K
kell
I got the very same scores as you did (800/720) in 1993(the scoringI got an 800 on my math SAT (but only 720 on the verbal) but that was
before they dumbed it down.
adjustment came a year or two after that).
I got the very same scores as you did (800/720) in 1993(the scoringI got an 800 on my math SAT (but only 720 on the verbal) but that was
before they dumbed it down.
Eat some whale blubber. It has a calming effect.What next? You'll copy the
Germans and declare you are the master race?
Mark said:Hi,
purely out of curiosity, is there anyone who can tell me what happened
to popular electronics mail-order companies of the 1970s like Poly Paks
in the US and BiPak & BiPrePak in the UK? There must have been a trend
that killed them off, and caused other medium sized names to shrink
while a few grew very large? Is there a book on this element of history??
Mark A
martin said:
Why do you have such contempt for ordinary people and their beliefs?
Are Canadians much different? Do you have similar contempt for
Buddhists and Intuits and everybody else with spiritual beliefs?
I don't believe much of that stuff, but I sure don't feel superior,
much less mocking, to those that do. Actually, I rather envy them
having something bigger than themselves that they can believe in.
Well, what do you believe in? Cartoon animation?
I don't mean to bash Canada, a nice place with very nice people, but
when a Canadian claims that the US is "part of the ongoing war on
intelligence and knowledge" I get a little skeptical. This is the same
guy who bashes Americans for being fat but won't say how much he
weighs.
Guess which country all those Nobels were shared with?
Of course, what you should have said is "I don't care about the original
topic of this thread, I'll reply to make some commentary, and cross-post
it to sci.electronics.design in addition to the original
sci.electronics.components because I'm more interested in this off-topic
stuff than in commenting in the original newsgroup about the original
post".
Sometims not saying anything is more effective than trying to chime into
every thread.
Barry said:Does that mean that possession of 555's is a felony?
I got the very same scores as you did (800/720) in 1993(the scoring
adjustment came a year or two after that).
One can criticise ordinary people when they believe claims for which
there is absolutely no objective evidence.
The usual criticism is to call them gullible, and point ot that they
are being deluded by religious leaders who make a nice income out of
peddling this kind of rubbish.
What are they believing in that is bigger than themselves? You've
measured a god recently?
Cartoon animations do exist. Their relation to reality isn't all that
direct, but then again, nobody is being asked to worship them, or to
support missionaries who go out and try to persuade other suckers to
worship them.
Like I said, mean people suck.
Right.I don't think the SAT is more than some rough indicator. I went to
school with a few true math geniuses, way better than me, and none of
them nailed the math part, after several tries. Taking the SAT mainly
demonstrates one's skill at taking the SAT.
John
I agree. What sort of sick, twisted scum sucking bastards lie to thousands
of people so they can steal from them and live a life of luxury while their
'believers' live in misery? Apart from Republicans that is?
That author discovered, somewhat to his own dismay, that
self-described conservatives, Republicans, and Christians are far more
charitable, and generous to the community at large, than
self-described liberals and atheists. More likely to help others; more
likely to donate time and money to both religious and non-religious
causes; more likely to help strangers and foreigners. The least
generous people are young liberals.
I heard him on a local PBS interview. He's a sincere and committed
statistician who reported what he found.
As usual, your prejudices are at odds with reality.
No, they aren't. From Halliburton to Henry Hinn I see no liberals.
Read the book.
kell said:I got the very same scores as you did (800/720) in 1993(the scoring
adjustment came a year or two after that).
kell said:Right.
But the verbal part is even worse. In effect it's a measure of your
socioeconomic status. It's a vocabulary test.
I grew up in a roomy middle-class home with lots of books and college-
educated parents, but some kid raised in an inner-city apartment that
contains few or no books (but has of course a television) would hardly
be likely to score as well on that test, no matter how great his
native intelligence.
Dare I ask how it's possible to score over 100% ? It's not by any change an
attempt to massage the average figure is it ?
Talking of which the average figure someone posted is equivalent to 56% which is
pretty damn lame.
John said:A "perfect" score on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (the common
college-admissions test here) is 800.
That depends on how hard the questions are.