Great new signing

Scalped...Styled.

This is me laughing at you and your ignorance Aldo. For a man who claims to be more intelligent that us mere mortals you don't half swallow some amount of cack. Gullible is the word i'm looking for here

Did you seriously think me and Reb were having a real conversation about Prods.

 

I had hoped it was

 

Whereas Aldo thought it was

 

Oooft . We have had the tinternet hardman now your resorting to making **** up .

Where is it you think I agreed with you that I don't know what I'm talking about or I'm not really an atheist ?

Your clutching now chump . It's getting funnier with every post you make .

 

That's a good self evaluation, dumbass.

 

Haha another tim telling lies .

Please point out where I claimed to be more intelligent than you mere mortals .

And what made you think I took you and your wee rebel oals inane chatter about proddies seriously ?

Was it me saying kaflik education was to be privatised ?

Kudos to you for sticking up for your wee pal but sorry Dev you've just got mantled .

 

This thread alone is replete with examples of you claiming to be of superior intellect to all and sundry.

As for you mentioning Kaflik education being privatised, yes, that's exactly what I meant. If you were paying no heed to our discussion why did you address your first post directly at me and Reb

(You will also note that you referred to us as "dummies", that's one of those examples I was on about).

So, if you did not take us seriously why on earth did you tell us about the Privatisation?

What made you think either of us was at all concerned about Kaflik education?

 

OOOOOOFT EPIC DEV FAIL .

SCALPED !!!!!!

 

I would ask you to explain but I have a feeling that will fall on entirely deaf ears and instead you will retort with some variation on the recurring theme that "I'm an idiot" if I don't understand what you are on about.

Spell it out Aldo, for God's sake man I don't have my Enigma machine on me.

What point is that quote supposed to prove or even make?

 

Is he saying that he did not take us seriously but he HAS posted a comment to prove we WERE serious?

 

Sorry...Mate

 

Dunning–Kruger effect

In Kruger and Dunning's experiments participants were given specific tasks (such as solving logic problems, analyzing grammar questions, and determining whether or not jokes were funny), and were asked to evaluate their performance on these tasks relative to the rest of the group, enabling a direct comparison of their actual and perceived performance.

Results were divided into four groups depending on actual performance and it was found that all four groups evaluated their performance as above average, meaning that the lowest-scoring group (the bottom 25%) showed a very large illusory superiority bias. The researchers attributed this to the fact that the individuals who were worst at performing the tasks were also worst at recognizing skill in those tasks. This was supported by the fact that, given training, the worst subjects improved their estimate of their rank as well as getting better at the tasks.

The paper, titled "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments," won a 2000 Nobel Prize.

In 2003 Dunning and Joyce Ehrlinger, also of Cornell University, published a study that detailed a shift in people's views of themselves influenced by external cues. Participants in the study (Cornell University undergraduates) were given tests of their knowledge of geography, some intended to positively affect their self-views, some intended to affect them negatively. They were then asked to rate their performance, and those given the positive tests reported significantly better performance than those given the negative.

Daniel Ames and Lara Kammrath extended this work to sensitivity to others, and the subjects' perception of how sensitive they were. Work by Burson Larrick and Joshua Klayman has suggested that the effect is not so obvious and may be due to noise and bias levels.
Dunning, Kruger, and coauthors' latest paper on this subject comes to qualitatively similar conclusions after making some attempt to test alternative explanations.

 

Run Forrest, Run.

 

Could any hermeneutist on here explain the difference between a 'staunch atheist' and an 'atheist'?

 

Uberfud.