Are There More Christians or Atheists in Law School? Forum

[John Mill]

then we had the Texas oil man who had us paying 3.50 a gallon for gas, and now we're on to Obama... the guy who thinks windows on airplanes should open and has us paying 4.00 a gallon for gas.

Man we need another president like Lincoln...

The "windows on airplanes" guy was Romney, not Obama.

Hahaha it was? I must be getting tired... Anyway my point was we went from philanderer, to a lunatic, to a dumbass over the past three presidents.I wan't a president like some of the truly great leaders we've had in our history...

[Ludo!]

then we had the Texas oil man who had us paying 3.50 a gallon for gas, and now we're on to Obama... the guy who thinks windows on airplanes should open and has us paying 4.00 a gallon for gas.

Man we need another president like Lincoln...

The "windows on airplanes" guy was Romney, not Obama.

Hahaha it was? I must be getting tired... Anyway my point was we went from philanderer, to a lunatic, to a dumbass over the past three presidents.I wan't a president like some of the truly great leaders we've had in our history...

Elaborate on why Obama is a dumbass, TYIA

[John Mill]

then we had the Texas oil man who had us paying 3.50 a gallon for gas, and now we're on to Obama... the guy who thinks windows on airplanes should open and has us paying 4.00 a gallon for gas.

Man we need another president like Lincoln...

The "windows on airplanes" guy was Romney, not Obama.

Hahaha it was? I must be getting tired... Anyway my point was we went from philanderer, to a lunatic, to a dumbass over the past three presidents.I wan't a president like some of the truly great leaders we've had in our history...

Elaborate on why Obama is a dumbass, TYIA

Don't really wanna get into a big political debate, just not very impressed with what he's done. He ran his first campaign on a platform of change for America (which was a not so subtle way of playing off the race thing) and then he didn't really accomplish anything besides getting DADT remanded in the military. Then while campaigning for his second term he billed himself as some great champion of the middle class, and most of what he's done has only hurt the middle class.

I just read an article a little while ago about how Papa John's pizza is cutting back on employee hours to pay for Obamacare. Plus I have an uncle who makes too much money for the state to pay his health insurance, but not enough to afford to pay for it himself, and now he's being charged for that. Plus I think that Obama putting heavy taxes on big corporations is just going to wind up costing the middle class a bunch of jobs.

I wanna be clear, I don't think much more of people like Mitt Romney, I heard somebody describe this election as a battle to decide the shiniest of two turds, and I think that's a pretty fitting example, was super unimpressed this year, although I'm also sick as fuck of the recession so I might just be taking my frustration out where it isn't due...

[calidancer2]

Don't really wanna get into a big political debate, just not very impressed with what he's done. He ran his first campaign on a platform of change for America (which was a not so subtle way of playing off the race thing) and then he didn't really accomplish anything besides getting DADT remanded in the military. Then while campaigning for his second term he billed himself as some great champion of the middle class, and most of what he's done has only hurt the middle class.

I just read an article a little while ago about how Papa John's pizza is cutting back on employee hours to pay for Obamacare. Plus I have an uncle who makes too much money for the state to pay his health insurance, but not enough to afford to pay for it himself, and now he's being charged for that. Plus I think that Obama putting heavy taxes on big corporations is just going to wind up costing the middle class a bunch of jobs.

I wanna be clear, I don't think much more of people like Mitt Romney, I heard somebody describe this election as a battle to decide the shiniest of two turds, and I think that's a pretty fitting example, was super unimpressed this year, although I'm also sick as fuck of the recession so I might just be taking my frustration out where it isn't due...

lololololololol

most are appropriately blaming Papa John, not Obama for that. EAT DOMINOES INSTEAD!!!!

/ibtl

[John Mill]

Don't really wanna get into a big political debate, just not very impressed with what he's done. He ran his first campaign on a platform of change for America (which was a not so subtle way of playing off the race thing) and then he didn't really accomplish anything besides getting DADT remanded in the military. Then while campaigning for his second term he billed himself as some great champion of the middle class, and most of what he's done has only hurt the middle class.

I just read an article a little while ago about how Papa John's pizza is cutting back on employee hours to pay for Obamacare. Plus I have an uncle who makes too much money for the state to pay his health insurance, but not enough to afford to pay for it himself, and now he's being charged for that. Plus I think that Obama putting heavy taxes on big corporations is just going to wind up costing the middle class a bunch of jobs.

I wanna be clear, I don't think much more of people like Mitt Romney, I heard somebody describe this election as a battle to decide the shiniest of two turds, and I think that's a pretty fitting example, was super unimpressed this year, although I'm also sick as fuck of the recession so I might just be taking my frustration out where it isn't due...

lololololololol

most are appropriately blaming Papa John, not Obama for that. EAT DOMINOES INSTEAD!!!!

/ibtl

I do blame Papa John, just like I blame the corporations who lay people off rather than cutting back on CEO salaries when they get taxed heavier, but I think that when everybody predicts that the corporations will react this way, and the president still goes ahead with these policies, it's not going to endear me to him.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

You have to take it in the context of the original comparison. sinfiery was claiming that less religious people are more intelligent, and that based off of this, law students on average would be less religious. Law students being more intelligent than your average American is incidental if you take the fact that they have graduated college and the average American has not, even if it is true. What I was trying to say is that even if the average law student is more intelligent than the average American, law school itself is not the reason why. I'm sure there are many schools in the lower TTT that would accept your average American, if they only had a degree and a loan.

See what I'm trying to say? The average law student may well be more intelligent than the average American, but law school itself is not the test of that, so the argument that: religious people = less intelligent (which I'm not saying is true) + law schools only accept intelligent people = less religious people in law school is false.

...No one was making the argument that "law schools only accept intelligent people." And no one was saying anything about causation between law school students and average American. You went off on a ridiculous tangent and refused to admit a very basic thing. Protip: Learn to admit your wrong in the future--there's nothing wrong with saying "Oops, that was dumb of me, you're right." People prefer that compared to "Oh, I misunderstood you and you misunderstood this point i was trying to make about nothing that concerns this particular topic."

Actually the research on that is still up in the air, but the current consensus is no, if the test is administered properly you cant increase your numbers by any significant degree, and that after you reach a certain age your kind of locked in place.

Like I said before, this is wrong. You can improve your speed, you can improve your spatial reasoning, etc. If you sit around taking IQ tests at your local bookstore all day long for a few weeks, you will sure as shit improve your IQ score. Familiarity with the test is one of the things that hurts it's ability to gauge intelligence, since the test is really meant to be taken by an audience with no familiarity whatsoever. It's not too different from the LSAT.

As I said in the beginning I agree with this, but the numbers are not attributed to law schools themselves as much as to having graduated undergrad school. Now calm down and stop flipping out/cursing over a miss communication.

Once again, nothing was attributed to law schools themselves except by you. The topic was correlation, not causation. And it wasn't a miscommunication. It was you being wrong and being too stubborn too admit it.

On a related note: I don't have much evidence to support the proposition that overall intelligence can be increased through studying. There is stuff that points to studying as an activity that can increase grey matter, increase in neurons and their survival rate, but you're right that there needs to be research to link this change in the brain to increased overall intelligence. So, I really shouldn't have tried to argue with you on that point since I don't have much of an argument.

[FattyMcFatFat]

Don't really wanna get into a big political debate, just not very impressed with what he's done. He ran his first campaign on a platform of change for America (which was a not so subtle way of playing off the race thing) and then he didn't really accomplish anything besides getting DADT remanded in the military. Then while campaigning for his second term he billed himself as some great champion of the middle class, and most of what he's done has only hurt the middle class.

I just read an article a little while ago about how Papa John's pizza is cutting back on employee hours to pay for Obamacare. Plus I have an uncle who makes too much money for the state to pay his health insurance, but not enough to afford to pay for it himself, and now he's being charged for that. Plus I think that Obama putting heavy taxes on big corporations is just going to wind up costing the middle class a bunch of jobs.

I wanna be clear, I don't think much more of people like Mitt Romney, I heard somebody describe this election as a battle to decide the shiniest of two turds, and I think that's a pretty fitting example, was super unimpressed this year, although I'm also sick as fuck of the recession so I might just be taking my frustration out where it isn't due...

lololololololol

most are appropriately blaming Papa John, not Obama for that. EAT DOMINOES INSTEAD!!!!

/ibtl

I suspect that it's this sort of unfortunate partisan zealotry and egregious ignorance of economic reality among current and prospective law students that, at least in part, motivated the earlier questions about law student intelligence. (Appealing to the masses, begging the question / spewing dogma, etc.)

[Typhoon24]

My guess is that law schools probably have more non-religious people than anything else just because the higher you go up in education, the harder it is for you to believe that a burning bush talked to some "Prophet" in the desert and that Noah got all those animals on one ark. I'm not even going to get into the evidentiary argument. The religious that are in law school are probably a nuanced and more spiritual type of religious, rather than a fanatic or a fundamentalist. Whether or not they are atheists is a totally different story, though I would submit that there are a ton of agnostics, deists and pantheists out there in academia.

That being said, who cares? It's not like it matters. Everyone keeps this info to themselves and hardly let it influenced their actions.

[FattyMcFatFat]

then we had the Texas oil man who had us paying 3.50 a gallon for gas, and now we're on to Obama... the guy who thinks windows on airplanes should open and has us paying 4.00 a gallon for gas.

Man we need another president like Lincoln...

The "windows on airplanes" guy was Romney, not Obama. And although national average gas prices under Obama did kiss $4/gallon a few times, it's down to $3.52 and trending downward.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

[09042014]

then we had the Texas oil man who had us paying 3.50 a gallon for gas, and now we're on to Obama... the guy who thinks windows on airplanes should open and has us paying 4.00 a gallon for gas.

Man we need another president like Lincoln...

The "windows on airplanes" guy was Romney, not Obama. And although national average gas prices under Obama did kiss $4/gallon a few times, it's down to $3.52 and trending downward.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

Gas Prices weren't "trending downward" during the Bush administration. They were climbing very fast, then tell off a cliff once the Great Recession hit because global demand was shocked. We just returned to normal during Obama's term.

Anyone who is old enough to drive before 2006 should know this.

[rinkrat19]

then we had the Texas oil man who had us paying 3.50 a gallon for gas, and now we're on to Obama... the guy who thinks windows on airplanes should open and has us paying 4.00 a gallon for gas.

Man we need another president like Lincoln...

The "windows on airplanes" guy was Romney, not Obama. And although national average gas prices under Obama did kiss $4/gallon a few times, it's down to $3.52 and trending downward.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

Gas Prices weren't "trending downward" during the Bush administration. They were climbing very fast, then tell off a cliff once the Great Recession hit because global demand was shocked. We just returned to normal during Obama's term.

Anyone who is old enough to drive before 2006 should know this.

Gas was under $1 when I first became conscious of it (I remember the shock of it climbing from <$1 to ~$1.50 during the first Gulf War), and was around $1.25 when I learned to drive.

[FattyMcFatFat]

then we had the Texas oil man who had us paying 3.50 a gallon for gas, and now we're on to Obama... the guy who thinks windows on airplanes should open and has us paying 4.00 a gallon for gas.

Man we need another president like Lincoln...

The "windows on airplanes" guy was Romney, not Obama. And although national average gas prices under Obama did kiss $4/gallon a few times, it's down to $3.52 and trending downward.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

Gas Prices weren't "trending downward" during the Bush administration. They were climbing very fast, then tell off a cliff once the Great Recession hit because global demand was shocked. We just returned to normal during Obama's term.

Anyone who is old enough to drive before 2006 should know this.

Thank you Captain Obvious. 2 +2 = 4 (my insightful gift to you, since you were so generous to me). Although you seem to have unilaterally made a variety of false assumptions (I suspect this may be a symptom of that partisan bias; the closing childish dig makes me suspect this more), perhaps I was not clear (though I doubt it). By "long-run" trend, I mean "long-run" trend (write that down). As in "the future." I don't know how to make that clearer, sorry.

Domestic oil production will expand over the next few decades (hopefully and probably). The only thing that will keep gas prices from rising slower than inflation (probably) over the next few years is the current administration's unrepentantly counterproductive domestic oil policy (e.g., Keystone pipeline (which even former President Clinton, supports, BTW), ANWR, etc.).

I know you may have been persuaded by President Obama's outright lie about his administration's support for expanding domestic oil production during the second debate (if you watched or heard). Unfortunately, there is not much I can do if you choose to believe that.

[ChikaBoom]

Gas Prices weren't "trending downward" during the Bush administration. They were climbing very fast, then tell off a cliff once the Great Recession hit because global demand was shocked. We just returned to normal during Obama's term.

Anyone who is old enough to drive before 2006 should know this.

This. Gas was like 99 cents a gallon when I started driving (2002). LOL at 'trending downward'. They were at a high in spring/summer of 2008, IIRC, and have been slowly coming down since then.

[FattyMcFatFat]

Gas Prices weren't "trending downward" during the Bush administration. They were climbing very fast, then tell off a cliff once the Great Recession hit because global demand was shocked. We just returned to normal during Obama's term.

Anyone who is old enough to drive before 2006 should know this.

This. Gas was like 99 cents a gallon when I started driving (2002). LOL at 'trending downward'. They were at a high in spring/summer of 2008, IIRC, and have been slowly coming down since then.

"LOL at" selective partisan inference.

[09042014]

Thank you Captain Obvious. 2 +2 = 4 (my insightful gift to you, since you were so generous to me). Although you seem to have unilaterally made a variety of false assumptions (I suspect this may be a symptom of that partisan bias; the closing childish dig makes me suspect this more), perhaps I was not clear (though I doubt it). By "long-run" trend, I mean "long-run" trend (write that down). As in "the future." I don't know how to make that clearer, sorry.

Domestic oil production will expand over the next few decades (hopefully and probably). The only thing that will keep gas prices from rising slower than inflation (probably) over the next few years is the current administration's unrepentantly counterproductive domestic oil policy (e.g., Keystone pipeline (which even former President Clinton, supports, BTW), ANWR, etc.).

Your writing is incomprehensible bro, and that's a huge insult coming from me.

LOL at long-run meaning "in the future." Do a linear model of gas prices since 2000 til now. It's got a good upward slope.

[FattyMcFatFat]

Thank you Captain Obvious. 2 +2 = 4 (my insightful gift to you, since you were so generous to me). Although you seem to have unilaterally made a variety of false assumptions (I suspect this may be a symptom of that partisan bias; the closing childish dig makes me suspect this more), perhaps I was not clear (though I doubt it). By "long-run" trend, I mean "long-run" trend (write that down). As in "the future." I don't know how to make that clearer, sorry.

Domestic oil production will expand over the next few decades (hopefully and probably). The only thing that will keep gas prices from rising slower than inflation (probably) over the next few years is the current administration's unrepentantly counterproductive domestic oil policy (e.g., Keystone pipeline (which even former President Clinton, supports, BTW), ANWR, etc.).

Your writing is incomprehensible bro, and that's a huge insult coming from me.

LOL at long-run meaning "in the future." Do a linear model of gas prices since 2000 til now. It's got a good upward slope.

I'm going to try this ooooone more time. "In the future," refers to "the future." Meaning "after today." Meaning "this day." Meaning "November 17, 2012." Maybe this will help:

http://money.usnews.com/money/personal- ... nergy-boom
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/50 ... ependence/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/eco-nomics/ ... -applause/

These are the first three links that come up if I Google "Domestic Oil Production."

Regardless, my main point has nothing directly to do with oil. It has to do with the fact that many law students are very quick to make partisan assumptions, and, unfortunately, not so quick to make sure those assumptions are correct by, for example, performing a simple Google search. Making assumptions like this is a critical factor adding to the perception that law students are sometimes not too bright, which may or may not have anything to do with OP's question about religion. Do you see how quickly this deteriorated into me having to repeatedly refute incorrect assumptions, probably made due to a conscious or subconscious partisan bias? The quality of my writing has nothing to do with the fact that you did not ask for clarification and chose to infer what you did.

The obvious point of contention, as I think you may see, is whether these assumptions are due to a partisan bias. I have only the last few posts to offer as evidence of that at this point.

[ChikaBoom]

This. Gas was like 99 cents a gallon when I started driving (2002). LOL at 'trending downward'. They were at a high in spring/summer of 2008, IIRC, and have been slowly coming down since then.

"LOL at" selective partisan inference.

Not partisan at all. The numbers are established and they occured in that time frame. I did not infer that it had anything to do with anything, you're the one that insisted that gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration. Both points of reference that I gave you were during that time. Seems like you're infering arguments that aren't there, not me.

[FattyMcFatFat]

you're the one that insisted that gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration.

... and now we've deteriorated to just making shit up.

[rinkrat19]

you're the one that insisted that gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration.

... and now we've deteriorated to just making shit up.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

[09042014]

ITT Reptile is confused that we all don't live in the conservative entertainment complex bubble.

[071816]

"In the future," refers to "the future." Meaning "after today." Meaning "this day." Meaning "November 17, 2012."

huh

[vpintz]

Tagging for fuckery.

[ChikaBoom]

you're the one that insisted that gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration.

... and now we've deteriorated to just making shit up.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

You were saying?

[FattyMcFatFat]

you're the one that insisted that gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration.

... and now we've deteriorated to just making shit up.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

Reading... reading... ah. Just as I suspected. There is no insistence that "gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration."

... but now the incessant assumptions and distortions have received support from a fellow groupthinker.

ITT Reptile is confused that we all don't live in the conservative entertainment complex bubble.

... and now the zombies resort to ad hominem based upon their false assumptions.

And for clarification. I am not a conservative.

[Ludo!]

you're the one that insisted that gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration.

... and now we've deteriorated to just making shit up.

The "gas prices trending downward" in the long run guy was Bush ("but, but, he was dumb and stuff," right?), despite Obama. This is is the sort of partisan ignorance I'm talking about. I am disappoint.

Reading... reading... ah. Just as I suspected. There is no insistence that "gas prices were trending downward during the Bush administration."

... but now the incessant assumptions have received support from a fellow groupthinker.

ITT Reptile is confused that we all don't live in the conservative entertainment complex bubble.

... and now the zombies resort to ad hominem based upon their false assumptions.

And for clarification. I am not a conservative.

I think the problem is

Your writing is incomprehensible bro