Foxy, you blow your credibility when you tell SM you have no further interest in continuing the discussion with him, yet take the bait and respond to his next comment within a few hours. If you are going to make a stand, you cannot also insist on having the last word.

I used to have arguments with my mother who, like me, could be difficult to deal with.

She would sometimes end our arguments with, "I don't want to talk to you any more, but before I stop talking to you, I have a few things to say."

Dear ConservativeHippie,

Thank You for your valid point.

I was not thinking of either my credibility or of having
the last word. It was mainly out of frustration that
Shadow Minister did not seem to
quite understand the issues being raised -
and I wanted him to read the Conclusion and
Discussions that followed on in the links
provided - especially in the Discover Magazine site.
Anyway, I'll make a note of your comments and I'll
sincerely try to do better next time.

Dear David F.,

I should have used your "hat argument,"
(put my hat on and simply walk away) - but
I guess when the right buttons are pushed -
we all react! I hope to do better next time.

Foxy,

"I'll make a note of your comments and I'll
sincerely try to do better next time."

" I hope to do better next time."

Erm....why don't you tell them to go and take a funny run?

As if they have any say on when and how often you should comment.

What a load of.....

Foxy,

I have read the studies and conclusions, and the conclusions from both the studies differ greatly from the articles to which you linked. For example both of them had samples that were so small that the results were within statistical error.

In the Amodio study with the previous study, the number of students claiming to be conservative was so small (6 this time) that any anomaly would distort the outcome. Notably the readings of two of the "conservatives" were so low that either they were nearly comatose or the readings were erroneous. If these readings were excluded as outliers, the regression would be dead flat and the average of the conservatives would be roughly the same as the liberals.

As per one reviewer:

"I had expected a better common-man explanation of the experiment and of the results. Instead, I think I read what must be an inside joke amongst one end of the political spectrum. As for the data, it seems the experiment uses a poor statistical sample showing five times as many "liberals" as it does "conservatives." Certainly the authors had access to many more subjects. The reader cannot assess how those labels were assigned nor, indeed, of they are in any way valid. Also, the data chart seems better fit with other than a liner algorithm. Theis short abstrtact does not reflect good science."

I seriously doubt that you have actually read the studies.

P,

The only person claiming that international partners wanted to pull out was student guild president Lizzy O'Shea. I have read several articles and cannot find reference to a single one. The VC who made the decision states that the withdrawal was due to the emotional reaction of some of the staff and students and deeply regrets not getting the opportunity to work with Nobel Laureate economists.

I'm sure that Nobel laureates would damage the university's reputation.

a letter from Bob Brown in today's SMH says her resignation was NOT discussed with him ..