Joined: Sep. 2006
|Quote (jujuquisp @ Jan. 19 2007,09:00)|
|New Tardative posted!!!|
"Although I agree with the point of your post, that greater acceptance of ID can be considered an indicator of scientific literacy, your assessment of the NSF statistic was not quite right."
Point taken. However, if you add up the percentages for the US for each of the 9 literacy questions excluding evolution then take the average, and do the same for EU, the U.S. comes out slightly higher.
So it IS essentially equal with a slight U.S. lead if all 9 questions are given equal weight. Keep in mind if we consider the opener a valid question and add that into the equation “Is astrology science?” then the U.S. gets a wider lead in the average.
I would guess I unconsciously weighted the questions differently such that being way more right about Astrology not being science is better than being a little more right about continental drift. Or that being way more right about the nature of radioactivity and antibiotics is more important than being a little more right about sperm determining the sex of a child or the center of the earth being very hot. The relative importance of the questions biased my conclusion.
DaveTard, you are simply unbelievable. Learn how to read graphs properly and quit LYING. You are a blatant LIAR and are a DISGRACE. You have NO credibility except amongst the DEMBSKIISTS. Your explanations to any rational person are ABSURD and PATHETIC. You make me NAUSEOUS.
Good find batboy.
I think DaveTard is in Six Sigma Black Belt the way he manipulates those statistics to make his coherent point.
I wonder if Dembski, the PhD mathametician and owner of the blog, approves of this type of analysis?