Once you've accepted the axioms the mathematics wich drives the logic is exact. So you can make the anology and it's quite popular
The Female Brain Relating to Chess (kinda)
Sort:
Jun 19, 2010
0
#103
You don't have sufficient data to reasonably conclude that I'm a clown. Although, you could make a decent case that I'm sexist.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Jun 19, 2010
0
#105
BTW, some sources...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=sex-math-and-scientific-achievement
"Men generally are better at mentally manipulating objects and at performing certain quantitative tasks that rely on visual representations."
http://www.spring.org.uk/2008/07/are-boys-better-than-girls-at-maths.php
" Indeed research on thousands of SAT scores published in the 1990s backed this up: for complex problem-solving males had a significant advantage over females in the general population, especially at the high end of the distribution."
Done with sourcing this BTW... if u want more, find it urself.
Jun 19, 2010
0
#106
Cry_Wolf wrote:
trysts wrote:
Actually, I'm a girl.
Oh, well in that case, you definately can't follow the mathematics.
Second... I stated a claim, I sourced it, and I have backing from the majority of people here. As far as I'm concerned... point proven. I'm not going to stand here and feed trolls any longer.
And to whoever said my shot was uwarranted... it was indeed warranted because trysts implied that I was stupid (and later blatantly said I was retarded) because I stated a fact. That "shot" was my evidence as to why you should believe me over her.
Hilarious!
Isn't applied mathematics just counting the drinks I've had tonight? The only reason I called you "retarded" was because my female brain would hurt if I suppressed it.
This definitely gets my vote as the funniest thread of 2010.
Cry_Wolf wrote:
trysts wrote:
Actually, I'm a girl.
Oh, well in that case, you definately can't follow the mathematics.
Second... I stated a claim, I sourced it, and I have backing from the majority of people here. As far as I'm concerned... point proven. I'm not going to stand here and feed trolls any longer.
And to whoever said my shot was uwarranted... it was indeed warranted because trysts implied that I was stupid (and later blatantly said I was retarded) because I stated a fact. That "shot" was my evidence as to why you should believe me over her.
I is right cuz I sed so! Now git me a beer, womun.
Cry_Wolf wrote:
Kupov3 wrote:
I know what you were saying. I asked for a source.
Its pretty common knowledge. I admit I can't source this for math and science but I could for chess without a problem, although I shouldn't really need to.
Yep I've definitely heard it before. Wouldn't common knowledge be quite easily sourced?
ivandh wrote:
54% of men like their toilet paper to roll under instead of over. Does that make me a woman?
No, just less of a man 
No actually, I like to roll my toilet paper over. In fact, why would anyone want to roll it under? That's not a real fact is it?
Cry_Wolf wrote:
You don't have sufficient data to reasonably conclude that I'm a clown. Although, you could make a decent case that I'm sexist.
Admitting your sexist? That's bold.
And it's never too late for us Elubas.
Kupov3 wrote:
And it's never too late for us Elubas.
lol, no comment.
Elubas wrote:
ivandh wrote:
54% of men like their toilet paper to roll under instead of over. Does that make me a woman?
No, just less of a man
No actually, I like to roll my toilet paper over. In fact, why would anyone want to roll it under? That's not a real fact is it?
Its "common knowledge".
Cry_Wolf wrote:
BTW, some sources...
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=sex-math-and-scientific-achievement
"Men generally are better at mentally manipulating objects and at performing certain quantitative tasks that rely on visual representations."
http://www.spring.org.uk/2008/07/are-boys-better-than-girls-at-maths.php
" Indeed research on thousands of SAT scores published in the 1990s backed this up: for complex problem-solving males had a significant advantage over females in the general population, especially at the high end of the distribution."
Done with sourcing this BTW... if u want more, find it urself.
These sources don't provide a reason though, which is what I'm looking for. There are plenty of possible reasons for why women up til this point have been scoring lower on these tests and they aren't necessarily biological or inherent.
And why should I find scources to back up your stance?
No,but talking about it does!
Jun 19, 2010
0
#119
Kupov3 wrote:
And why should I find scources to back up your stance?
Well, I'm not saying that you should... I'm just saying that I've made all the efforts that I'm going to to prove my point, as I think they are sufficient.
Actually, I'm a girl.
Oh, well in that case, you definately can't follow the mathematics.
Second... I stated a claim, I sourced it, and I have backing from the majority of people here. As far as I'm concerned... point proven. I'm not going to stand here and feed trolls any longer.
And to whoever said my shot was uwarranted... it was indeed warranted because trysts implied that I was stupid (and later blatantly said I was retarded) because I stated a fact. That "shot" was my evidence as to why you should believe me over her.
This guy is a clown