 4 way FS versus those who just do it for fun with their buds, you'll see that the competitors are better at it. Practice makes perfect, and competition drives the practice to a higher standard that just 'that was fun!' Same is true for fun runners versus those that focus on racing the 5k,10k, 21k, 42k. College is 4 years of practice. People certainly can achieve a lot by reading alone, but you'll find awfully few people who will put in the same level of effort (esp since they probably have jobs instead), and self directed study is rarely as productive as that lead by an expert in the subject. IQ is supposed to be unrelated to education, but it's actually quite hard to divorce them apart. Education gives building blocks for the more intelligent person to harness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #129 June 23, 2010 QuoteQuote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now. Not needed for aerospace engineers. Do you know the process for getting a PE? First, graduate with a degree from an accredited engineering program.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #130 June 23, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now. Not needed for aerospace engineers. Do you know the process for getting a PE? First, graduate with a degree from an accredited engineering program. didn't know it wasn't needed for aerospace engineers... interesting. yes. I know the process. The question seemed to imply to me an alternate mode of certification. I was in the civil engineering school and transferred to computer science about the time they were discussing changing the CS degree to software engineering, and all the PE implications that went with that. I followed that pretty closely. (though it had nothing to do with those silly rocket scientists.)-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #131 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now. Not needed for aerospace engineers. Do you know the process for getting a PE? First, graduate with a degree from an accredited engineering program. didn't know it wasn't needed for aerospace engineers... interesting. yes. I know the process. The question seemed to imply to me an alternate mode of certification. I was in the civil engineering school and transferred to computer science about the time they were discussing changing the CS degree to software engineering, and all the PE implications that went with that. I followed that pretty closely. (though it had nothing to do with those silly rocket scientists.) The fact is that the engineering profession (all disciplines) has collectively decided that the appropriate gateway to becoming an engineer is to start with an engineering degree from an accredited program.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #132 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote Right, but Libertarians are simply disgruntled Repubs; this is their way of rebelling. Look at Ron Paul, running back and forth as a Liber, then Repub, repeat several times. See, Libertarians claim they feel that the gov should stay out of our lives and keep taxes low, yet you just don't see them at pro-choice rallies and I'm sure not at gay ralleys, etc. QuoteHow do you know? Do you survey? Or are these facts pulled out of your ass? By definition, a Libertarian is going to support gay marriage. What you're claiming is that all actual people are bastardized versions of the political creed. Look around, esp here, the so-called self-labeling Libertarians are quiet on social issues yet LOUDLY BOISTEROUS on tax cuts. Keep living in your dream world where people live by definitions. I don't consider the self-annointed Libertarians to be such, they can call themselves that if they wish and I'm ok with it. Quote Billvon is a true Libertarian, not just a pissed off Republican. QuoteYou just said that all Libertarians are pissed off Republicans. But you didn't really mean that? Make up your mind already. Since you're claiming to be a mind reader, you should be able to tell what you're thinking. Obviosly I'm making the assertion that most people who call themselves Libertarians are really just pissed Republicans who awkwardly slide over as Libertarians, they really are not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #133 June 24, 2010 QuoteI agree that it's harder to cheat on a video'd skydive than on a college test. You can always work harder and learn more and get cheated too. It's bizzare to think that a person with college is no smarter than a person with no college. Probably most people w/o degrees feel the same way. Of course many skydivers who have never competed on a 4-way team may feel they are as good as those on teams and winning. Ego is a tough thing; those w/o college/univ should face it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #134 June 24, 2010 Quote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? Yea, no shit. What kind of fucked up conversation is this where we debate the merits of education vs no education? Science, learning, research is about trial and error, how can someone say they're as intelligent if they have never observed, researched and the sort in a scientific fashion, led by people with decades of controlled scientific learning? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #135 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now. You can cram for a quiz, even cram for the State Bar, that doesn't mean you will have 3 years of intense legal studies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #136 June 24, 2010 QuoteIQ is supposed to be unrelated to education, but it's actually quite hard to divorce them apart. Education gives building blocks for the more intelligent person to harness. Who says that? Intelligence is influenced by 2 elements: - Genetic - Environmental Most studies I've read point a little more to genetics, but of course both are needed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #137 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now. Not needed for aerospace engineers. Do you know the process for getting a PE? First, graduate with a degree from an accredited engineering program. didn't know it wasn't needed for aerospace engineers... interesting. yes. I know the process. The question seemed to imply to me an alternate mode of certification. I was in the civil engineering school and transferred to computer science about the time they were discussing changing the CS degree to software engineering, and all the PE implications that went with that. I followed that pretty closely. (though it had nothing to do with those silly rocket scientists.) The fact is that the engineering profession (all disciplines) has collectively decided that the appropriate gateway to becoming an engineer is to start with an engineering degree from an accredited program. What a silly notion. I guess lawyers should have a JD too; wow, we've really redirected academia here! This thread has become a joke, who can think that formalized education is meaningless? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #138 June 24, 2010 Quote Quote IQ is supposed to be unrelated to education, but it's actually quite hard to divorce them apart. Education gives building blocks for the more intelligent person to harness. Who says that? Intelligence is influenced by 2 elements: - Genetic - Environmental Most studies I've read point a little more to genetics, but of course both are needed. Unfortunately a very large fractiion of so-called IQ tests implicitly assume a large body of knowledge. t That isnt really what IQ is all about. Apologies if my speling is a litle off, I'm on vacation on Hawaii and have just consumed a large fraction of a bottle of something very alcoholic while watching "pipeline" waves breaking on the beacjh outside our rented beach house at Poipu.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #139 June 24, 2010 Quote This thread has become a joke, who can think that formalized education is meaningless? hey... a thread in SC turns into meaningless drivel... who'd have thought... Certainly formalized education isn't meaningless. However to insist that implies anything beyond a certain level of training and the ability to successfully complete that training is to assume quite a bit. Also to assume that formalized education is required before one has the knowledge (not necessarily a certification) to complete a job is to make a whole different set of assumptions.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #140 June 24, 2010 Quote Apologies if my speling is a litle off, I'm on vacation on Hawaii and have just consumed a large fraction of a bottle of something very alcoholic while watching "pipeline" waves breaking on the beacjh outside our rented beach house at Poipu. get the fuck off DZ.com enjoy your vacation-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #141 June 24, 2010 ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #142 June 24, 2010 Quote Quote Quote IQ is supposed to be unrelated to education, but it's actually quite hard to divorce them apart. Education gives building blocks for the more intelligent person to harness. Who says that? Intelligence is influenced by 2 elements: - Genetic - Environmental Most studies I've read point a little more to genetics, but of course both are needed. Unfortunately a very large fractiion of so-called IQ tests implicitly assume a large body of knowledge. t That isnt really what IQ is all about. Apologies if my speling is a litle off, I'm on vacation on Hawaii and have just consumed a large fraction of a bottle of something very alcoholic while watching "pipeline" waves breaking on the beacjh outside our rented beach house at Poipu. IQ is more about a distributed baseline of knowledge. It's likely a math/physics genius woulod do poorly on an IQ test of he/she had little other knowledge. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #143 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote This thread has become a joke, who can think that formalized education is meaningless? hey... a thread in SC turns into meaningless drivel... who'd have thought... Certainly formalized education isn't meaningless. However to insist that implies anything beyond a certain level of training and the ability to successfully complete that training is to assume quite a bit. Also to assume that formalized education is required before one has the knowledge (not necessarily a certification) to complete a job is to make a whole different set of assumptions. Formalized education teaches, at its very root, critical thinking, or at least points that way for cheaters. Hell, even people who cheat in college, which is most peopel to some degree, learn how to cheat which is still a skill. You have to learn the system and lean what the criteria is and then adapt to that. Most classes start that way; you look to the teacher to see what he/she is looking for, grading scheme's, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites winsor 236 #144 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteReally? Because I think that's the entire direction of this thread. That somehow "right wing" equals "right way" and "liberal" equals "wrong way" when in fact most people on this forum don't even have an accurate description of what the word "liberal" means. Politically, it has been defined with regard to application of government. That is to say, should we address problem X, Y or Z with a liberal dose of government, or should we be conservative in our use of government in seeking a solution? Windsor, you are quite possibly one of the most intelligent and erudite posters on this forum and I've thought so for a long time, even before this forum existed and me having an opportunity to watch you post way back on AVSig. However, you certainly must be aware that what you've written is pretty much only how liberalism has been defined by the "newspeak" of the right since about the time of the New Deal and even then only in the US. What you have posted, specifically about its application of government to issues is wrong in terms of the classic use of the term in political science. Virtually all of the founding fathers of the US were "liberals" in the classic use of the term. Read John Locke. As I previously stated, most people on this forum don't seem to have an accurate description of what "liberal" means. Where we differ is that I provided a definition of the terms I use, so there is some metric against which to evaluate my contentions. You, OTOH, simply claim that I am wrong and that your standpoint is valid because you are in Locke step with the source you prefer - without ever providing another definition. Had you engaged in a study of Logic (and passed), you would be aware that there is are many types of definition - Lexical, Precising, Technical, Legal and so forth - and would perhaps respond coherently by offering a different context for your position. No such luck. If you think it important to have an "accurate description of what 'liberal' means," you would do well to provide one. BTW, I never posted on AVSig, and am not even sure what it is. BSBD, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #133 June 24, 2010 QuoteI agree that it's harder to cheat on a video'd skydive than on a college test. You can always work harder and learn more and get cheated too. It's bizzare to think that a person with college is no smarter than a person with no college. Probably most people w/o degrees feel the same way. Of course many skydivers who have never competed on a 4-way team may feel they are as good as those on teams and winning. Ego is a tough thing; those w/o college/univ should face it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #134 June 24, 2010 Quote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? Yea, no shit. What kind of fucked up conversation is this where we debate the merits of education vs no education? Science, learning, research is about trial and error, how can someone say they're as intelligent if they have never observed, researched and the sort in a scientific fashion, led by people with decades of controlled scientific learning? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #135 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now. You can cram for a quiz, even cram for the State Bar, that doesn't mean you will have 3 years of intense legal studies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #136 June 24, 2010 QuoteIQ is supposed to be unrelated to education, but it's actually quite hard to divorce them apart. Education gives building blocks for the more intelligent person to harness. Who says that? Intelligence is influenced by 2 elements: - Genetic - Environmental Most studies I've read point a little more to genetics, but of course both are needed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #137 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over? I'd suggest they pass the professional engineer's certification for their state just like they do now. Not needed for aerospace engineers. Do you know the process for getting a PE? First, graduate with a degree from an accredited engineering program. didn't know it wasn't needed for aerospace engineers... interesting. yes. I know the process. The question seemed to imply to me an alternate mode of certification. I was in the civil engineering school and transferred to computer science about the time they were discussing changing the CS degree to software engineering, and all the PE implications that went with that. I followed that pretty closely. (though it had nothing to do with those silly rocket scientists.) The fact is that the engineering profession (all disciplines) has collectively decided that the appropriate gateway to becoming an engineer is to start with an engineering degree from an accredited program. What a silly notion. I guess lawyers should have a JD too; wow, we've really redirected academia here! This thread has become a joke, who can think that formalized education is meaningless? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #138 June 24, 2010 Quote Quote IQ is supposed to be unrelated to education, but it's actually quite hard to divorce them apart. Education gives building blocks for the more intelligent person to harness. Who says that? Intelligence is influenced by 2 elements: - Genetic - Environmental Most studies I've read point a little more to genetics, but of course both are needed. Unfortunately a very large fractiion of so-called IQ tests implicitly assume a large body of knowledge. t That isnt really what IQ is all about. Apologies if my speling is a litle off, I'm on vacation on Hawaii and have just consumed a large fraction of a bottle of something very alcoholic while watching "pipeline" waves breaking on the beacjh outside our rented beach house at Poipu.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #139 June 24, 2010 Quote This thread has become a joke, who can think that formalized education is meaningless? hey... a thread in SC turns into meaningless drivel... who'd have thought... Certainly formalized education isn't meaningless. However to insist that implies anything beyond a certain level of training and the ability to successfully complete that training is to assume quite a bit. Also to assume that formalized education is required before one has the knowledge (not necessarily a certification) to complete a job is to make a whole different set of assumptions.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #140 June 24, 2010 Quote Apologies if my speling is a litle off, I'm on vacation on Hawaii and have just consumed a large fraction of a bottle of something very alcoholic while watching "pipeline" waves breaking on the beacjh outside our rented beach house at Poipu. get the fuck off DZ.com enjoy your vacation-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #141 June 24, 2010 ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #142 June 24, 2010 Quote Quote Quote IQ is supposed to be unrelated to education, but it's actually quite hard to divorce them apart. Education gives building blocks for the more intelligent person to harness. Who says that? Intelligence is influenced by 2 elements: - Genetic - Environmental Most studies I've read point a little more to genetics, but of course both are needed. Unfortunately a very large fractiion of so-called IQ tests implicitly assume a large body of knowledge. t That isnt really what IQ is all about. Apologies if my speling is a litle off, I'm on vacation on Hawaii and have just consumed a large fraction of a bottle of something very alcoholic while watching "pipeline" waves breaking on the beacjh outside our rented beach house at Poipu. IQ is more about a distributed baseline of knowledge. It's likely a math/physics genius woulod do poorly on an IQ test of he/she had little other knowledge. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #143 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuote This thread has become a joke, who can think that formalized education is meaningless? hey... a thread in SC turns into meaningless drivel... who'd have thought... Certainly formalized education isn't meaningless. However to insist that implies anything beyond a certain level of training and the ability to successfully complete that training is to assume quite a bit. Also to assume that formalized education is required before one has the knowledge (not necessarily a certification) to complete a job is to make a whole different set of assumptions. Formalized education teaches, at its very root, critical thinking, or at least points that way for cheaters. Hell, even people who cheat in college, which is most peopel to some degree, learn how to cheat which is still a skill. You have to learn the system and lean what the criteria is and then adapt to that. Most classes start that way; you look to the teacher to see what he/she is looking for, grading scheme's, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #144 June 24, 2010 QuoteQuoteReally? Because I think that's the entire direction of this thread. That somehow "right wing" equals "right way" and "liberal" equals "wrong way" when in fact most people on this forum don't even have an accurate description of what the word "liberal" means. Politically, it has been defined with regard to application of government. That is to say, should we address problem X, Y or Z with a liberal dose of government, or should we be conservative in our use of government in seeking a solution? Windsor, you are quite possibly one of the most intelligent and erudite posters on this forum and I've thought so for a long time, even before this forum existed and me having an opportunity to watch you post way back on AVSig. However, you certainly must be aware that what you've written is pretty much only how liberalism has been defined by the "newspeak" of the right since about the time of the New Deal and even then only in the US. What you have posted, specifically about its application of government to issues is wrong in terms of the classic use of the term in political science. Virtually all of the founding fathers of the US were "liberals" in the classic use of the term. Read John Locke. As I previously stated, most people on this forum don't seem to have an accurate description of what "liberal" means. Where we differ is that I provided a definition of the terms I use, so there is some metric against which to evaluate my contentions. You, OTOH, simply claim that I am wrong and that your standpoint is valid because you are in Locke step with the source you prefer - without ever providing another definition. Had you engaged in a study of Logic (and passed), you would be aware that there is are many types of definition - Lexical, Precising, Technical, Legal and so forth - and would perhaps respond coherently by offering a different context for your position. No such luck. If you think it important to have an "accurate description of what 'liberal' means," you would do well to provide one. BTW, I never posted on AVSig, and am not even sure what it is. BSBD, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #145 June 24, 2010 if you want right-wing moderators, then try http://www.stormfront.org might be more to your liking. No one is making you come here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meso 38 #146 June 24, 2010 Well played. And the fact that 'all the mods are ultra libs' should say something shouldn't it ;) Especially since their political views were in many cases unknown during their appointing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #147 June 24, 2010 QuoteWell played. And the fact that 'all the mods are ultra libs' should say something shouldn't it ;) Especially since their political views were in many cases unknown during their appointing. To even say all mods are liberal is tarded. I know of 2 I would cal conservative, Bill is Libertarian. Not the Coca-cola Libertarian who has no opinion about moral issues, a true libertarian who proactively wants gay marriage, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meso 38 #148 June 24, 2010 Hence my quotation marks around the quote ;P I don't know most of the other mods political views anyway. I just know Quade tends to post what I think a lot of the time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #149 June 24, 2010 Quotea true libertarian who proactively wants ..... Wow, a TRUE libertarian is pro-government intrusion. Who'd'a thunk it? your personal definitions are still biased as you find politics to only be defined by what one is a militant activist for - some just don't care about politics and find them to be a bunch of whiny children arguing over subjective crap, or even a bunch of insincere thieve playing the public for power and $$$ some people just want to stay out of other people's business and have them stay out of theirs - what's truly wrong with that? Your example of gay marriage - a libertarian, by definition, does not care who marries who. If he sees a case where a specific situation is unfairly restricted you might predict he'll react in one of two ways 1 - he might stay out of it - if enough people just stayed out of it, the couple wouldn't have had the problem in the first place, or; 2 - he might find it unfair enough to get involved on behalf of those being constrained. To restrict your definition to just the 2nd group isn't the full picture If asked about his position? "what a stupid question, it doesn't affect me either way" and "marriage shouldn't even be part of government" If you refuse to let people live their owns lives without interference - I don't see those extreme religious busy bodies as any different than the extreme left-wing thieves ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #150 June 24, 2010 Quoteif you want right-wing moderators, then try http://www.stormfront.org might be more to your liking. No one is making you come here. I call a violation of Godwin's Law. I find Fox News to be as monotonous an exercise of navel-contemplation as is Howard Stern, but the sources that identify themselves with the Left are equally dreary. Mediocrity of thought knows no political persuasion. In addition to the tendency to wanting to do my thinking for me, both sides of the aisle are numerically illiterate. This is to say that none of them have any understanding of the numbers they bandy about. I am more comfortable with a group that at least recognizes that turning a profit has merit. Having seen a rather wide range of Socialism/Marxism/Communism in action, I consider that particular orthodoxy to be a bit worse than the Christian Fundementalist nonsense (but still significantly more sophisticated than Islamic totalitarianism). Scientology and Mormon are simply make-believe. Political Science in general strikes me as being but a variant on Scatology. To an expert on the the subject, there are massive differences between feces from various sources. However, if a significant amount of any of it winds up in the soup, it defines the broth. In the final analysis, in the sense that cops and criminals have more in common with each other than they do with civilians (they both make a living from criminal behavior, and neither pay much attention to the rules), the rulers of the 1930s in Berlin and Moscow had more in common with each other than they did with leaders of more moderate regimes. The differences between "Left Wing" and "Right Wing" extremists is a matter of details regarding what they wish to inflict upon the masses, and neither of them has much in common with the more centrist majority. Regardless of the label one applies to a political stance, if it is not based on personal responsibility I am not interested. BSBD, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
