Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[Skep tickle]

US Supreme Court makes same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states. 5-4 decision, Kennedy writing for the majority.

A random news article, hot off the press: http://thehill.com/homenews/news/246241 ... x-marriage

[debaser71]

Add these number 2365 and 7184. In common core to solve it looks like this. 2000 + 700 +300 + 100 +60 + 80 +5 + 4 = . That's fine but not at the expense of making sure the kids know how to do standard math algorithms. Where you can just add up any amount of number with any amount of digits. Where you line up the problem and add columns right to left, carrying the 1, etc. And on the test, the question doesn't just ask, what is 2365 + 7184? It'll ask, "using the blahblah method, explain why Uniqua is wrong when she answers 9449." And no, answering because 2365+7184 does not equal 9449 is a wrong answer. Or saying because reality is such that it is, is not an answer. You NEED to explain gobbly gook. Like an exercise in Bullshitting. And as far as the answer to the math problem? Who cares, just explain.

I am not a mathematician but I did do STEM (before it was called STEM) in college and I have three daughters in the public school system. Where the school fails them I have to pick up the slack. Anyway I'll let others comment if they so desire.

[German LurksBoatsman]

The lifestyle was much more of an issue than the ethnicity. I'm not saying that the Romans were tolerant, far from it. They were, as I wrote, hugely culturally racist: they believed that the Roman culture was superior to all others and that "un-Roman behavior" was disgusting. The nature of their racism was different from American racism, though, and that's the point of my screed. They didn't have "one drop" rules and they didn't care that much about physical appearance as long as you were culturally Roman.

Elagabalus was incredibly "un-Roman" in his behavior (including his sexuality) and therefore he was seen as a menace.

O.K. I do think that Roman and modern racism differ, sure, because they stem from quite different concepts of race and arose under totally different circumstances. I wouldn't go as far as saying Romans didn't care about your ethnicity because I'm pretty sure they did. 'Barbarian' was always an ethnical and cultural concept and one is really hard to tell from the other, especially two millennia after the fact. Sure, you can make your way through the ranks of an ethnically diverse army and hope to become pretender, than emperor. Doesn't tell you what Rome's senators would think about you. Maximinus Thrax was seen as a barbarian on the throne, so how do you tell if it was because of his manners or because he was presenting as Thracian. Is there even a difference?

Septimius Severus was half-Roman, half-Semitic, not ethnically African**. I don't see any notable differences in appearance in his busts but who knows. It's hardly a coincidence these Romans always used white marble, erasing his possible Libyan heritage. Shitlords, I tell you.

Gothicus was of Illyrian origin, if wikipedia is right, which I don't think qualified as Germanic then.

But I do agree that Romans had a no clear concept of race, rather of foreignness. I just think ethnicity is quite a part of that.


** I'm also not at home so I can't do more than skim some wikipedia links right now. So basically all there is to this knowledge thing.

[Skep tickle]

You can quote your statistics until the cows come home but that does not in any way, shape or form address that rather important question; those statistics are merely descriptive, but in no way address the causes for that belief: many people have believed that the universe revolved around the Earth, but I hardly think you're likely to think that that made it so. Or maybe you do, and that you subscribe to the view that reality is socially constructed ...

There's a huge difference between the nature of the position of the Earth within the universe and the nature of language.

The Earth isn't socially constructed: the behaviors of thousands or millions of people about its position within the universe do not change it one bit. Languages are, at a least partly, a social construct. Racism is also largely a social construct. I was actually waiting for you to make your point explicit, so it can be refuted more easily.

Your view of language as something existing on its own, as a structure of rules and meanings that have a direct correspondence to some structures in the brain, is similar to the view of the logical positivists or of the first Wittgenstein (around the time he wrote the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.)

But even the "second Wittgenstein" noticed this simply isn't how language is used in society. Only formal languages (like mathematics) can be described as a set of rules and axioms.

"Natural" languages are a social tool.

<snip>

Hats off to kirbmarc for this excellent post. :clap:

[debaser71]

oops I messed my numbers a bit..sorry but I hope you get the idea.

[katamari Damassi]

...
While others rely on rigid, unthinking, inflexible dogma. It's pathetic, really.

... the dogma of 'men and women are the same except reproductive organs' is so ludicrous that it's 'not even wrong.' And yet that's where Myers has gone...

He's a joke. Hell, he's beyond a joke.

Peez has painted himself into a corner, as he must feed his Horde this pomo bullshit to keep them around. He sounds like a complete fool whenever he opens his mouth. Why anyone would still rely on him to explain science is baffling.

"The same except for reproductive organs?" Are you saying men can't have vaginas and women can't have penises? Take your hate speech back to Stormfront bigot!

[Lsuoma]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

[comhcinc]

I just want to point out that I was living in Alabama and they were the legalized gay marriage then I moved to Georgia and less than a week later it is legalized here too.

I am the gay messiah.

[John D]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Indeed. I may have to dust off my Celebrant Certificate.

Prediction. This will help the Republicans in 2016 because they will argue this is another case of SCOTUS over-reach. There is already a law in Michigan that allows religious adoption agencies to refuse a gay couple. There is a bill in progress that says you can only be married by a religious officiant. The battle will continue in the political arena even if this is settled law.

[jimthepleb]

snip

SNIP

Why?

[Skep tickle]

Add these number 2365 and 7184. In common core to solve it looks like this. 2000 + 700 +300 + 100 +60 + 80 +5 + 4 = . That's fine but not at the expense of making sure the kids know how to do standard math algorithms. Where you can just add up any amount of number with any amount of digits. Where you line up the problem and add columns right to left, carrying the 1, etc. And on the test, the question doesn't just ask, what is 2365 + 7184? It'll ask, "using the blahblah method, explain why Uniqua is wrong when she answers 9449." And no, answering because 2365+7184 does not equal 9449 is a wrong answer. Or saying because reality is such that it is, is not an answer. You NEED to explain gobbly gook. Like an exercise in Bullshitting. And as far as the answer to the math problem? Who cares, just explain.

I am not a mathematician but I did do STEM (before it was called STEM) in college and I have three daughters in the public school system. Where the school fails them I have to pick up the slack. Anyway I'll let others comment if they so desire.

Anecdote here. My kid hated the requirements posed in early elementary school math, with its verbally-based approach. I think it was 2nd grade when he complained that he just wanted to solve the problem & they wouldn't let him. He had already been soaking up math like a sponge before starting school, & outside of school, so got through that part, but it was tough. He ended up essentially doing independent study in late elementary school then taking classes offered to higher grades. When he was young, it was hard to find math-rich books for him to read for fun - so many of them are geared - and even titled - with messages like "you don't have to be scared of math!", which fear had never crossed his mind so it seemed potentially counterproductive to introduce it. The Number Devil (a German book translated into English) and The Colossal Book of Mathematics (CBM) were great. He started reading CBM well before he could understand much of what was in it, but kept reading it over & over for fun. :)

I've been thinking more about girls' self-confidence in science & math since starting to transcribe the Milo Y & Emily Grossman TV show segment yesterday. I poked around to find a couple more studies, including this one: pnas.org/content/107/5/1860.full.pdf?with-ds=yes Female teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement (PNAS, 2010; full text plus supplement at link). From the abstract on this study of 17 female 1st & 2nd grade teachers and 117 of their students:

By the school years' end,...the more anxious teachers were about math, the more likely girls (but not boys) were to endorse the commonly held stereotype that “boys are good at math, and girls are good at reading” and the lower these girls’ math achievement.

Consider, then, a couple of possible approaches to improving girls' experience of their math & science education. From Grossman, the advice is to make science & math learning environments more nurturing for girls. From the study above, one might consider whether reducing math anxiety in early elementary teachers (or, reducing early elementary teachers with math anxiety) could help. Or, last but not least, from the Hornbeckian school: tell girls during science & math classes that, because it's just a social construct, they're boys. (Best to have that be limited to those classes, though, so the girls' overall school performance doesn't suffer.)

This is first and second grade math.
And the female teachers are anxious.

corestandards.org/Math/Content/2/introduction/

Understanding multidigit numbers up to 1000.
Counting by 5s, 10s, and multiples of 100s.
Add and subtract within 100 (under 100?)
Understand inch and centimeter and use rulers.
Analyze shapes

Given the quality (or lack thereof) of math teaching I have seen in K-12, I might think what is hurting girls in math is not what Tim Hunt says at a lunch in Korea, but having shitty teachers who exhibit math anxiety on 2nd grade math.

Perhaps instead of subjecting kids to a plethora of standardized teaching, we should give math competency and math anxiety tests to all teachers and then help those teachers learn math and learn how to teach math.

And make sure all kids and teachers memorize their fucking addition and subtraction tables, and give them back plenty of paper, and make them fucking practice and practice and practice until the shit is memorized.

The absolutely shitty math skills I've seen by high school graduates, college graduates, (and even ph.ds) who are otherwise clearly quite bright is the most depressing thing ever but clear indications that what hurts kids is terrible teachers, not the patriarchy.

The supplemental material for that paper included the exam they gave the teachers. It was more difficult than 1st/2nd grade math & included scary things like dividing by fractions.

Also, I quite disagree about pushing kids to memorize, memorize, memorize as their intro to math. Maybe some will find that comforting but others will chafe at it. Math is (personal bias here) fascinating, useful, & (above the arithmethic level) beautiful. Not everyone will have their boat floated by the same thing, but allowing it to be interesting seems like a much better way to keep from training kids to hate math.

[comhcinc]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Indeed. I may have to dust off my Celebrant Certificate.

Prediction. This will help the Republicans in 2016 because they will argue this is another case of SCOTUS over-reach. There is already a law in Michigan that allows religious adoption agencies to refuse a gay couple. There is a bill in progress that says you can only be married by a religious officiant. The battle will continue in the political arena even if this is settled law.

I think at this point the tide has turned enough with undecideds that it won't really matter.

[comhcinc]

Another islamic terrorist attack this morning in France by two guys. So far, it's only been reported that one person was beheaded and their head hung on the factory's gate along with two islamic flags. The terrorists also drove through some gaz containers, probably trying to explode them. One of the suspected attackers has been arrested.

This will fail to get a lot of attention today. It's important and I hope that it's a subject that gets noticed in the next week or so.

[katamari Damassi]

Dawkins issued a tweet congratulating the US for legalizing same sex marriage. So how long do you think before one of his dedicated detractors condemns him for erasing trans people or the polyamorous or some such nonsense.

[Billie from Ockham]

http://i62.tinypic.com/1zb827l.jpg

The point of the above and the correct use of the above is to demonstrate how small (horizontal) differences in the mean can produce large (vertical) differences in the tails. That's it. Nothing more. Using it for other purposes is as ignorant as calling inferential statistics "descriptive" and then bitching that they don't tell you cause.

Put another way: the above depicts the Spinning Dancer of frequency statistics. (It even has two large mounds [in most cases], just like the dancer's tits.)

[katamari Damassi]

Another islamic terrorist attack this morning in France by two guys. So far, it's only been reported that one person was beheaded and their head hung on the factory's gate along with two islamic flags. The terrorists also drove through some gaz containers, probably trying to explode them. One of the suspected attackers has been arrested.

This will fail to get a lot of attention today. It's important and I hope that it's a subject that gets noticed in the next week or so.

Only in the U.S. I'm sure it's front page stuff in Europe.

BTW-if I were a serial killer with a thing for decapitations, I'd go to France and just drop something Islamic at the scene of my murders. It's the perfect crime.

[comhcinc]

Another islamic terrorist attack this morning in France by two guys. So far, it's only been reported that one person was beheaded and their head hung on the factory's gate along with two islamic flags. The terrorists also drove through some gaz containers, probably trying to explode them. One of the suspected attackers has been arrested.

This will fail to get a lot of attention today. It's important and I hope that it's a subject that gets noticed in the next week or so.

Only in the U.S. I'm sure it's front page stuff in Europe.

BTW-if I were a serial killer with a thing for decapitations, I'd go to France and just drop something Islamic at the scene of my murders. It's the perfect crime.

I bet that America going gay will be a bigger story even in Europe. We are the center of the Universe.

[Billie from Ockham]

What is seam foam?

Girl Answer: a misspelling of a version of light blue.

Guy Answer: a misspelling of that stuff you use to clear your fuel system, valves, and piston-tops.

That shit works.

I agree 100%. Since redoing the bedroom with sea-foam-colored paint, I have ceased to need those funny-shaped, sky-colored pills.

Or were you trying to be manly and were referring to the crap for the car's engine? Well, I agree about that, too, actually, especially if you're running on corn.

[debaser71]

"Also, I quite disagree about pushing kids to memorize, memorize, memorize as their intro to math"

IMO the notion that math used to be all rote memorization is a canard. All you need to know for most math is your times tables and some "fact families" like 8+7 = 15; so you know that 15-8=7 and 15-7=8. You take this basic knowledge, sort of stack them together, then you solve (not memorize) a problem. IMO solving is sort of the opposite of memorize. I find that when people want to say bad things about those who oppose the common core they say something about rote memorization being bad. As if that has anything to do with solving math problems. They might mention something about raising standards too but here in New York the CC standards are lower than previously required. Maybe in bumfuck Montana CC standards are higher.

[deLurch]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Wow. It appears to be a no holds barred decision. I bet there might be some legal skirmishes in the states, but I can't imagine they will go far.

I wonder what the religious right will do in reaction/opposition to this.

[deLurch]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Indeed. I may have to dust off my Celebrant Certificate.

Prediction. This will help the Republicans in 2016 because they will argue this is another case of SCOTUS over-reach. There is already a law in Michigan that allows religious adoption agencies to refuse a gay couple. There is a bill in progress that says you can only be married by a religious officiant. The battle will continue in the political arena even if this is settled law.

Yeah, I can see the religious right trying to pull an abortion catch to this ruling. They might continue to put up small laws and barriers in the way in an effort to prevent this.

[comhcinc]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Wow. It appears to be a no holds barred decision. I bet there might be some legal skirmishes in the states, but I can't imagine they will go far.

I wonder what the religious right will do in reaction/opposition to this.

Georgia, who has had a state constitutional ban since 2004, is already marrying people. I think everyone knew it was going to happen and were just waiting for the shoe to drop.

[Parody Accountant]

I bet the Inuit men called the color of snow as 'white' and I bet the Inuit women called the color of snow as 'pearl, oyster, linen, eggshell, alabaster, ivory, frost, parchment, cotton, etc'.

Yep. And if Frank Zappa had been a female Inuit, we would have been treated to:

"Watch out where the huskies go and don't you eat that lemon snow."

"Eskimos have more words for snow than there are atoms in the universe" - Black Science Man

[Shatterface as Guest]

Hats off to kirbmarc for this excellent post. :clap:

As tiresome as I find Steersman's 'arguments' the one plus out of this conversation is reading kirbmarc's responses.

Shatterface

[katamari Damassi]

http://i62.tinypic.com/1zb827l.jpg

The point of the above and the correct use of the above is to demonstrate how small (horizontal) differences in the mean can produce large (vertical) differences in the tails. That's it. Nothing more. Using it for other purposes is as ignorant as calling inferential statistics "descriptive" and then bitching that they don't tell you cause.

Put another way: the above depicts the Spinning Dancer of frequency statistics. (It even has two large mounds [in most cases], just like the dancer's tits.)

In my early internet experiences on bulletin boards services I learned that a lot of people who identify as liberal or progressive are reflexively opposed to any generalization. If you were to say that in general humans have brown eyes, you'd get a dozen "nuh-uh. I have blue eyes and know a lot of people who don't have brown eyes." I think it's an instinct against falling for potentially nasty stereotypes, which I understand. Though generalizations are true about a population, we must regard people as individuals. If it's found that in general, women are more nurturing than men, that shouldn't be used to decide a particular child custody case.

[deLurch]

So when does the US gay marriage go into effect? The news articles so far don't have that info readily available.

[katamari Damassi]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Wow. It appears to be a no holds barred decision. I bet there might be some legal skirmishes in the states, but I can't imagine they will go far.

I wonder what the religious right will do in reaction/opposition to this.

They'll make noise for a little while. Probably attempt to pass religious exemption laws for clerks, but they'll move on to another issue they think they can win on.
Unlike Roe v Wade, there isn't much wiggle room here.

[fuzzy]

"Also, I quite disagree about pushing kids to memorize, memorize, memorize as their intro to math"

IMO the notion that math used to be all rote memorization is a canard. All you need to know for most math is your times tables and some "fact families" like 8+7 = 15; so you know that 15-8=7 and 15-7=8. You take this basic knowledge, sort of stack them together, then you solve (not memorize) a problem. IMO solving is sort of the opposite of memorize. I find that when people want to say bad things about those who oppose the common core they say something about rote memorization being bad. As if that has anything to do with solving math problems. [...]

I agree. Math's rap for rote memorization comes from the early drilling of addition and multiplication tables early on, but that part is so darn important. Because it's really hard to discuss examples of the higher concepts later on if you're having to stop and think very hard about what nine times six is. They really don't drill them hard at all these days, and in my brief stint as a teacher I found that endlessly frustrating and I thought core didn't emphasize that enough. Or perhaps I was just bad at 'splainin' things.

I suppose the situation of having to memorize of formulas without understanding them may be the other source of the rap. I confess I barely know what "core" has come to mean these days. A lot of people in the ed biz would go broke if they didn't churn the pedagogy every few years :-)

[Lsuoma]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Indeed. I may have to dust off my Celebrant Certificate.

Prediction. This will help the Republicans in 2016 because they will argue this is another case of SCOTUS over-reach. There is already a law in Michigan that allows religious adoption agencies to refuse a gay couple. There is a bill in progress that says you can only be married by a religious officiant. The battle will continue in the political arena even if this is settled law.

Yeah, I can see the religious right trying to pull an abortion catch to this ruling. They might continue to put up small laws and barriers in the way in an effort to prevent this.

The real problem in preventing this is that it's a 14th amendment issue, and it has huge amounts of corporate, personal, financial, white, middle-class support for it. I really don't think that it is in danger. There is NO WAY this will be overturned by a further amendment (which would be in favor of bigotry) or a SCOTUS decision. This is done and dusted, even though it will continue to generate heat and light.

[Lsuoma]

So when does the US gay marriage go into effect? The news articles so far don't have that info readily available.

Now. It means that states can't outlaw same-sex marriage anywhere in the union. If someone can find an officiant, they can get married and any attempt to discriminate is now unconstitutional.

[John D]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Indeed. I may have to dust off my Celebrant Certificate.

Prediction. This will help the Republicans in 2016 because they will argue this is another case of SCOTUS over-reach. There is already a law in Michigan that allows religious adoption agencies to refuse a gay couple. There is a bill in progress that says you can only be married by a religious officiant. The battle will continue in the political arena even if this is settled law.

Yeah, I can see the religious right trying to pull an abortion catch to this ruling. They might continue to put up small laws and barriers in the way in an effort to prevent this.

Gay marriage will not be banned.... I agree. But the Republicans will get tons of mileage and votes from all the adjacent topics associated with religious freedom. We are going to hear nothing from Republicans except that a baker of a wedding cake doesn't need to bake a cake for gays...etc.

My super religious coworker (who thinks this is a sign of the coming end times) is worried that liberals will start to force ministers to perform gay weddings. It's total bullshit... but they really think this is coming.

[deLurch]

So when does the US gay marriage go into effect? The news articles so far don't have that info readily available.

Now. It means that states can't outlaw same-sex marriage anywhere in the union. If someone can find an officiant, they can get married and any attempt to discriminate is now unconstitutional.

In one news video I saw, the news caster said that this wasn't the case. That there would be an date in which this decision becomes active.

So while states are free to follow this ruling immediately, they would be within their rights to not do so until the enforcement date.

[comhcinc]

So when does the US gay marriage go into effect? The news articles so far don't have that info readily available.

Already happening in Georgia.

[comhcinc]

So when does the US gay marriage go into effect? The news articles so far don't have that info readily available.

Now. It means that states can't outlaw same-sex marriage anywhere in the union. If someone can find an officiant, they can get married and any attempt to discriminate is now unconstitutional.

In one news video I saw, the news caster said that this wasn't the case. That there would be an date in which this decision becomes active.

So while states are free to follow this ruling immediately, they would be within their rights to not do so until the enforcement date.

The enforcement date would be today. A state may try to delay for a day or so but they will be risking a lawsuit.

[James Caruthers]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Indeed. I may have to dust off my Celebrant Certificate.

Prediction. This will help the Republicans in 2016 because they will argue this is another case of SCOTUS over-reach. There is already a law in Michigan that allows religious adoption agencies to refuse a gay couple. There is a bill in progress that says you can only be married by a religious officiant. The battle will continue in the political arena even if this is settled law.

Yeah, I can see the religious right trying to pull an abortion catch to this ruling. They might continue to put up small laws and barriers in the way in an effort to prevent this.

If they try to make the election about gay marriage, the Republicans will lose. This is a done deal in the public eye as far as all the major metropolitan centers are concerned.

[comhcinc]

[Parody Accountant]

I think even bigger than the SCOTUS ruling is the release of this amazing product:

http://i.imgur.com/0YvUWZP.jpg

[John D]

So when does the US gay marriage go into effect? The news articles so far don't have that info readily available.

Already happening in Georgia.

People are already in line at the county clerk offices in Michigan. Some of the progressive county clerks have already changed the form to remove "husband and wife" type language and make the form gender neutral.

There will be more marriages in the US in the coming days than in any period in history. haha. I suspect Monday will set the record and this record will never be broken.

[Slipterid]

Another islamic terrorist attack this morning in France by two guys. So far, it's only been reported that one person was beheaded and their head hung on the factory's gate along with two islamic flags. The terrorists also drove through some gaz containers, probably trying to explode them. One of the suspected attackers has been arrested.

This will fail to get a lot of attention today. It's important and I hope that it's a subject that gets noticed in the next week or so.

Only in the U.S. I'm sure it's front page stuff in Europe.

BTW-if I were a serial killer with a thing for decapitations, I'd go to France and just drop something Islamic at the scene of my murders. It's the perfect crime.

Yes it's front page news here. But the SJWs are surely not going to pay attention until they can be sure it isn't an islamic terrorist event, they have to be sure it's a white hate crime against black gay muslim French women. Then they will be all over it.

[comhcinc]

If they try to make the election about gay marriage, the Republicans will lose. This is a done deal in the public eye as far as all the major metropolitan centers are concerned.

This. It's not like Alabama was not going to go red. In the big swing states, many which already had gay marriage, it's a popular thing already. You may see some bitching in the primaries but I doubt even that much.

[deLurch]

I think even bigger than the SCOTUS ruling is the release of this amazing product:
http://i.imgur.com/0YvUWZP.jpg

Ass-period pads?

Gone are the days of never trusting a fart. Now it is trust but verify.

[deLurch]

There will be more marriages in the US in the coming days than in any period in history. haha. I suspect Monday will set the record and this record will never be broken.

Great. After WWII there was a huge baby boom. I can't image what the hospitals will look like 9 months from now.

[Lsuoma]

So when does the US gay marriage go into effect? The news articles so far don't have that info readily available.

Now. It means that states can't outlaw same-sex marriage anywhere in the union. If someone can find an officiant, they can get married and any attempt to discriminate is now unconstitutional.

In fact it means that states can no longer decline to issue licenses as of now.

It also means that if a couple who have a marriage legally sanctioned under any jurisdiction, including foreign, arrives in a state in the union, then they are de jure recognized as married in that state and can't be discriminated against.

[Slipterid]

snip

SNIP

Why?

Because they have scissors and ur balls are unprotected?

[deLurch]

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/m ... /29245521/

While it wasn't immediately apparent when the ruling would officially take effect — court mandates are typically issued after 25 days — the decision was expected to quickly touch off a wave of marriages before sympathetic officials at the state and local levels in Michigan and across the U.S.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Finally PZ is getting back to the science subjects that established his popularity:
https://archive.is/7A8dx

I...*throat spasm*,

I...*feeling nauseous*,

I...agree with him. *pukes profusely*

[Billie from Ockham]

"Also, I quite disagree about pushing kids to memorize, memorize, memorize as their intro to math"

IMO the notion that math used to be all rote memorization is a canard. All you need to know for most math is your times tables and some "fact families" like 8+7 = 15; so you know that 15-8=7 and 15-7=8. You take this basic knowledge, sort of stack them together, then you solve (not memorize) a problem. IMO solving is sort of the opposite of memorize. I find that when people want to say bad things about those who oppose the common core they say something about rote memorization being bad. As if that has anything to do with solving math problems. They might mention something about raising standards too but here in New York the CC standards are lower than previously required. Maybe in bumfuck Montana CC standards are higher.

I half agree. At first, there's a lot of memorization (of the procedural sort, actually, so it's really skill learning by repetition). If you have to think to do basic arithmetic, then you won't have the spare capacity to do the hard stuff. After that, however, it's much more conceptual, so rote learning can actually impede, rather than help. I see many first-year grad-students who have a lot of stats facts already memorized, but can't get the two core concepts of Central Limit Theorem, no matter what I do. When I work with high-school students on robotics, I have the same problem when teaching them statics; they can do the trig easily, but the idea that torques and forces sum to zero is a problem (although my new trick of saying "you don't give an F, yes? Well, the sum of the Fs is, therefore, zero" has been helpful).

[free thoughtpolice]

Another islamic terrorist attack this morning in France by two guys. So far, it's only been reported that one person was beheaded and their head hung on the factory's gate along with two islamic flags. The terrorists also drove through some gaz containers, probably trying to explode them. One of the suspected attackers has been arrested.

Wham Bam Ramadam, thank you Imam!

[Billie from Ockham]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

Indeed. I may have to dust off my Celebrant Certificate.

Prediction. This will help the Republicans in 2016 because they will argue this is another case of SCOTUS over-reach. There is already a law in Michigan that allows religious adoption agencies to refuse a gay couple. There is a bill in progress that says you can only be married by a religious officiant. The battle will continue in the political arena even if this is settled law.

I predict that the decision will have a huge (positive) effect of right-wing turn-out - and turn-out has been key for decades - but it could (a) peak too soon and (b) could trigger a left-wing turn-out bump in response.

I'm not at all worried about "religious officiant" bills. Those have no chance of standing up, even if Scalia survives the predicted heart-attack from this week, Thomas finally asks a question, and the other three Catholics are threatened by the Pope.

[John D]

There will be more marriages in the US in the coming days than in any period in history. haha. I suspect Monday will set the record and this record will never be broken.

Great. After WWII there was a huge baby boom. I can't image what the hospitals will look like 9 months from now.

Haha.... gay marriage will affect births????? haha.

[Parody Accountant]

You guys... they released maxi pads for your anus.

Shart pads.
Poopshoot parachutes.
Second chance wipes.
Skid-lock protection.
Santorum Sanitary Napkin.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Add these number 2365 and 7184. In common core to solve it looks like this. 2000 + 700 +300 + 100 +60 + 80 +5 + 4 = . That's fine but not at the expense of making sure the kids know how to do standard math algorithms. Where you can just add up any amount of number with any amount of digits. Where you line up the problem and add columns right to left, carrying the 1, etc. And on the test, the question doesn't just ask, what is 2365 + 7184? It'll ask, "using the blahblah method, explain why Uniqua is wrong when she answers 9449." And no, answering because 2365+7184 does not equal 9449 is a wrong answer. Or saying because reality is such that it is, is not an answer. You NEED to explain gobbly gook. Like an exercise in Bullshitting. And as far as the answer to the math problem? Who cares, just explain.

I am not a mathematician but I did do STEM (before it was called STEM) in college and I have three daughters in the public school system. Where the school fails them I have to pick up the slack. Anyway I'll let others comment if they so desire.

My grandfather, a math teacher, taught me c. 1968 that quick method you describe above oor adding up big numbers. He also taught me how to count backwards (he called it "Australian" for upside down) to make change. And for multiplying -- what's 9 x 7 ? It's 10 x 7 minus 7. You can do rough division the same way.

[deLurch]

There will be more marriages in the US in the coming days than in any period in history. haha. I suspect Monday will set the record and this record will never be broken.

Great. After WWII there was a huge baby boom. I can't image what the hospitals will look like 9 months from now.

Haha.... gay marriage will affect births????? haha.

What? You don't believe me? OK. Let's select a neutral arbitrator from outside our forum. Someone that would hate us both so that there will be no bias. How about Alex Gabriel?

[Matt Cavanaugh]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

But can you marry a squid?

[Billie from Ockham]

In my early internet experiences on bulletin boards services I learned that a lot of people who identify as liberal or progressive are reflexively opposed to any generalization. If you were to say that in general humans have brown eyes, you'd get a dozen "nuh-uh. I have blue eyes and know a lot of people who don't have brown eyes." I think it's an instinct against falling for potentially nasty stereotypes, which I understand. Though generalizations are true about a population, we must regard people as individuals. If it's found that in general, women are more nurturing than men, that shouldn't be used to decide a particular child custody case.

With regard to your first example, I believe that the problem is actually one of applying continuous thinking to a categorical variable. Within a given eye-color, there is lots of continuous variation, but across eye colors, it's categorical (i.e., there is no meaningful ordering to the values and shifts between values occur in discrete steps). Thus, there is no "mean" or "average" eye-color, because categoricals do not have meaningful summary measures of central tendency; with a categorical, the simplest descriptive stat with any meaning is the frequency histogram.

Your second example doesn't cause any statistical grief, which, I believe, is why fewer people have issues with the generalization.

Where the fun comes in is when you have a discrete but quantitative variable (such as number of children). Because it is quantitative, the mean has meaning; e.g., most people can understand what is meant by "average number of children in US families is 1.85"). But because the underlying (raw) data are discrete, nobody can have the mean number of kids, so the summary statistic cannot be applied to any individual. That, in my experience, is what motivates many claims that summary stats can't be used when you're interested in the individuals. Of course, this is based on a core misunderstanding of the correct use for summary stats, but when would something like that stop a SJW?

With all that said, I sometimes think that my brother is only about 85% human (and I have no other siblings), so maybe the summary stats for US family size does apply to some families. I also have 4.5 pets right now, as I haven't let the cat out of Schroedinger's Box.

[Lsuoma]

You guys... they released maxi pads for your anus.

Shart pads.
Poopshoot parachutes.
Second chance wipes.
Skid-lock protection.
Santorum Sanitary Napkin.

Starfish stuffers.

[Lsuoma]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

But can you marry a squid?

It's be interesting to see people walking down the aisle arm in arm in arm in arm in arm...

[Tigzy]

You guys... they released maxi pads for your anus.

Shart pads.
Poopshoot parachutes.
Second chance wipes.
Skid-lock protection.
Santorum Sanitary Napkin.

Dung Doilies.
Winnit Wings.
Leaky Knicks.
Dangleberry Diapers.

'OooaaaAAAWWWGRAAAAH BODYFORM! Bodyform for POO-OOO!'

[Billie from Ockham]

I think even bigger than the SCOTUS ruling is the release of this amazing product:
http://i.imgur.com/0YvUWZP.jpg

Given where that product is supposed to be worn, was anyone else immediately reminded of the early LA Law episode concerning the "Butterfly Flick"?

No?

Well, in that case, I'll shut up now.

[comhcinc]

SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14 ... 6_3204.pdf

But can you marry a squid?

Is the squid gay?