TMI! TMI!
;)
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> I've never lacked for fun.
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
>>
>> There are times I really wonder about your private life mo - gag
>> balls, handcuffs? What's next?
>>
>
>
>
The Vul study debunked the use of fMRI to determine what a person is
thinking. It was a magic potion used in many studies to prove liberals
are smarter. So they analyzed several studies that used them,
contacted the others and proved none we're accurate. That by using
fMRI one can assume whatever
I've never lacked for fun.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> There are times I really wonder about your private life mo - gag
> balls, handcuffs? What's next?
>
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology n
Even dismissing all the studies that have that error, the ones left
still show the same relationships, just not as quite as strong. That
said, I disagree with how they aggregated the data. In fact I am not
sure whether the approach they used was at all appropriate in a meta
analysis. The assumptio
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Sam wrote:
> .
>
> You're argument is valid...
>
>
I am gonna save this forever and ever :D
--
Scott Stroz
---
You can make things happen, you can watch things happen or you can wonder
what the f*&k happened. - Cpt. Phil Harris
http://xkcd.com/
That's not what the study found or why it was commissioned. Firth was
on a radio show and said conservatives are idiots, then he decided to
prove it by paying for a study that backed up his comment.
People think differently and use different parts of the brain. But
this study based on fMRI, aka j
I will admit, Larry's summary does sound a bit skewed, but that does not
mean the study is 'junk'
How is this for a good summary.
People with liberal views tend to have commonalities in their brain
physiology that differs form the commonalities of brain physiology of
people with conservative vie
The study showed that using fMRI research doesn't work, you can easily
pull out whatever result you want from each study.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> I found a copy of the study Sam was citing. It was very interesting.
> the author had some very valide criticisms
I found a copy of the study Sam was citing. It was very interesting.
the author had some very valide criticisms. One thing that was still
critical however and the authors provided this data themselves was
that when you looked a the studies without the non independence error,
as they termed it, the
Here's how Larry described it:
It makes perfect sense in a why. There is some neuropsych research
that's I've mentioned before that did functional MRI's on self
identified conservatives and progressives. What the researchers found
was that the areas of the brain that deal with processing fear and
But, Sam, that is not what the study is stating, that is what you are
saying it is stating.
In a nut shell, it says, for the most part, liberals and conservatives have
different political beliefs because their brains are built differently. And
that, for the most part, members of each 'group' seem
It's saying liberals are open minded and conservatives are closed
minded. That's as bad as it gets. But we know for a fact this bogus
science was just used to back up a bad opinion and has no basis in
fact.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> I do not think the results of t
Thank you. That is what I've been trying to drive into people's heads.
Its an elegant way of explaining why all things considered equal, why
people are attracted to different opinions/ideologies. It may even
give us a predictive model to use. Sorry going all mad scientist on
you guy here. To me th
Exactly, no better or worse, just how we process information
differently. those who have a greater tolerance for ambiguity and a
possibly more attracted to nuanced logic, (as expected with a more
active anterior cyngulate gyrus) may be attracted to the progressive
ideologies. In contrast those who
I do not think the results of the study showed which political opinion was
'smarter', rather that differing physiology may explain why the differing
opinions exist in the first place.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Agreed, but trying to determine which political opinion is the
Agreed, but trying to determine which political opinion is the smarter
one is plain ole stupid.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> At the 100,000 foot overview, I really don't think it is outside the realm
> of possibility that the physiology of our brain affects how we th
At the 100,000 foot overview, I really don't think it is outside the realm
of possibility that the physiology of our brain affects how we think.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Sam wrote:
>
>
> http://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=4MrZ9zMJ&citation_for_view=
http://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=4MrZ9zMJ&citation_for_view=4MrZ9zMJ:u5HHmVD_uO8C
The idea is that Conservatives think with the fear portion of the
brain, fear is often caused by ignorance but not always, while
liberals are open minded and acceptable t
That should have started with 'But as far as I can tell...'
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> Best as I can tell, the study did not say that conservatives were
> 'idiots', merely that it seemed that the physiology of the brain between
> 'liberals' and 'conservatives' was di
Best as I can tell, the study did not say that conservatives were 'idiots',
merely that it seemed that the physiology of the brain between 'liberals'
and 'conservatives' was different. Something I don't think is really all
that hard to believe.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> H
He commissioned the research to prove his point that conservatives are idiots.
The result was a Columbia research lab proved the use of fMRI data was
bogus science.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:48 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Yeah he was involved in the research somehow.
>
> We had a lengthy thread
I would go with cute instead of nice but since he didn't read the
study I'd say that is also wrong.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:37 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> nice!!
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:25 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
>>
>> Uh, no comment was made about intelligence, only responses in different
Yeah he was involved in the research somehow.
We had a lengthy thread about it a while ago. Some of us were concerned
over the small sample size and wondered about the questions and methodology
used in the study. The people that liked the study argued for it, those
that didn't like the study ar
That produced...nothing.. http://screencast.com/t/qfvD1mLi
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Search the archives for Colin Firth
>
> .
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> >
> > Links to the 'debunking'?
> >
>
>
Colin Firth the actor?
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Search the archives for Colin Firth
>
> .
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> >
> > Links to the 'debunking'?
> >
>
>
~|
Order the
nice!!
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:25 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> Uh, no comment was made about intelligence, only responses in different
> areas of the brain to different stimuli.
>
> Conservatives can still be really smart, but different parts of their
> brains seem to be activated differently in res
Search the archives for Colin Firth
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Links to the 'debunking'?
>
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272
Links to the 'debunking'?
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> It's junk science because it's been debunked. That's what happens when
> you commission a study you all ready know the answer to. Biased
> science.
>
> .
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:25 PM, GMoney wrote:
> >
> > Uh, no
It's junk science because it's been debunked. That's what happens when
you commission a study you all ready know the answer to. Biased
science.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:25 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> Uh, no comment was made about intelligence, only responses in different
> areas of the brain to di
Uh, no comment was made about intelligence, only responses in different
areas of the brain to different stimuli.
Conservatives can still be really smart, but different parts of their
brains seem to be activated differently in response to different stimuli,
than liberals.
For instance, a conserva
There are times I really wonder about your private life mo - gag
balls, handcuffs? What's next?
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Maureen wrote:
>
> I'll throw in the handcuffs for free.
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
>>
>> it would only work if you could tie her hand
I don't think so, rather look at the messages involved. Those who are
more tolerant of ambiguity, etc may be attracted to progressive
ideologies, while conservatives may tend to be attracted to the
anxiety reduction messaging given by conservative ideology. This is a
very gross over simplification
I'll throw in the handcuffs for free.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> it would only work if you could tie her hands as well - to keep them
> from a keyboard.
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Maureen wrote:
> >
> > For them to have any kind of thinking would be an i
I cannot help but wonder (and maybe I missed it in those links) - is
someone a 'liberal' or 'conservative' because of the physiology, or is the
physiology as it is because someone is a 'liberal' or 'conservative'?
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Here's the abstract.
I think Sam need to be reminded of Daniel Patrick Moynihan's rule,
"You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to
your own facts."
Sam seems to think the opposite.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Just curious, Sam, how/why is what Larry said 'junk' s
Same asinine study from before. Look up the Actor Colin Firth in the archives.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Here's the abstract. The study itself is not behind a paywall btw:
> http://www.cell.com/current-biology/retrieve/pii/S0960982211002892
>
> This blog post
Here's the abstract. The study itself is not behind a paywall btw:
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/retrieve/pii/S0960982211002892
This blog post gives an OK explanation.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds
Other research:
http:/
In the archives, long discussion, lots of research, he gets proven
wrong. Three months later he pretends nothing happened and starts his
argument again.
According to him your stupid too, you need to be a moonbat like him to
be considered smart if you go by his studies.
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at
Just curious, Sam, how/why is what Larry said 'junk' science?
Larry - got linkage to any studies?
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Sam wrote:
>
> You're an idiot. Again with this junk science about how much smarter
> your opinion is?
>
> .
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Larry C. Lyons
You're an idiot. Again with this junk science about how much smarter
your opinion is?
.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Well the research in this area is fairly clear, the anterior cingulate
> gyrus, which deals with tolerance for ambiguity and handles nuanced
> logic
it would only work if you could tie her hands as well - to keep them
from a keyboard.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Maureen wrote:
>
> For them to have any kind of thinking would be an improvement. I'd pay a
> year's salary for someone to superglue a ball-gag into Coulter's mouth.
>
> On Fri
Well the research in this area is fairly clear, the anterior cingulate
gyrus, which deals with tolerance for ambiguity and handles nuanced
logic and reason tend to be much less active among conservatives than
progressives. Mind you the amygdala tends to me much larger among
self-identified conserv
For them to have any kind of thinking would be an improvement. I'd pay a
year's salary for someone to superglue a ball-gag into Coulter's mouth.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> tone deaf. Like Ann Coulter further mocking mentally handicapped
> people - she really went
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:04 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
>
>
> These people need to have some nuanced thinking.
>
>
I would settle for any kind of thinking, nuanced or not.
--
Scott Stroz
---
You can make things happen, you can watch things happen or you can wonder
what the f*&k ha
tone deaf. Like Ann Coulter further mocking mentally handicapped
people - she really went into a rant against that downs syndrome guy
who asked for an apology.
These people need to have some nuanced thinking.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:56 AM, GMoney wrote:
>
> You'd think a politician would want
You'd think a politician would want to stay away from his achilles heel,
not highlight it. Just a dumb ad on so many levels.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> The latest Todd Akin commercial features a woman claiming to be a rape
> survivor. The man is simply tone deaf.
The latest Todd Akin commercial features a woman claiming to be a rape
survivor. The man is simply tone deaf.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/11/01/akin-ad-features-survivor-of-sexual-assault/
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 12:20 AM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Give me 15 minutes alone
tsk. Dildo.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Give me 15 minutes alone with them, a baseball bat and a nutcracker. I'll
> show them how wrong they are.
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> >
> > the thing is, I am sure they have people telling them to shut up,
Give me 15 minutes alone with them, a baseball bat and a nutcracker. I'll
show them how wrong they are.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> the thing is, I am sure they have people telling them to shut up, but they
> are s convinced they are right.
>
~
the thing is, I am sure they have people telling them to shut up, but they
are s convinced they are right.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> The politician. Sorry.
> On Nov 1, 2012 7:30 PM, "Maureen" wrote:
>
> >
> > Is your WTF for my statement, or the politicians com
The politician. Sorry.
On Nov 1, 2012 7:30 PM, "Maureen" wrote:
>
> Is your WTF for my statement, or the politicians comment?
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> >
> > Seriously. WTF?
> > On Nov 1, 2012 5:43 PM, "Maureen" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > As a rape survivor and
Is your WTF for my statement, or the politicians comment?
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Seriously. WTF?
> On Nov 1, 2012 5:43 PM, "Maureen" wrote:
>
> >
> > As a rape survivor and also a mother who lost 5 babies to miscarriage,
> > until these politicians suffer an
Seriously. WTF?
On Nov 1, 2012 5:43 PM, "Maureen" wrote:
>
> As a rape survivor and also a mother who lost 5 babies to miscarriage,
> until these politicians suffer an equivalent stressors - if such existed -
> they should drink a large cup of STFU.
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Larry
As a rape survivor and also a mother who lost 5 babies to miscarriage,
until these politicians suffer an equivalent stressors - if such existed -
they should drink a large cup of STFU.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> giving his opinion on rape and abortion:
>
>
> http:/
giving his opinion on rape and abortion:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-congressional-candidate-says-the-rape-thing-is-not-cause-for-abortion/2012/10/31/f3a299d8-23a4-11e2-92f8-7f9c4daf276a_story.html
--
Larry C. Lyons
web: http://www.lyonsmorris.com/lyons
LinkedIn: http://www.linke
Why are these dinosaurs even on the ballot?
And before people say that Democrats say stuff too...NOOO!!
You don't read this crap from Democrats every month or every other month!
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/10/23/mourdock-god-intended-for-babies-to-result-from-rape/
Mourdock: Pregnancy from rape can be something that God intended to happen
Posted by Aaron Blake on October 23, 2012 at 8:54 pm
Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock s
57 matches
Mail list logo
