selkirk

I'm beginning to think your not a very good conservative republican KK. Your always welcome to join us moonbats on the left if you like. Smaller, fiscally conservative government, protecting the environment, staying out of other countries business, and wars. Sounds like the way the Republican party used to be.

Ok, so what about the Hard/Soft sciences and not just the Arts? "I am become Shiva, the destroyer of worlds" The Baghavad Gita, quoted by Robert Oppenheimer when the tested the first nuke.

However universities can have funding pulled for not allowing recruiters onto campus. And somehow I missed the bit about allowing minors to get abortions without parental consent. Now the morning after pill as over the counter, I can get behind.

only with respect to "Wordsmiths" though. While the liberal leaning of wordsmiths might be stronger than that in other fields. Why does the rest of intellectual society (i.e. scientists and engineers, the numbersmiths neglected by Nozick.) seem to be leaning left as well? (support of the global warming data, interest in stem cell research, opposition to Bush's treatment of scientific research etc etc. ) This article also only addresses the opposition to capitalism and the mechanism of wealth distribution ,and not the broader sense of liberal as well (tolerance of alternative lifestyles, environmentalism, pro-choice, desire to provide care for the elderly and poor instead of letting them fend for themselves, etc) As a whole the article seems a little thin. Numbersmiths don't lean left because they don't get vocal recognition? The article itself states that it's just a hypothesis, or arm chair conjecture in need of evaulation and quantitative testing. Has this been done yet? Anything beyond speculation?

works just as well, and holds just as true.

The same is also true of the right wing as well. But that doesn't matter much since it's not under discussion at the moment. Though the egomaniacal researchers i've met never really applied their ego to politics save occasionally department politics. It's usually reserved for students in the courses, and their own grad students when they aren't as brilliant as they should be. Good for you. Now that brings the number of conservatives i've met with an interest in being instructors at the Univ. level up to 1. But if you finished your masters you obviously did well in your coursework, so why didn't the liberal educators chew you up? Or did you just tell them what they wanted to hear? The only times i've heard of students having issues with over-zealously liberal instructors is at the level of freshman english, when it's being taught by grad students. Has anyone here ever run into elsewhere? And the whole "research" focus at major universities ends up being a huge disservice to the undergrads there, thought it's great for the grad students. A lot of people end up teaching courses, when they shouldn't ever be allowed out of the lab . That's actually one of my ongoing grievances against UW and other major research universities. The big name is made on research funding and graduate student output. Said big name draws in lots of undergrads, who proceed to take introductory classes with 300 other students in lecture, and often get exposed to egonmaniacal wankers who teach by lecturing, and telling their students how stupid they are. (not all mind you, there are some who are great at it.) There's so little focus put on teaching, that the undergrads get a bit lost in the shuffle. Smaller, more teaching oriented universities seem to do a better job actually educating students. And yes it is about teaching yourself, but that doesn't mean effective instruction can't accomplish a great deal more than ineffective instruction.

Even if a draft is applied equally, strings will be pulled regarding where/in what capacity draftees are assigned. Not everyone serves a combat role on the front line. But then it's not being applied equally. Not everyone needs to be on the front line, but no one should be in the rear just because daddy knows a general.

But again, how evenly was the draft applied? It may have been random in concept, but it seems that political strings can get pulled, and were back to the loss of life being a somewhat abstract concept for those making the decisions, instead of the loss of life possibly including their sons and daughters.

First off, I may have mistated myself. I don't necessarily think the Liberal bias in education makes itself overly strongly felt. Most of the instructors/TA's etc that i've dealt with do a good job seperating their own beliefs out from the subject matter, and teach the subject of the class pretty cleanly. I am however in engineering so there isn't all that much controversy. What I have seen is not so much liberal bias affecting most courses, as have met very few (none in higher ed) highly conserative people who teach at any level. Trying to sum up the basic positions real quick. KK: Liberal Bias exists because in order to academically succed one must kowtow to the profs and either actually hold or at least espouse their own liberal bias. Does that sound right? Dberdinka, Jiggler, Foraker: Liberal bias is there as to be successfull in education you can't be close minded or too dogmatic since you must continually analyze opposing viewpoints and analyze the support for your own beliefs. ChucK: Liberal bias is an artifact of conserative individuals having a different set of priorities (i.e. $$$) Jim: Have you stopped beating your wife yet? And KK, please, of course there are liberal ego-maniacs in each and every field , though I tend to see this more in people who are primarily researchers then those who are primarily teachers. I've met a number who seem to view teaching as penance that they have to do in order to be allowed to research at a major Univ. However there are also an awful lot of good people who are very focused on education and learning and aren't their for their own prestige or advancement. And yes there are dogmatic extremist wacko's on both end of the spectrum. As for a more well rounded education? Why would the left wing not support that? I have to agree completely, and i'm certainly a liberal though I doubt i'd qualify as left wing. We've shifted too far from the original intent of a university education, from a broad, general education that teaches one how to think clearly about any topic with some specialization in one field, to an advanced technical degree, where the only issues you are ever confronted with come from one very narrow field (extremely true in engineering). My own impression is along the line of ChucK's. I've met very few conservative people who are interested in teaching others. Many tend to be of the "Those who can do. Those who can't teach." mindset, and primarily define success in a career/monetary sense. While the more liberal people I know tend to define their success/quality of life based around the relationships and/or the positive outcome of the work they do. It's my opinion that the people who go into education to teach, do so because they feel that teaching the next generation of students is the most valuable thing anyone can do, and the best way to insure that our societies and ideas don't dissappear. (Those who go into academia primarly to research are often of a very different breed though.) On a sidebar, i'd even be willing to venture that there is a spectrum of the level of liberality from lower education through higher. The more complex and involved the concepts are, and the higher the amount of education necessary to teach those concepts, the more liberal (in general) the average person who ends up teaching at that level. (So I bet the Elementary and Middle school teachers, are on the whole, somewhat less liberal than high school teachers, who are somewhat less liberal the Community College Instructors, who are somewhat less liberal than major Univ. instructors. (again, thos who are primarily focused on research are somewhat excepted.)

Ok, I think most people are willing to readily accept that there is a liberal bias in education (k-12, and collegiate) as well as in the science community. So my question for everyone is why? Is it something that self selects? Liberal establishment chooses to promote/advance liberal causes, which are pursued by each new generation of liberal researchers/teachers/proffessors who then become the liberal establishment? Or is it something more fundamental? On a related note, why does education seem to correlate progressive/liberal beliefs? What are everyone's thoughts?

Ok, so lets assume there is a bias in science and it does tend to produce left leaning results. (Global warming is man caused, burning grass fields leads to increase asthma levels, were going to run out of oil in the near future, etc etc.) How should we approach that error? Is it better to completely write off the results do what ever we want and deal with the consequences later? Personally i'm in favor of erring on the side of conservation. If were wrong, nothing happens, the trends continue, and we have a few more resources later on (trees, oil, coal, etc.) and what suffers in the short term are a few companies pocketbooks. Employment levels drop for major polluters as they spend money on upgrades and employment rises as regulation and remediation technology producers to help clean up the "dirty industries". Net effect, temporary economic slowdown, possible minor depression, unpleasant in the short term but no major long term effects. In the long run, we can always cut down the trees, burn the coal, drive off the oil, 10 years from now as easily as we can now. If the scientists are right? Were ourselves over right now and in 50 years, we'll be seeing significant temperature changes, more droughts, more dangerous heat waves, more species dissapearing faster, permanently lost forests and biodiversity etc. We may not be screwed but our children might very well be. So..... which is it to be? Err on the side of caution, and at worst temporary discomfort? Or Err on the side of potentially screwing ourselves over? hmmmmmm, tough choice and yes, I'm a highly biased scientist. What can I say, I want to graduate Bias does exist, and does take a while to correct itself. But as it's been stated before.... the scientific process eventually sets itself straight, it might take a few years, or a generation. But nothing garners scientific prestige and recognition faster than good reproducible data that refutes the current level of understanding. Names and careers are never made confirming current understanding, but by rocking the boat a little and producing new understaning.

I didn't sit on my ass and watch TV at home. How could you all be inside? Leavenworth and Vantage were in! Though Vantage was a bit crowded :-(

The tri-nuts are actually a different design. the cross section looks like a triangle with all the points cut off, so you actually get three different widths out of it instead of the traditional 2 you get of most nuts. Though you sacrifice a little rock contact area on the cut-off-triangle point side.

Has anyone used the new Omega Pacific Tri-nuts? Or fondled the new DMM wallnuts? Those are inspiring wicked thoughts just looking at them.

Has anyone else heard the scuttlebut that it might starting taking a passport to get back in from Canada/Mexico? (as opposed to a Birth Certificate?)

Is that the day Layton finally gets some?

How could you have neglected to post the poem Squiddy!!! The Mark Johnstone Version of "Twas the Night Before Christmas" "Twas the week before Christmas, and boy was it neat. We had been on vacation, and my wife was in heat. The doors were all bolted, the phone off the hook, It was time for some nooky, by hook or by crook. Momma in her teddy and I in the nude, Had just hit the bedroom and reached for the lube. When out from my privates there arose such a cry, That I lost my boner and thought I would die. Up to the window I sprang like a very big flea, The pain was so bad it stung like a bee. I ran down the hall past the 'putter I'd built, And looked in a mirror, clean up to the hilt. When what to my wondering eyes should appear, But an airhole in my scrotum - I said to her....Dear. With two holes now seen, half out of my sock, It's time for a phone call, right now to a Doc. The first one I called, said I'd just lost my mind. So I paid him his worth ... it was only a dime. The next one I called said it was just a small mite Sure as I'm speaking, he was high as a kite All I had left was to lay there in pain A cry in the night with nothing to gain Then down the chimney came a big red guy St. Nick I told him, it must be a fly. He was chubby and plump, a right jolly old prick, And I laughed when I saw him, in spite of my dick. A wink of his eye and a twist of his head Soon gave me to know I had more problems to dread Whoa Shithead he said - you are such a Putz, Stop whining right now or I'll cut off your nuts. A phone number he gave and a big bag of ice He said call this Doc and he will be nice He sprang up the chimney, to his team gave a whistle And away they all flew like the down of a thistle. But I heard him exclaim boy "Don't bitch or don't pout" "Merry Christmas to all and be glad they are all out!"

no, not particularly. But what's so special about 62 million years?

Last thing I heard was it was one of the poor guys first trad leads. He was several pieces up and pitched (I think it was on the route just right of Nimrod's Nemesis? (The big roof on the climbers left at Royal Columns, which goes 5.5 I think)). From word of mouth it wasn't a spectacularly bad fallm just more than bad enough. Probably 10 or 12 ft, no ground fall, and his pro held. But he must have caught his foot on something during the fall. Sounds like a combination of newness to leading and bad luck while falling. A good reminder that even if you don't hit the ground you can hurt yourself.

eeeewwwwwww !!!!! I thought this was going to be a discussion about chicks

He's obviously too turned on to think straight.

What are you hoping to see with more details than your roof or car?

Yes, but since the atmosphere is thinner near the poles than they sky will squish Canuckistan first!!

or should that be sheepskin merkins?

Where's Snowbyrd been? Isn't she a red-head?