From the Catholic, yet apparent Vox Day worshipping Kenneth Hynek (with whom I think the only thing we could agree upon is Dr. Lamoureux’s generally reasonable position on the evolution-creation debates) comes this position (coined oh-so-eloquently by Mr. Day):
And actually, in looking at Mr. Bushfield’s online persona, I have to say: he certainly seems to fit the profile of the socially autistic Pharyngulan that Vox Day noted a while back:
An Australian study into the sexual history of 185 students at the University of Sydney found male science “nerds” were the least likely to have had sexual intercourse.
Apparently when you have nothing nice to say, rather than say nothing, you should always tease. It’s like we’re in elementary school again. Yay for the internet.
Anyways, before I drop to his level and poke fun, let’s bash this survey a bit.
More female students (78 per cent) than male (22 per cent) agreed to take part in the survey.
Shit, that means they interviewed around 40 guys. Assuming that they had a representative population sample from a school with enrolments similar to the UofA (I’m going to use this reference and exclude education, as this is based on degrees/diplomas/certificates and I couldn’t quickly find actual enrolment data), that would make for 9 arts students, 8 science, 5 in engineering, business and nursing, 2 in medicine and phys-ed, and 1 in each of law and pharmacy (roughly). Of course, I assumed there’s as many guys as girls in each faculty (which is off for ones like nursing and engineering), but the goal here is the same.
Basically, they interviewed at total of under 20 guys in science and engineering and concluded that they have less sex? I call bullshit on this survey.
Whether or not their conclusion is true, this is not a valid survey, and I don’t think it’s worth bringing up ever.
Now, that also is negated by the fact that I have a steady girlfriend, who I’ve been dating for nearly two years and live with (yes, in sin). So yes, I do get laid as regularly as a Catholic priest, only I don’t need the alter-boys to get some.
We can also say using terms like “socially autistic” is legitimately offencive to people who do suffer from autism, but I don’t take people like Kenneth here to give much care to others feelings.
Finally, I think there’s a special place in the blog-o-sphere hell for people who self-link almost 30 times in a single post (and not once to something he’s actually written before, but merely to tag pages). Once or twice in a post is fine, if it adds to what you’re trying to say. But shameless self-promotion for the sake of stroking his hit counter? Give me a break.