On Sep 18, 11:16 am, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:

osprey <noneedtok...@mail.com> writes:

On Sep 18, 1:51 am, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:

Dishonset as usual, Osprey altered the URL immediately below to make
it difficult for people to find the original article. Here it is
again --
<http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-politics10sep10,0,5982337....>

<http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-politics10sep10,0,5982337....>:

In a simple experiment reported todayin the journal Nature
Neuroscience, scientists at New York University and UCLA show
that political orientation is related to differences in how
the brain processes information.
...
Participants were college students whose politics ranged from
"very liberal" to "very conservative." They were instructed to
tap a keyboard when an M appeared on a computer monitor and to
refrain from tapping when they saw a W.
...
Liberals had more brain activity and made fewer mistakes than
conservatives when they saw a W, researchers said. Liberals
and conservatives were equally accurate in recognizing M.

I.e., liberals are in tune with the "real world" and conservatives
tend to see what they want to see. Osprey is quite evidently a
conservative. :-)-

Liberal study rigged

As I said, liberals are dishonest..and now, they rig their own
studies.

You moron - it was published in a highly respected peer-reviewed
journal. The "brain activity" was measured.

Also check out
<http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nn1979.html>.

It's absolutely ludicrous to believe that someone is smarter than
anyone else, simply based on their political preference. Then again,
liberals are so desperate that I can see why they are rigging studies
and grasping on to things like this.

Idiot - they did not measure intelligence. They measured brain
activity using an electroencephalograph. They simply claimed that
liberals and conservatives show physiological differences in how
their brains function when performing simple tasks.

http://www.slate.com/id/2173965/?GT1=10436

Liberal Interpretation
Rigging a study to make conservatives look stupid.
[Author sums this up nicely]
In fact, that's exactly what you've done in this study: You've
manufactured a tiny world of letters, half-seconds, and button-
pushing, so you can catch us in clear errors and keep out the part of
life where our tendencies correct yours. And now you feel great about
yourselves. Congratulations. You haven't told us much about our way
of
thinking. But you've told us a lot about yours.

Your author doesn't know what he is talking about.

He is dead on. It bothers you.

The reserchers

observed a difference in response in a simple repetitive task and
found there were corresponding differences in brain activity in
specific portions of the brain. They made no comment at all about
innate intelligence.

I gave you a reference to some legitimate rsearch

"rigged" research.

and you responded

with an article by a hack whose claim to fame is being a writer and
the author of "Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War."
I.e., some guy with no background in neuroscience.

Well, that tells us a lot about you, Osprey, and is just another
reason why we all consider you to be an idiot.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It was RIGGED....

You're a fool if you think someone is smarter than others, based
solely on their political preference.

I know a LOT of conservatives that would run circles around you in the
area of intelligence and IQ.

You're not that bright.

On Sep 18, 11:16 am, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:

osprey <noneedtok...@mail.com> writes:

On Sep 18, 1:51 am, No One <no...@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:

Dishonset as usual, Osprey altered the URL immediately below to make
it difficult for people to find the original article. Here it is
again --
<http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-politics10sep10,0,5982337....>

Your author doesn't know what he is talking about.

He is dead on. It bothers you.

The reserchers
observed a difference in response in a simple repetitive task and
found there were corresponding differences in brain activity in
specific portions of the brain. They made no comment at all about
innate intelligence.

I gave you a reference to some legitimate rsearch

"rigged" research.

and you responded

with an article by a hack whose claim to fame is being a writer and
the author of "Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War."
I.e., some guy with no background in neuroscience.

Well, that tells us a lot about you, Osprey, and is just another
reason why we all consider you to be an idiot.- Hide quoted text -

It was RIGGED....

You're a fool if you think someone is smarter than others, based
solely on their political preference.

I know a LOT of conservatives that would run circles around you in the
area of intelligence and IQ.

In article <87abrooulv.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>, No One
<noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <davbarnes@gmail.com> writes:

He is all excuses. His carelessness also got him in trouble at work.
If he had been forthcoming, instead of making excuses and trying the
blame two others, (one of whom was not even there at the time) he might
not have been reprimanded.

How was he reprimanded? I tried a google search, but there were so many
people dumping on him that it wasn't worth the time to try to figure out
what he might have done. Was it work related or did it have something
to do with the New York Times or both?
Larry Craig should have filed his guilty plea on usenet - then with
all the ranting, nobody would be able to find it. :-)

Yeah - There is nothing on the Internet about it (that I know of) - it
was no big deal. Osprey isn't important at all out there in Delaware.
A couple of years ago Osprey was actually stalking me, to a certain
degree. He was apparently printing out comments I made out here and
showing them to his coworkers. My posts at that time had my actual
email address on them. (They do not now.)
One of them, and then later another, apparently at the request or
advice of the first, emailed me and told me how Osprey was known for
being rather lazy (he played on the computers at the prison any chance
he could during work hours). They told me about many things, including
that Osprey lived in a trailer, that he owned an online Internet
business that failed, and that he and his father (who recently died)
has gone bankrupt.
During the conversations (by email) one mentioned that Osprey was
reprimanded and that he had once tried to get an actual law enforcement
job with the Sheriffs Office but was turned down as unqualified. I
suspect, but don't know, those reprimands caught up with him. I was
able to verify some of what Osprey's coworkers said once I had that
information, so I have no reason to believe any of it is a lie.
Everything I found was public information, but it took some work.
Osprey emailed me at one time asking that I lay off him, but I don't
feel I owe him anything considering how he has made up lies about me
being a child molester and Patrick being a drug dealer. He brags about
how he apologizes when appropriate but has never done so in these
instances, which are clearly defamatory. I feel certain that if his
office knew the kind of shame his comments bring upon Delaware
employees they would reprimand him further for his activity out here -
or at least I would like to think they have standards high enough that
they would do so. Perhaps, if they have any self respect, they would
fire him (although that is difficult since he is protected by his
union.)

In article <87abrooulv.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net>, No One
<noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote:

"David W. Barnes" <davbarnes@gmail.com> writes:

He is all excuses. His carelessness also got him in trouble at work.
If he had been forthcoming, instead of making excuses and trying the
blame two others, (one of whom was not even there at the time) he might
not have been reprimanded.

How was he reprimanded? I tried a google search, but there were so many
people dumping on him that it wasn't worth the time to try to figure out
what he might have done. Was it work related or did it have something
to do with the New York Times or both?

Larry Craig should have filed his guilty plea on usenet - then with
all the ranting, nobody would be able to find it. :-)

Yeah - There is nothing on the Internet about it (that I know of) - it
was no big deal. Osprey isn't important at all out there in Delaware.

A couple of years ago Osprey was actually stalking me, to a certain
degree. He was apparently printing out comments I made out here and
showing them to his coworkers. My posts at that time had my actual
email address on them. (They do not now.)

One of them, and then later another, apparently at the request or
advice of the first, emailed me and told me how Osprey was known for
being rather lazy (he played on the computers at the prison any chance
he could during work hours).

that Osprey lived in a trailer,

business that failed,

has gone bankrupt.

During the conversations (by email) one mentioned that Osprey was
reprimanded and that he had once tried to get an actual law enforcement
job with the Sheriffs Office but was turned down as unqualified.

suspect, but don't know, those reprimands caught up with him. I was
able to verify some of what Osprey's coworkers said once I had that
information, so I have no reason to believe any of it is a lie.
Everything I found was public information, but it took some work.

Osprey emailed me at one time asking that I lay off him,

feel I owe him anything considering how he has made up lies about me
being a child molester and Patrick being a drug dealer. He brags about
how he apologizes when appropriate but has never done so in these
instances, which are clearly defamatory. I feel certain that if his
office knew the kind of shame his comments bring upon Delaware
employees they would reprimand him further for his activity out here -
or at least I would like to think they have standards high enough that
they would do so. Perhaps, if they have any self respect, they would
fire him (although that is difficult since he is protected by his
union.)