Topic: Study shows Atheists have "far lower IQs than believers"
ShitArse !saAqdaazn2 started this discussion 12 years ago #35,245
http://huffingtonpost.com.sundaytimesdaily.com/clinical-study-shows-atheists-have-far-lower-iq%27s-than-believers/r/32458HAHAHHAHAHAHA! Get rekt, fedorachildren!
base dew ltd joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later[^] [v] #485,026
I hate the huffington post the news is no place for jokes
Ugh
Ugh
ShitArse !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 45 seconds later, 2 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #485,027
Syntax joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 14 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #485,029
As a fan and contributor (yes I pay an editor) of HuffingtonFun to see ShitArse reverting to a phony story - Also a reminder that Einstein was an Atheists.
Atheists 'have higher IQs': Their intelligence "makes them more likely to dismiss religion as irrational and unscientific"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2395972/Atheists-higher-IQs-Their-intelligence-makes-likely-dismiss-religion-irrational-unscientific.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2395972/Atheists-higher-IQs-Their-intelligence-makes-likely-dismiss-religion-irrational-unscientific.html
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #485,030
@previous (Syntax)
Huh. Odd to see the Daily Mail running that story. Normally they're pro-Christianity.
Huh. Odd to see the Daily Mail running that story. Normally they're pro-Christianity.
base dew ltd replied with this 12 years ago, 25 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #485,043
Syntax replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #485,046
@485,030 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Yes I was curious as well and could have done a more better job with a quick search - So Daily mail publishes article on the 16th of month and
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/13/are_atheists_smarter_than_religious_people_partner/ on as you see 13th of month however they note Daily Mail source the info from the 12th at Yahoo.
Yahoo appears 1st to publish as a known news source and it got its article directly from
http://psr.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/02/1088868313497266.abstract on the 6th which also says it is printed on-line before in print so its the 1st source
Author will excite ShitArse in2 serious buttttthurt rage when he sees its a Harvard PhD that led the study.
Yes I was curious as well and could have done a more better job with a quick search - So Daily mail publishes article on the 16th of month and
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/13/are_atheists_smarter_than_religious_people_partner/ on as you see 13th of month however they note Daily Mail source the info from the 12th at Yahoo.
Yahoo appears 1st to publish as a known news source and it got its article directly from
http://psr.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/08/02/1088868313497266.abstract on the 6th which also says it is printed on-line before in print so its the 1st source
Author will excite ShitArse in2 serious buttttthurt rage when he sees its a Harvard PhD that led the study.
(Edited 43 seconds later.)
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 56 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #485,049
I heard non-believers actually have a higher IQ than believers.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 12 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #485,054
> believing there is a god despite being able to proof it
vs.
> believing there is no god despite being able to proof it
vs.
> believing there is no god despite being able to proof it
squeegee joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #485,067
@previous (F)
proving my point by not knowing the difference between those two statements.
also you forgot the "nots" unless you've got proof
proving my point by not knowing the difference between those two statements.
also you forgot the "nots" unless you've got proof
squeegee double-posted this 12 years ago, 28 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #485,077
oh. this is not that other thread. i may have commented without context since some of this thread has ignored shitass posts.
Metæ joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #485,079
The Huffington Post is a fucking joke. Also why are you citing a liberal paper @OP?
Syntax replied with this 12 years ago, 10 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #485,080
@previous (Metæ)
In defense of the Huffington post.
1:In 2012, The Huffington Post became the first commercially run United States digital media enterprise to win a Pulitzer Prize.
2:The Huffington Post was ranked #1 on the 15 Most Popular Political Sites. Rankings based on the top 3 web site biz that do the rankings.
Yes without doubt it is Liberal and openly Liberal. With a little inside insight - It after reeling in $315 Million from AOL - and pulling in a mass of $$$ from advertisers and co deals with TV and digital media sites - Best guess is they will totally split off from AOL - and make the insiders even more wealthy - Got to just love Free Enterprise.
> Huffington Post is a fucking joke
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/best-jokes/
In defense of the Huffington post.
1:In 2012, The Huffington Post became the first commercially run United States digital media enterprise to win a Pulitzer Prize.
2:The Huffington Post was ranked #1 on the 15 Most Popular Political Sites. Rankings based on the top 3 web site biz that do the rankings.
Yes without doubt it is Liberal and openly Liberal. With a little inside insight - It after reeling in $315 Million from AOL - and pulling in a mass of $$$ from advertisers and co deals with TV and digital media sites - Best guess is they will totally split off from AOL - and make the insiders even more wealthy - Got to just love Free Enterprise.
> Huffington Post is a fucking joke
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/best-jokes/
base dew ltd replied with this 12 years ago, 42 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #485,083
Syntax replied with this 12 years ago, 16 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #485,084
base dew ltd replied with this 12 years ago, 7 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #485,085
@previous (Syntax)
there are a few blogs i track to keep up to date and get actual info on actual stories along with one news site i don't remember the name of because i bookmarked it and Mic (formerly policymic) and the Washington post isn't as bad as huff post
also the guardian sometimes
i don't like most big news sites even the decent ones i do not want to see another fucking list style buzzword article ever again
there are a few blogs i track to keep up to date and get actual info on actual stories along with one news site i don't remember the name of because i bookmarked it and Mic (formerly policymic) and the Washington post isn't as bad as huff post
also the guardian sometimes
i don't like most big news sites even the decent ones i do not want to see another fucking list style buzzword article ever again
Syntax replied with this 12 years ago, 23 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #485,089
@previous (base dew ltd)
Wash post is often cited in Huff as well as several from Wash post also do work for Huff
Out of here for some adventure as surprise and have no clue how to dress for it - part of the mystery party thingy
Wash post is often cited in Huff as well as several from Wash post also do work for Huff
Out of here for some adventure as surprise and have no clue how to dress for it - part of the mystery party thingy