Reply to Thread New Thread |
11-06-2011, 05:58 AM | #1 |
|
Here's just one example of the kind of tripe this guy got published as phony "science"
"Thinking of meat, does not exactly bring out the best in people, Roos Vonk noted. People who looked at the steak had made selfish choices during a division game, they often chose in their own interest. In imaginary situations, they found themselves more important than others and reacted less social: in a fire they found that they often wished to be saved first, and that they were less willing to help someone who is upset. It was also found that after people eating meat they felt less connected to others, lonely and unpopular" after eating meat. http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/20...ism_as_science ALSO, he made up facts to support urban spending.. "Finding" as a result of his "science" that Whites are more racist against Blacks in a broken down environment. These are the kinds of "studies" the libfucks have been waving around FOR YEARS.. They actually believe this shit! |
|
11-06-2011, 06:12 AM | #2 |
|
In my class sociology of race/ethnicity my teacher says whites are more racist against blacks.
My teacher said white people used to set up black people to fail by using IQ tests and asking questions with wording only upper class educated whites would understand as a way to disqualify them for jobs. I like to watch primetime tv show "what would you do" they always bust someone being racist or discriminating and make them feel ashamed and apologize. I always wonder if someone did a counter show and then confronted the same person after the primetime crew left and asked the person who got busted being racist why they apologized and if they felt shamed into being politically correct because they were on tv if they would admit it |
|
11-06-2011, 06:14 AM | #3 |
|
My teacher said white people used to set up black people to fail by using IQ tests and asking questions with wording only upper class educated whites would understand
as a way to disqualify them for jobs. The tacit admission here: Blacks are FUCKING STUPID and can't read, write or speak as well as whites. I mean, that's what their accusation boils down to. Blacks just suck goat ass and are a race that needs training wheels... |
|
11-06-2011, 06:15 AM | #4 |
|
|
|
11-06-2011, 06:34 AM | #5 |
|
|
|
11-06-2011, 06:35 AM | #7 |
|
|
|
11-06-2011, 07:10 AM | #8 |
|
|
|
11-06-2011, 03:54 PM | #9 |
|
To be honest when I was told that I would be "required" under Gen Ed guidelines to take a "diversity" class I felt resentful.
It cost me $417.00 and my choices were race/ethnicity, or gender issues where they study gay lesbian transgender and feminism. I don't see why that should be required as "basic requirements" alongside math, science & english. I think it should be an elective but not a requirement. |
|
11-06-2011, 04:03 PM | #10 |
|
|
|
11-06-2011, 05:28 PM | #11 |
|
Sociology is the biggest waste of time I have ever spent in my entire college career. I got an A in it because I regurgitated what they wanted to hear and used words and approaches the professor probably didn't even understand. They tend to think that societies can be controlled and manipulated, that studying societies can make us "progress" in the sense of technological and scientific progress in understanding and "manipulating" societies. You are not going to do that with humans. There is just no science in it - after all it is a social "science".
BTW - I would guess almost all sociologists are Left and Liberal. |
|
11-06-2011, 05:30 PM | #12 |
|
To be honest when I was told that I would be "required" under Gen Ed guidelines to take a "diversity" class I felt resentful. |
|
11-06-2011, 05:34 PM | #13 |
|
Sociology is the biggest waste of time I have ever spent in my entire college career. I got an A in it because I regurgitated what they wanted to hear and used words and approaches the professor probably didn't even understand. They tend to think that societies can be controlled and manipulated, that studying societies can make us "progress" in the sense of technological and scientific progress in understanding and "manipulating" societies. You are not going to do that with humans. There is just no science in it - after all it is a social "science". I don't see why they can't have apprenticeships like the old days and just learn on the job. However, this sociology class is not even for sociology majors, it is a class required to EVERYONE in Basic requirements, you MUST take a diversity class on race or gender or religious tolerance. I am not sure when it became a requirement for basics but it seems unfair. |
|
11-06-2011, 05:40 PM | #14 |
|
Well I want to take care of elderly people's needs in old folks homes and to be a coordinator the government requires a degree in Sociology. You would think it required a Public Health Degree (which does incorporate a few Sociology classes). I would understand taking a class on World Religions, which I did and liked it (philosophy base ), but not something with "tolerance" at the end. I make up my own mind after observing the facts. |
|
11-06-2011, 05:49 PM | #15 |
|
To be honest when I was told that I would be "required" under Gen Ed guidelines to take a "diversity" class I felt resentful. |
|
11-07-2011, 01:09 AM | #16 |
|
It's required because the Marxists who dominate "higher education" use it to indoctrinate people into their ideology. Their tactics can be traced all the way back to the Frankfurt School. Sadly, their strategy is working. That's why we ended up with Obongo. whenever I start to wonder things and ask questions people get really angry. |
|
11-07-2011, 01:13 AM | #17 |
|
I think I have been indoctrinated a little bit. |
|
11-07-2011, 01:14 AM | #18 |
|
Liberals, especially college professors, don't like to have their beliefs challenged. They get mad because their views won't hold up under the slightest amount of scrutiny. Rather than try trying to defend the indefensible, they just prefer to silence the opposition. |
|
11-08-2011, 08:39 AM | #19 |
|
|
|
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests) | |
|