Huginn

I got 100%. The questions were quite diffictult to read, though. I wonder to what extent reading comprehension is being tested.

[ June 17, 2002: Message edited by: Huginn ]</p>

Totalitarianist

I will never use chemestry for anything; it is to me like mathematics was to Darwin--not that I cannot understand chemestry like Darwin couldn't understand maths; I just have no use for it. Knowing what colour the sky is, like chemestry, is useless to me. Understanding the mechanisms of evolution is useful to me; understanding psychoanylisis is useful to me; understanding maths is useful to me; understanding relativity is useful to me; reading the correct literature is useful to me. All of these things can potentially further my sophistication in the subject of philosophy. Things like chemestry, scientology, the weather, and nearly everything else are completely useless to me; however, some brainless activities (I'm not implying that chemestry is brainless) are very useful to me;-- for example: walking. As of a few weeks ago, I never walked; but the re-realisation (I already knew this, but not onced considered it--) of the well-known fact that it gets your circulation going and thence delivers oxygen to the brain had me take up this particular hobby.

On second thought, perchance some branches of chemestry are somewhat useful; toxicology, for example. I am considerably unaqainted with this especial subject, but could applying toxicology peradventure increase something like memory and attentiveness? Just curious.

[ June 17, 2002: Message edited by: Lack of Paint ]</p>

Huginn

Well Brent/Trebaxian Vir/Tin Tin/Pseudonym/Lack of Paint/etc., some things turn out, rather unexpectedly, to be really useful to know. So it is a good idea to try and understand as much about everything as you can.

Totalitarianist

or not, lest you elbow out what you really want to know.

seebs

100%! Just proving that theists *CAN* understand science.

seebs

Yeah, that's what they all say. Fifty years ago, almost no one had heard of DNA, now everyone's using it.

You might like to read the Sherlock Holmes stories, in which Holmes makes this same point, and much more clearly than you... on the other hand, he was a cokehead, so I'm not sure how seriously I take him.

Skydancer

No one's ever said they couldn't. Just that they turn their brains off before applying it to their religious beliefs.

Fundies, on the other hand.....

Totalitarianist

I know.

I already quoted him somewhere on these forums.

I consider it pointless to quote him twice.

[ June 18, 2002: Message edited by: Pseudonym ]</p>

RufusAtticus

That just proves that you aren't a True Christian.

fando

Yes it is. The Sun appears larger at the equator than near the poles. Simple fact of geometry: You're slightly closer to the Sun at the equator than at the poles. However, the size difference due to our elliptical orbit is much greater. So #7 actually had 2 correct answers, but it takes some thinking to realize that.

The more you know, the less you know.

[ June 18, 2002: Message edited by: fando ]</p>