<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_30_1318240</id>
	<title>Why Do So Many Terrorists Have Engineering Degrees</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1262181960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Socguy noted that Slate is apparently a little desperate for some traffic as they are writing about<i>"Why so many of the <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2240157/">terrorists have engineering degrees</a>, and they come to the conclusion that engineers and engineering students are much more likely to hold strong conservative and religious views than a general cross section of the public.  Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise. Terrorist organizations have long recognized that engineering departments are fertile ground for recruitment and have concentrated their efforts there.  A 2005 report from British intelligence noted that Islamic extremists were frequenting college campuses, looking for 'inquisitive' students who might be susceptible to their message. In particular, the report noted, they targeted engineers."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Socguy noted that Slate is apparently a little desperate for some traffic as they are writing about " Why so many of the terrorists have engineering degrees , and they come to the conclusion that engineers and engineering students are much more likely to hold strong conservative and religious views than a general cross section of the public .
Further , engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise .
Terrorist organizations have long recognized that engineering departments are fertile ground for recruitment and have concentrated their efforts there .
A 2005 report from British intelligence noted that Islamic extremists were frequenting college campuses , looking for 'inquisitive ' students who might be susceptible to their message .
In particular , the report noted , they targeted engineers .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Socguy noted that Slate is apparently a little desperate for some traffic as they are writing about"Why so many of the terrorists have engineering degrees, and they come to the conclusion that engineers and engineering students are much more likely to hold strong conservative and religious views than a general cross section of the public.
Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.
Terrorist organizations have long recognized that engineering departments are fertile ground for recruitment and have concentrated their efforts there.
A 2005 report from British intelligence noted that Islamic extremists were frequenting college campuses, looking for 'inquisitive' students who might be susceptible to their message.
In particular, the report noted, they targeted engineers.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604558</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>snuki</author>
	<datestamp>1262270160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly, my engineering degree was essential  in pulling me away out of religion (and my parents are missionaries...).

I prefer tooth-fairy agnosticism: Yes, there could be a tooth fairy (or god) I I haven't seen, but so far so much points towards 'no', and nothing really points towards 'yes' that it's only reasonable to act as if it doesn't exist.

The limit of agnosticism as everything points to the null hypothesis is atheism.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly , my engineering degree was essential in pulling me away out of religion ( and my parents are missionaries... ) .
I prefer tooth-fairy agnosticism : Yes , there could be a tooth fairy ( or god ) I I have n't seen , but so far so much points towards 'no ' , and nothing really points towards 'yes ' that it 's only reasonable to act as if it does n't exist .
The limit of agnosticism as everything points to the null hypothesis is atheism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly, my engineering degree was essential  in pulling me away out of religion (and my parents are missionaries...).
I prefer tooth-fairy agnosticism: Yes, there could be a tooth fairy (or god) I I haven't seen, but so far so much points towards 'no', and nothing really points towards 'yes' that it's only reasonable to act as if it doesn't exist.
The limit of agnosticism as everything points to the null hypothesis is atheism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593338</id>
	<title>Physics versus engineering</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1259855520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a physicist, I find it interesting that both physicists and engineers have similar skill sets, but I have never heard of a terrorist physicist (unless you want to count Edward Teller).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a physicist , I find it interesting that both physicists and engineers have similar skill sets , but I have never heard of a terrorist physicist ( unless you want to count Edward Teller ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a physicist, I find it interesting that both physicists and engineers have similar skill sets, but I have never heard of a terrorist physicist (unless you want to count Edward Teller).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593362</id>
	<title>Re:They wouldn't be targeting engineers because...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah it might be more effective to recruit an engineer than an illiterate farmer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah it might be more effective to recruit an engineer than an illiterate farmer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah it might be more effective to recruit an engineer than an illiterate farmer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592888</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593232</id>
	<title>I've heard...</title>
	<author>Thelasko</author>
	<datestamp>1259855040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're all <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical\_engineering" title="wikipedia.org">maniacal engineers.</a> [wikipedia.org]  <a href="http://www.instantrimshot.com/" title="instantrimshot.com">*rimshot*</a> [instantrimshot.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're all maniacal engineers .
[ wikipedia.org ] * rimshot * [ instantrimshot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're all maniacal engineers.
[wikipedia.org]  *rimshot* [instantrimshot.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592994</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think Murphy's Law has something to do with it.  Engineers know that Nature doesn't care one whit what humans do or think.  That is, to Nature, humans are nothing special, and are casually swatted by earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, landslides, etc.  So, engineers can obtain a viewpoint that humans are bugs to squash when they get in the way of Progress.  Now, as to the definition of Progress, and who defines it, those are other matters altogether (religion certainly has its views on that subject!).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Murphy 's Law has something to do with it .
Engineers know that Nature does n't care one whit what humans do or think .
That is , to Nature , humans are nothing special , and are casually swatted by earthquakes , tsunamis , volcanoes , landslides , etc .
So , engineers can obtain a viewpoint that humans are bugs to squash when they get in the way of Progress .
Now , as to the definition of Progress , and who defines it , those are other matters altogether ( religion certainly has its views on that subject !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Murphy's Law has something to do with it.
Engineers know that Nature doesn't care one whit what humans do or think.
That is, to Nature, humans are nothing special, and are casually swatted by earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, landslides, etc.
So, engineers can obtain a viewpoint that humans are bugs to squash when they get in the way of Progress.
Now, as to the definition of Progress, and who defines it, those are other matters altogether (religion certainly has its views on that subject!
).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593896</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>kirillian</author>
	<datestamp>1259857500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sadly, my experience has been that the liberal arts people are far more "My view is RIGHT" than the engineers that I have come across...instead of mathematical or scientific certainties, however, their views tend to center around values or philosophies - and woe to the person who is obviously a bigot/racist or is intolerant.</p><p>All of these examples really are anecdotal. I can only shake my head at those who think that some social group or another contains more of these hard-headed, "Always Right" people. I think that some people are just stuck up, set in their ways, and unwilling to accept any wrongdoing or error on their part. I find these people in all walks of life. It just takes a LOT of patience, time, and effort to deal with these people.</p><p>I'm not convinced that engineers make good terrorists because of their personalities, but I COULD see engineers making good terrorists because of their skillsets. Heck, anyone with a good skillset would make a good terrorist. Maybe we should jail all of them just in case!!?!?!?!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly , my experience has been that the liberal arts people are far more " My view is RIGHT " than the engineers that I have come across...instead of mathematical or scientific certainties , however , their views tend to center around values or philosophies - and woe to the person who is obviously a bigot/racist or is intolerant.All of these examples really are anecdotal .
I can only shake my head at those who think that some social group or another contains more of these hard-headed , " Always Right " people .
I think that some people are just stuck up , set in their ways , and unwilling to accept any wrongdoing or error on their part .
I find these people in all walks of life .
It just takes a LOT of patience , time , and effort to deal with these people.I 'm not convinced that engineers make good terrorists because of their personalities , but I COULD see engineers making good terrorists because of their skillsets .
Heck , anyone with a good skillset would make a good terrorist .
Maybe we should jail all of them just in case ! ! ? ! ? ! ? !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly, my experience has been that the liberal arts people are far more "My view is RIGHT" than the engineers that I have come across...instead of mathematical or scientific certainties, however, their views tend to center around values or philosophies - and woe to the person who is obviously a bigot/racist or is intolerant.All of these examples really are anecdotal.
I can only shake my head at those who think that some social group or another contains more of these hard-headed, "Always Right" people.
I think that some people are just stuck up, set in their ways, and unwilling to accept any wrongdoing or error on their part.
I find these people in all walks of life.
It just takes a LOT of patience, time, and effort to deal with these people.I'm not convinced that engineers make good terrorists because of their personalities, but I COULD see engineers making good terrorists because of their skillsets.
Heck, anyone with a good skillset would make a good terrorist.
Maybe we should jail all of them just in case!!?!?!?!
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593392</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1259855760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Engineering isn't science, it's math.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) More seriously though, you can get an engineering degree and design a working building without actually being inquisitive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineering is n't science , it 's math .
; ) More seriously though , you can get an engineering degree and design a working building without actually being inquisitive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineering isn't science, it's math.
;) More seriously though, you can get an engineering degree and design a working building without actually being inquisitive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595344</id>
	<title>Re:Engineers make the best soldiers</title>
	<author>Gruzzen</author>
	<datestamp>1259862060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the 70s/80s there was kind of a "revenge of the jocks" doctrinal move toward special forces, etc, but that has pretty much failed, fizzled out, and the combat engineers reign supreme on the battlefield once again...</p></div><p>I"m sorry.  I"m pretty sure you don't understand the requirements of Special Forces and their mission, vs those of Combat Eng.  Furthermore, you don't understand the enlistment requirements to be a Combat Eng (21B) and an grunt (11B).  If you check it out, they are both the same.</p><p>ASVAB Score Required: 90 in aptitude area CO, Physical Profile 111221.</p><p>I"ll slightly agree that Combat Engs. are more economically  effective then a standard Grunt.</p><p>Most effective? Far from it.  Laughably far from it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the 70s/80s there was kind of a " revenge of the jocks " doctrinal move toward special forces , etc , but that has pretty much failed , fizzled out , and the combat engineers reign supreme on the battlefield once again...I " m sorry .
I " m pretty sure you do n't understand the requirements of Special Forces and their mission , vs those of Combat Eng .
Furthermore , you do n't understand the enlistment requirements to be a Combat Eng ( 21B ) and an grunt ( 11B ) .
If you check it out , they are both the same.ASVAB Score Required : 90 in aptitude area CO , Physical Profile 111221.I " ll slightly agree that Combat Engs .
are more economically effective then a standard Grunt.Most effective ?
Far from it .
Laughably far from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the 70s/80s there was kind of a "revenge of the jocks" doctrinal move toward special forces, etc, but that has pretty much failed, fizzled out, and the combat engineers reign supreme on the battlefield once again...I"m sorry.
I"m pretty sure you don't understand the requirements of Special Forces and their mission, vs those of Combat Eng.
Furthermore, you don't understand the enlistment requirements to be a Combat Eng (21B) and an grunt (11B).
If you check it out, they are both the same.ASVAB Score Required: 90 in aptitude area CO, Physical Profile 111221.I"ll slightly agree that Combat Engs.
are more economically  effective then a standard Grunt.Most effective?
Far from it.
Laughably far from it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598804</id>
	<title>Trash the Coding Dogma, Save the World!</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1259831220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With apologies to future Hiro (or is it future Hiro of a now dead timeline?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With apologies to future Hiro ( or is it future Hiro of a now dead timeline ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With apologies to future Hiro (or is it future Hiro of a now dead timeline?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593788</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>IanHurst</author>
	<datestamp>1259857140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gah, my kingdom for mod points!  Mod parent up please!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gah , my kingdom for mod points !
Mod parent up please !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gah, my kingdom for mod points!
Mod parent up please!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593354</id>
	<title>me not evil</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure they tried to recruit restaurant chefs but they noticed that they spend to much time arguing about the right flavor and when they are done all you got is an explosion of flavors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure they tried to recruit restaurant chefs but they noticed that they spend to much time arguing about the right flavor and when they are done all you got is an explosion of flavors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure they tried to recruit restaurant chefs but they noticed that they spend to much time arguing about the right flavor and when they are done all you got is an explosion of flavors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594002</id>
	<title>i declare you must become fred flinstone then</title>
	<author>CHRONOSS2008</author>
	<datestamp>1259857860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this will get rid of the problem<br>end schooling and get everyone right stupid again</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this will get rid of the problemend schooling and get everyone right stupid again</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this will get rid of the problemend schooling and get everyone right stupid again</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597456</id>
	<title>Women are in short supply in the middle east</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259869200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Essentially there are not enough available women to go around for the average male. Depending on exactly where one is looking, there is polygamy or (more usually) very strictly controlled access to women. For all that homosexuality is condemned in the middle east, one does not have to spend much time their before one sees two men wondering the streets holding hands. Possibly this means something different over there, but one does NOT see (m)any man/women couples wondering the streets holding hands.</p><p>The control of women in middle eastern society is paramount for your average father. You do not allow her to mix freely with male society. You control her access to male company and you select (or get your wife/wives to select) the male she marries.</p><p>This means that a hormonal, young male has (on average) much less (satisfying) access to women. The fact that he may be inherently shy because he is an engineer or scientist is merely a bonus on the recruiting front. Why else do people find pictures of paradise which emphasize the availability of yer standard quota of 72 houris (albiet in Islamic dress) in places where bombers are indoctrinated?</p><p>Breaking down this particular cultural more would remove most of the recruits at a stroke. The trouble is that the hormonal males seem to be as in favour of this arrangement as the fathers...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Essentially there are not enough available women to go around for the average male .
Depending on exactly where one is looking , there is polygamy or ( more usually ) very strictly controlled access to women .
For all that homosexuality is condemned in the middle east , one does not have to spend much time their before one sees two men wondering the streets holding hands .
Possibly this means something different over there , but one does NOT see ( m ) any man/women couples wondering the streets holding hands.The control of women in middle eastern society is paramount for your average father .
You do not allow her to mix freely with male society .
You control her access to male company and you select ( or get your wife/wives to select ) the male she marries.This means that a hormonal , young male has ( on average ) much less ( satisfying ) access to women .
The fact that he may be inherently shy because he is an engineer or scientist is merely a bonus on the recruiting front .
Why else do people find pictures of paradise which emphasize the availability of yer standard quota of 72 houris ( albiet in Islamic dress ) in places where bombers are indoctrinated ? Breaking down this particular cultural more would remove most of the recruits at a stroke .
The trouble is that the hormonal males seem to be as in favour of this arrangement as the fathers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Essentially there are not enough available women to go around for the average male.
Depending on exactly where one is looking, there is polygamy or (more usually) very strictly controlled access to women.
For all that homosexuality is condemned in the middle east, one does not have to spend much time their before one sees two men wondering the streets holding hands.
Possibly this means something different over there, but one does NOT see (m)any man/women couples wondering the streets holding hands.The control of women in middle eastern society is paramount for your average father.
You do not allow her to mix freely with male society.
You control her access to male company and you select (or get your wife/wives to select) the male she marries.This means that a hormonal, young male has (on average) much less (satisfying) access to women.
The fact that he may be inherently shy because he is an engineer or scientist is merely a bonus on the recruiting front.
Why else do people find pictures of paradise which emphasize the availability of yer standard quota of 72 houris (albiet in Islamic dress) in places where bombers are indoctrinated?Breaking down this particular cultural more would remove most of the recruits at a stroke.
The trouble is that the hormonal males seem to be as in favour of this arrangement as the fathers...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592830</id>
	<title>Thomas Jefferson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inventor and engineer, also a revolutionary. Lucky for him (and us), a successful one.</p><p>Wonder what names the British called him and his compatriots? Blow the dust off your history book and find out.</p><p>Boy did I ever post this anonymously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inventor and engineer , also a revolutionary .
Lucky for him ( and us ) , a successful one.Wonder what names the British called him and his compatriots ?
Blow the dust off your history book and find out.Boy did I ever post this anonymously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inventor and engineer, also a revolutionary.
Lucky for him (and us), a successful one.Wonder what names the British called him and his compatriots?
Blow the dust off your history book and find out.Boy did I ever post this anonymously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597828</id>
	<title>Detail Orientation, Depression, Spectrum Disorders</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259870760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I rememebr reading a bunch of papers - SciAm and Psych Today. Sorry no exact citation - 'tis New Years Eve dammit - that basically said that detail oriented people, which engineers definitely are, deplete their Serotonin and Dopamine reserves more quickly, and that they also lack some signalling pathways between different parts of the brain that delinks their logical reasoning ability and emotional abilities. Usually emotion and logic play nice, so a normal person can curb hateful thoughts and their rationalization. But detail oriented people lacking these important neurochemical and neuroanatomical features, are more likely to be depressed, emotionally numb and thereby prone to fundamentalism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I rememebr reading a bunch of papers - SciAm and Psych Today .
Sorry no exact citation - 't is New Years Eve dammit - that basically said that detail oriented people , which engineers definitely are , deplete their Serotonin and Dopamine reserves more quickly , and that they also lack some signalling pathways between different parts of the brain that delinks their logical reasoning ability and emotional abilities .
Usually emotion and logic play nice , so a normal person can curb hateful thoughts and their rationalization .
But detail oriented people lacking these important neurochemical and neuroanatomical features , are more likely to be depressed , emotionally numb and thereby prone to fundamentalism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I rememebr reading a bunch of papers - SciAm and Psych Today.
Sorry no exact citation - 'tis New Years Eve dammit - that basically said that detail oriented people, which engineers definitely are, deplete their Serotonin and Dopamine reserves more quickly, and that they also lack some signalling pathways between different parts of the brain that delinks their logical reasoning ability and emotional abilities.
Usually emotion and logic play nice, so a normal person can curb hateful thoughts and their rationalization.
But detail oriented people lacking these important neurochemical and neuroanatomical features, are more likely to be depressed, emotionally numb and thereby prone to fundamentalism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816</id>
	<title>EE times came to a similar conclusion</title>
	<author>ProfBooty</author>
	<datestamp>1259853000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Didn't the EEtimes come to a similar conclusion last year?</p><p><a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/03/1943247" title="slashdot.org">http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/03/1943247</a> [slashdot.org]</p><p><a href="http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=207001533" title="eetimes.com">http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=207001533</a> [eetimes.com]</p><p>I recall it had more to do with planning skills than anything else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't the EEtimes come to a similar conclusion last year ? http : //it.slashdot.org/article.pl ? sid = 08/04/03/1943247 [ slashdot.org ] http : //www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml ; ? articleID = 207001533 [ eetimes.com ] I recall it had more to do with planning skills than anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't the EEtimes come to a similar conclusion last year?http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/03/1943247 [slashdot.org]http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=207001533 [eetimes.com]I recall it had more to do with planning skills than anything else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596614</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Solandri</author>
	<datestamp>1259865960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Engineers are ALWAYS right. ALWAYS. Even when (especially when?) something is clearly opinion based.
<br> <br>
Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is, you get a simple answer.<br>
Ask an eng the same, you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors.
<br> <br>
As I said, I am an engineer. It was only after I noticed behavior like this in other engs that I noticed it in myself as well.
I don't like having that trait (flaw?) and have had to make a conscious effort to be less judgmental. (Yet remaining critical.)</p></div></blockquote><p>
Disclaimer: I am an engineer.
<br> <br>
It's not a flaw.  It's a difference in how most engineers think compared to the general public.  For most people, their favorite color is a personal, internal choice.  The color may make them feel warm inside, or it was the color their mother liked to wear, or a color that they strongly associate with many positive events in their life, etc.  It's their favorite for reasons which matter only to themselves.
<br> <br>
Engineers tend to make choices based on external, practical criteria.  What uses does the color have?  How does it compare to other colors for different tasks? etc. It's their favorite for reasons which apply to everyone, not just themselves.
<br> <br>So even though you're asking the same question, you're essentially asking two different questions to engineers and non-engineers.  Most people parse your question as, "Which color do you feel the most personal affinity to?"  Engineers parse it as, "Which color is the most useful?"  (And no, asking the engineer the "personal affinity" question won't help - their brains are wired so that a great deal of personal affinity is based on an item's usefulness.)
<br> <br>
Since the engineer is basing their choice on <i>external</i> factors, there <i>is</i> one best RIGHT answer, depending on your criteria.  (In their defense, their answers do tend to be right.  Other people tend to assume the engineer picked a favorite color for similar personal reasons as them, and so interpret the engineer's reply as conceited.  They are being judgmental too.)
<br> <br>
As for the original topic, personally I think it's this tendency to emphasize external criteria and de-emphasize personal factors which make them more likely to become terrorists.  Just look at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational\_temperament" title="wikipedia.org">Keirsey temperament</a> [wikipedia.org] which engineers fall under - it reads like a recruiting checklist.  You'll get someone has technical expertise, has good planning skills, does not weigh heavily the human impact of their actions, and will arrive at a decision and be resolute in its correctness.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineers are ALWAYS right .
ALWAYS. Even when ( especially when ?
) something is clearly opinion based .
Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is , you get a simple answer .
Ask an eng the same , you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors .
As I said , I am an engineer .
It was only after I noticed behavior like this in other engs that I noticed it in myself as well .
I do n't like having that trait ( flaw ?
) and have had to make a conscious effort to be less judgmental .
( Yet remaining critical .
) Disclaimer : I am an engineer .
It 's not a flaw .
It 's a difference in how most engineers think compared to the general public .
For most people , their favorite color is a personal , internal choice .
The color may make them feel warm inside , or it was the color their mother liked to wear , or a color that they strongly associate with many positive events in their life , etc .
It 's their favorite for reasons which matter only to themselves .
Engineers tend to make choices based on external , practical criteria .
What uses does the color have ?
How does it compare to other colors for different tasks ?
etc. It 's their favorite for reasons which apply to everyone , not just themselves .
So even though you 're asking the same question , you 're essentially asking two different questions to engineers and non-engineers .
Most people parse your question as , " Which color do you feel the most personal affinity to ?
" Engineers parse it as , " Which color is the most useful ?
" ( And no , asking the engineer the " personal affinity " question wo n't help - their brains are wired so that a great deal of personal affinity is based on an item 's usefulness .
) Since the engineer is basing their choice on external factors , there is one best RIGHT answer , depending on your criteria .
( In their defense , their answers do tend to be right .
Other people tend to assume the engineer picked a favorite color for similar personal reasons as them , and so interpret the engineer 's reply as conceited .
They are being judgmental too .
) As for the original topic , personally I think it 's this tendency to emphasize external criteria and de-emphasize personal factors which make them more likely to become terrorists .
Just look at the Keirsey temperament [ wikipedia.org ] which engineers fall under - it reads like a recruiting checklist .
You 'll get someone has technical expertise , has good planning skills , does not weigh heavily the human impact of their actions , and will arrive at a decision and be resolute in its correctness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineers are ALWAYS right.
ALWAYS. Even when (especially when?
) something is clearly opinion based.
Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is, you get a simple answer.
Ask an eng the same, you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors.
As I said, I am an engineer.
It was only after I noticed behavior like this in other engs that I noticed it in myself as well.
I don't like having that trait (flaw?
) and have had to make a conscious effort to be less judgmental.
(Yet remaining critical.
)
Disclaimer: I am an engineer.
It's not a flaw.
It's a difference in how most engineers think compared to the general public.
For most people, their favorite color is a personal, internal choice.
The color may make them feel warm inside, or it was the color their mother liked to wear, or a color that they strongly associate with many positive events in their life, etc.
It's their favorite for reasons which matter only to themselves.
Engineers tend to make choices based on external, practical criteria.
What uses does the color have?
How does it compare to other colors for different tasks?
etc. It's their favorite for reasons which apply to everyone, not just themselves.
So even though you're asking the same question, you're essentially asking two different questions to engineers and non-engineers.
Most people parse your question as, "Which color do you feel the most personal affinity to?
"  Engineers parse it as, "Which color is the most useful?
"  (And no, asking the engineer the "personal affinity" question won't help - their brains are wired so that a great deal of personal affinity is based on an item's usefulness.
)
 
Since the engineer is basing their choice on external factors, there is one best RIGHT answer, depending on your criteria.
(In their defense, their answers do tend to be right.
Other people tend to assume the engineer picked a favorite color for similar personal reasons as them, and so interpret the engineer's reply as conceited.
They are being judgmental too.
)
 
As for the original topic, personally I think it's this tendency to emphasize external criteria and de-emphasize personal factors which make them more likely to become terrorists.
Just look at the Keirsey temperament [wikipedia.org] which engineers fall under - it reads like a recruiting checklist.
You'll get someone has technical expertise, has good planning skills, does not weigh heavily the human impact of their actions, and will arrive at a decision and be resolute in its correctness.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596494</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259865480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True, but they are all dogmatic.  ETA in Spain isn't religious per-say, but they are dogmatic in why they believe the Basque region should be separate.  When you are willing to accept that killing innocent people in an effort to further your cause is just, it doesn't matter if the cause is about a god or that you are oppressed, you are still a terrorist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True , but they are all dogmatic .
ETA in Spain is n't religious per-say , but they are dogmatic in why they believe the Basque region should be separate .
When you are willing to accept that killing innocent people in an effort to further your cause is just , it does n't matter if the cause is about a god or that you are oppressed , you are still a terrorist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, but they are all dogmatic.
ETA in Spain isn't religious per-say, but they are dogmatic in why they believe the Basque region should be separate.
When you are willing to accept that killing innocent people in an effort to further your cause is just, it doesn't matter if the cause is about a god or that you are oppressed, you are still a terrorist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592904</id>
	<title>Maybe the ones with drama degrees not so good?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could be just the engineering degree ones that are successful in blowing things up. Perhaps the ones who took degrees in fine art are busy in mountain retreats sculpting models of the end of world in matchsticks and bat guano, the ones who took degrees in drama are creating avant-garde absurdist plays and presenting these to goats in small rural farming communities, and the ones who took degrees in philosophy are arguing  whether their enemies actually exist in complex latin tracts that nobody understands and the local printers won't publish for them because radishes are a poor currency.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could be just the engineering degree ones that are successful in blowing things up .
Perhaps the ones who took degrees in fine art are busy in mountain retreats sculpting models of the end of world in matchsticks and bat guano , the ones who took degrees in drama are creating avant-garde absurdist plays and presenting these to goats in small rural farming communities , and the ones who took degrees in philosophy are arguing whether their enemies actually exist in complex latin tracts that nobody understands and the local printers wo n't publish for them because radishes are a poor currency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could be just the engineering degree ones that are successful in blowing things up.
Perhaps the ones who took degrees in fine art are busy in mountain retreats sculpting models of the end of world in matchsticks and bat guano, the ones who took degrees in drama are creating avant-garde absurdist plays and presenting these to goats in small rural farming communities, and the ones who took degrees in philosophy are arguing  whether their enemies actually exist in complex latin tracts that nobody understands and the local printers won't publish for them because radishes are a poor currency.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599140</id>
	<title>Re:Insecure personality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259832840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From what I gather a person with a narcissistic or borderline personality disorder would go on to study womens' studies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I gather a person with a narcissistic or borderline personality disorder would go on to study womens ' studies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I gather a person with a narcissistic or borderline personality disorder would go on to study womens' studies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594628</id>
	<title>It's not engineers.</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1259859840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Engineer is juse a cultural push onj the type of degrees people want there children to have.</p><p>As has been widely documented, people with a Bachelours degree tent to believe in 'woo' more then people without one. People who move onto a masters degree tend to loose there belief in 'woo'.</p><p>And religous terrorist is nothing more then someone believing in Woo...and bombs.</p><p>When you culture pushes getting a degree as an Doctor, Lawyer, or Engineering, or be an effective outcast, people come up with ways to get through school even if they don't have the chops for it. Out of the three which one do you think is the easiest to cheat your way through?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineer is juse a cultural push onj the type of degrees people want there children to have.As has been widely documented , people with a Bachelours degree tent to believe in 'woo ' more then people without one .
People who move onto a masters degree tend to loose there belief in 'woo'.And religous terrorist is nothing more then someone believing in Woo...and bombs.When you culture pushes getting a degree as an Doctor , Lawyer , or Engineering , or be an effective outcast , people come up with ways to get through school even if they do n't have the chops for it .
Out of the three which one do you think is the easiest to cheat your way through ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineer is juse a cultural push onj the type of degrees people want there children to have.As has been widely documented, people with a Bachelours degree tent to believe in 'woo' more then people without one.
People who move onto a masters degree tend to loose there belief in 'woo'.And religous terrorist is nothing more then someone believing in Woo...and bombs.When you culture pushes getting a degree as an Doctor, Lawyer, or Engineering, or be an effective outcast, people come up with ways to get through school even if they don't have the chops for it.
Out of the three which one do you think is the easiest to cheat your way through?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595092</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>l3prador</author>
	<datestamp>1259861400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Inability to understand or accept belief systems other than one's own - check</htmltext>
<tokenext>Inability to understand or accept belief systems other than one 's own - check</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inability to understand or accept belief systems other than one's own - check</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595500</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>cptnapalm</author>
	<datestamp>1259862480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not noticing much different in your comments about engineers than most of the humanities people I've known.  All disagreement is an indication of a heresy ("Racism!" and "Sexism!").  The views tend to be more muddled ("Everything is a shade of gray and all who disagree are EVIL!"), I would suspect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not noticing much different in your comments about engineers than most of the humanities people I 've known .
All disagreement is an indication of a heresy ( " Racism !
" and " Sexism ! " ) .
The views tend to be more muddled ( " Everything is a shade of gray and all who disagree are EVIL !
" ) , I would suspect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not noticing much different in your comments about engineers than most of the humanities people I've known.
All disagreement is an indication of a heresy ("Racism!
" and "Sexism!").
The views tend to be more muddled ("Everything is a shade of gray and all who disagree are EVIL!
"), I would suspect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600390</id>
	<title>Because they can't get a Date</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259840100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they are nerds and can't get a date, so they go for the virgins as their only hope of getting laid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they are nerds and ca n't get a date , so they go for the virgins as their only hope of getting laid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they are nerds and can't get a date, so they go for the virgins as their only hope of getting laid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594968</id>
	<title>Re:Simple answer, wrong question.</title>
	<author>nedlohs</author>
	<datestamp>1259860920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes because so many of the professors I had in my Chemical Engineering studies were left-wing socialists. They were also greenies, who really cared about where the tailings dam went.</p><p>And all the left wing socialists I've known support fundamentalist religion and having women be third class citizens,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes because so many of the professors I had in my Chemical Engineering studies were left-wing socialists .
They were also greenies , who really cared about where the tailings dam went.And all the left wing socialists I 've known support fundamentalist religion and having women be third class citizens,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes because so many of the professors I had in my Chemical Engineering studies were left-wing socialists.
They were also greenies, who really cared about where the tailings dam went.And all the left wing socialists I've known support fundamentalist religion and having women be third class citizens,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598372</id>
	<title>Engineering is a responsibility</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259872620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An early emphasis in my studies at UBC was the engineer&rsquo;s responsibility to society.  An engineer deals with the infrastructure, roads and every kind of machinery that makes our society prosperous and safe.  After graduation the various professional engineering associations of Canada reemphasize our responsibility to society.  A iron ring is worn as a constant reminder.  When someone uses their engineering knowledge deliberately for harm and malice the profession and the society who trusts in it are betrayed.  I believe ethics and responsibility to society must be made the core of every engineering curriculum because of the potential for harm or good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An early emphasis in my studies at UBC was the engineer    s responsibility to society .
An engineer deals with the infrastructure , roads and every kind of machinery that makes our society prosperous and safe .
After graduation the various professional engineering associations of Canada reemphasize our responsibility to society .
A iron ring is worn as a constant reminder .
When someone uses their engineering knowledge deliberately for harm and malice the profession and the society who trusts in it are betrayed .
I believe ethics and responsibility to society must be made the core of every engineering curriculum because of the potential for harm or good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An early emphasis in my studies at UBC was the engineer’s responsibility to society.
An engineer deals with the infrastructure, roads and every kind of machinery that makes our society prosperous and safe.
After graduation the various professional engineering associations of Canada reemphasize our responsibility to society.
A iron ring is worn as a constant reminder.
When someone uses their engineering knowledge deliberately for harm and malice the profession and the society who trusts in it are betrayed.
I believe ethics and responsibility to society must be made the core of every engineering curriculum because of the potential for harm or good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593072</id>
	<title>Maybe it's just because...</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1259854260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...*successful* terrorists are more likely to have engineering degrees--'cause the ones who don't blow themselves up trying to make the bomb.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... * successful * terrorists are more likely to have engineering degrees--'cause the ones who do n't blow themselves up trying to make the bomb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...*successful* terrorists are more likely to have engineering degrees--'cause the ones who don't blow themselves up trying to make the bomb.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593414</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The brainwashing comes first. These kids are brainwashed from birth, then sent to the west for education.</p><p>How do you think the Tamil Tigers were so successful? They did this for decades. They come to Canada/US/UK/etc, train as an engineer, send money back to support their favorite terrorist organization for a few years, then go home to join the fight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The brainwashing comes first .
These kids are brainwashed from birth , then sent to the west for education.How do you think the Tamil Tigers were so successful ?
They did this for decades .
They come to Canada/US/UK/etc , train as an engineer , send money back to support their favorite terrorist organization for a few years , then go home to join the fight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The brainwashing comes first.
These kids are brainwashed from birth, then sent to the west for education.How do you think the Tamil Tigers were so successful?
They did this for decades.
They come to Canada/US/UK/etc, train as an engineer, send money back to support their favorite terrorist organization for a few years, then go home to join the fight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599786</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Samgilljoy</author>
	<datestamp>1259836080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're on the right track.  What's interesting is that in other odd areas, e.g. the occult, fringe religious movements, etc., engineers are also extraordinarily common.  I think in part this concerns personalities that look for simple answers to complex problems, but the reasons are not all negative.  Most of these pursuits require an above-average intelligence, but they concern matters that an engineering education does not prepare one to tackle.  So, a young engineer, whose life experience has yet to expand his intellectual horizons much, can pretty easily get caught up in a world view that ignores a myriad of other considerations and data.</p><p>In most cases, it's a phase, and let's face it, undergraduates and recent graduates of all disciplines are, well, idiots, but in situations where people are exploited by those who know how to limit a person's awareness and make it look like they are making their own choices by controlling what choices are available, we can get extremely negative results.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're on the right track .
What 's interesting is that in other odd areas , e.g .
the occult , fringe religious movements , etc. , engineers are also extraordinarily common .
I think in part this concerns personalities that look for simple answers to complex problems , but the reasons are not all negative .
Most of these pursuits require an above-average intelligence , but they concern matters that an engineering education does not prepare one to tackle .
So , a young engineer , whose life experience has yet to expand his intellectual horizons much , can pretty easily get caught up in a world view that ignores a myriad of other considerations and data.In most cases , it 's a phase , and let 's face it , undergraduates and recent graduates of all disciplines are , well , idiots , but in situations where people are exploited by those who know how to limit a person 's awareness and make it look like they are making their own choices by controlling what choices are available , we can get extremely negative results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're on the right track.
What's interesting is that in other odd areas, e.g.
the occult, fringe religious movements, etc., engineers are also extraordinarily common.
I think in part this concerns personalities that look for simple answers to complex problems, but the reasons are not all negative.
Most of these pursuits require an above-average intelligence, but they concern matters that an engineering education does not prepare one to tackle.
So, a young engineer, whose life experience has yet to expand his intellectual horizons much, can pretty easily get caught up in a world view that ignores a myriad of other considerations and data.In most cases, it's a phase, and let's face it, undergraduates and recent graduates of all disciplines are, well, idiots, but in situations where people are exploited by those who know how to limit a person's awareness and make it look like they are making their own choices by controlling what choices are available, we can get extremely negative results.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600178</id>
	<title>Re:Engineers are more effective at destroying thin</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259838660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My personal experience with other engineers, which while merely an anecdote and far from solid evidence, is that politically they can vary. I've seen engineers all over the political spectrum. Please remember that a one-axis or two axis political spectrum is a gross oversimplification. There are a few issues on which the vast majority of engineers agree, but other than that it is rather chaotic.</p><p>However, as for religious views, I've not personally seen many regious extremists or fanatics among the engineers I've known. Many are either moderately religious or atheistic. Perhaps the sample of engineers I have tends to be highly biased in that regard, as many would consider themselves scientists too, even though engineers for practical reasons tend to take shortcuts and not adhere as rigorously to the scientific method as scientists do. The engineers I know just reach different conclusions when analyzing an experiment from an engineering perspective and from a scientific perspective.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal experience with other engineers , which while merely an anecdote and far from solid evidence , is that politically they can vary .
I 've seen engineers all over the political spectrum .
Please remember that a one-axis or two axis political spectrum is a gross oversimplification .
There are a few issues on which the vast majority of engineers agree , but other than that it is rather chaotic.However , as for religious views , I 've not personally seen many regious extremists or fanatics among the engineers I 've known .
Many are either moderately religious or atheistic .
Perhaps the sample of engineers I have tends to be highly biased in that regard , as many would consider themselves scientists too , even though engineers for practical reasons tend to take shortcuts and not adhere as rigorously to the scientific method as scientists do .
The engineers I know just reach different conclusions when analyzing an experiment from an engineering perspective and from a scientific perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal experience with other engineers, which while merely an anecdote and far from solid evidence, is that politically they can vary.
I've seen engineers all over the political spectrum.
Please remember that a one-axis or two axis political spectrum is a gross oversimplification.
There are a few issues on which the vast majority of engineers agree, but other than that it is rather chaotic.However, as for religious views, I've not personally seen many regious extremists or fanatics among the engineers I've known.
Many are either moderately religious or atheistic.
Perhaps the sample of engineers I have tends to be highly biased in that regard, as many would consider themselves scientists too, even though engineers for practical reasons tend to take shortcuts and not adhere as rigorously to the scientific method as scientists do.
The engineers I know just reach different conclusions when analyzing an experiment from an engineering perspective and from a scientific perspective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598624</id>
	<title>Religious fundamentalism and engineering</title>
	<author>OnePumpChump</author>
	<datestamp>1259873520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why are so many Christian fundamentalists who claim to be scientists actually engineers?

I don't think this is wholly coincidence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are so many Christian fundamentalists who claim to be scientists actually engineers ?
I do n't think this is wholly coincidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are so many Christian fundamentalists who claim to be scientists actually engineers?
I don't think this is wholly coincidence.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598820</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>skelly33</author>
	<datestamp>1259831280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first thing that struck me is that of all the occupational fields out there, engineers of varying areas of focus all have this in common: identifying problems and wanting to fix them. Apply that theme to someone who is pissed off about [insert arbitrary world affair here] and you have a potentially dangerously skilled person directing their energy into a special interest out of frustration, a need to be needed, a sense of purpose, etc... these are ungrounded people with no moral fabric and/or a faulty logic center. *shrug*</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first thing that struck me is that of all the occupational fields out there , engineers of varying areas of focus all have this in common : identifying problems and wanting to fix them .
Apply that theme to someone who is pissed off about [ insert arbitrary world affair here ] and you have a potentially dangerously skilled person directing their energy into a special interest out of frustration , a need to be needed , a sense of purpose , etc... these are ungrounded people with no moral fabric and/or a faulty logic center .
* shrug *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first thing that struck me is that of all the occupational fields out there, engineers of varying areas of focus all have this in common: identifying problems and wanting to fix them.
Apply that theme to someone who is pissed off about [insert arbitrary world affair here] and you have a potentially dangerously skilled person directing their energy into a special interest out of frustration, a need to be needed, a sense of purpose, etc... these are ungrounded people with no moral fabric and/or a faulty logic center.
*shrug*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593558</id>
	<title>It's Hearing Stuff Like This...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...That makes an engineer want to blow shit up! I keed, I keed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...That makes an engineer want to blow shit up !
I keed , I keed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...That makes an engineer want to blow shit up!
I keed, I keed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595816</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259863440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.</p></div></blockquote><p>While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity, I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromise. Im my mind, engineering is the art of compromise, and that is what separates us from "scientists". We crave efficiency, which in turn *requires* compromises. We constantly make tradeoffs between costs, quality and schedule, with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally. Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it (choose 1): better, sooner, cheaper. Instead, compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.</p></div><p>You obviously are confused regarding science and engineering.<br>Science is about understanding and explaining and modeling natural phenomena.<br>Engineering is about using heuristics to manipulate the world and create tools. Engineering does not actually require understanding.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Further , engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity , I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromise .
Im my mind , engineering is the art of compromise , and that is what separates us from " scientists " .
We crave efficiency , which in turn * requires * compromises .
We constantly make tradeoffs between costs , quality and schedule , with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally .
Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it ( choose 1 ) : better , sooner , cheaper .
Instead , compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.You obviously are confused regarding science and engineering.Science is about understanding and explaining and modeling natural phenomena.Engineering is about using heuristics to manipulate the world and create tools .
Engineering does not actually require understanding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity, I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromise.
Im my mind, engineering is the art of compromise, and that is what separates us from "scientists".
We crave efficiency, which in turn *requires* compromises.
We constantly make tradeoffs between costs, quality and schedule, with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally.
Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it (choose 1): better, sooner, cheaper.
Instead, compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.You obviously are confused regarding science and engineering.Science is about understanding and explaining and modeling natural phenomena.Engineering is about using heuristics to manipulate the world and create tools.
Engineering does not actually require understanding.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593030</id>
	<title>From engineers to leaders ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>They can do.

They can think for themselves.

They don't need you.

Thus they are dangerous.

In the 50s they would be called communists, now terrorist would be more fashionable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They can do .
They can think for themselves .
They do n't need you .
Thus they are dangerous .
In the 50s they would be called communists , now terrorist would be more fashionable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can do.
They can think for themselves.
They don't need you.
Thus they are dangerous.
In the 50s they would be called communists, now terrorist would be more fashionable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594914</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259860740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More relevant in this case is, how good they are at setting their underwear on fire?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More relevant in this case is , how good they are at setting their underwear on fire ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More relevant in this case is, how good they are at setting their underwear on fire?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593276</id>
	<title>Obvious: there is no need to recruit journos</title>
	<author>qqi239</author>
	<datestamp>1259855160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>most of the journos already support them</htmltext>
<tokenext>most of the journos already support them</tokentext>
<sentencetext>most of the journos already support them</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596810</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259866680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bringing the topic back along those lines, I think that being 'good' at any studied field is rare.  You can have an engineering degree and not be good at the field what so ever.</p><p>Between the pressure required to study and the lack of BS in gauging performance, your going to find more ignitable people in engineering.  There is a strong since of self-righteousness in engineers, but I also suggest there are a lot (if not a majority) of self-doubting depressed engineers/engineering students out there that feel they are going to be bad at their future career.  If you get these people religiously motivated, you will get someone more resolved and likely competent that want to be useful.</p><p>Another thing is that it is harder to find proper engineering jobs after school.  Off topic - I think real engineering programs need some sort of residency or continuing training as few companies hire inexperienced engineers.</p><p>My opinion is that liberal arts people are more of the join the mob and carry a sign type radical, engineers would want to be involved and be decisive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bringing the topic back along those lines , I think that being 'good ' at any studied field is rare .
You can have an engineering degree and not be good at the field what so ever.Between the pressure required to study and the lack of BS in gauging performance , your going to find more ignitable people in engineering .
There is a strong since of self-righteousness in engineers , but I also suggest there are a lot ( if not a majority ) of self-doubting depressed engineers/engineering students out there that feel they are going to be bad at their future career .
If you get these people religiously motivated , you will get someone more resolved and likely competent that want to be useful.Another thing is that it is harder to find proper engineering jobs after school .
Off topic - I think real engineering programs need some sort of residency or continuing training as few companies hire inexperienced engineers.My opinion is that liberal arts people are more of the join the mob and carry a sign type radical , engineers would want to be involved and be decisive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bringing the topic back along those lines, I think that being 'good' at any studied field is rare.
You can have an engineering degree and not be good at the field what so ever.Between the pressure required to study and the lack of BS in gauging performance, your going to find more ignitable people in engineering.
There is a strong since of self-righteousness in engineers, but I also suggest there are a lot (if not a majority) of self-doubting depressed engineers/engineering students out there that feel they are going to be bad at their future career.
If you get these people religiously motivated, you will get someone more resolved and likely competent that want to be useful.Another thing is that it is harder to find proper engineering jobs after school.
Off topic - I think real engineering programs need some sort of residency or continuing training as few companies hire inexperienced engineers.My opinion is that liberal arts people are more of the join the mob and carry a sign type radical, engineers would want to be involved and be decisive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598712</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259830920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ahhh, but we engineers like to deal in absolute truths as echoed in many a post in this discussion. Whether that truth is physical or metaphysical may not make a difference. Sure there are plenty of atheists and cynical-about-everything types in engineering but most are relatively normal people susceptible to the same influences as everyone else, except with more right-wrong dichotomy in their view of the world. For many people, religion provides the absolutest of truths. Combine that with a failure to socially integrate in one way or another along with a history of western oppression of the rest of the world then it makes perfect sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahhh , but we engineers like to deal in absolute truths as echoed in many a post in this discussion .
Whether that truth is physical or metaphysical may not make a difference .
Sure there are plenty of atheists and cynical-about-everything types in engineering but most are relatively normal people susceptible to the same influences as everyone else , except with more right-wrong dichotomy in their view of the world .
For many people , religion provides the absolutest of truths .
Combine that with a failure to socially integrate in one way or another along with a history of western oppression of the rest of the world then it makes perfect sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahhh, but we engineers like to deal in absolute truths as echoed in many a post in this discussion.
Whether that truth is physical or metaphysical may not make a difference.
Sure there are plenty of atheists and cynical-about-everything types in engineering but most are relatively normal people susceptible to the same influences as everyone else, except with more right-wrong dichotomy in their view of the world.
For many people, religion provides the absolutest of truths.
Combine that with a failure to socially integrate in one way or another along with a history of western oppression of the rest of the world then it makes perfect sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593540</id>
	<title>Damnit</title>
	<author>Xacid</author>
	<datestamp>1259856240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this is almost like saying "you're becoming just like your father!"</p><p>I'm almost pained to continue pursuing my studies if my outcome is already deemed to become a close-minded, uncompromising fanatic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this is almost like saying " you 're becoming just like your father !
" I 'm almost pained to continue pursuing my studies if my outcome is already deemed to become a close-minded , uncompromising fanatic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this is almost like saying "you're becoming just like your father!
"I'm almost pained to continue pursuing my studies if my outcome is already deemed to become a close-minded, uncompromising fanatic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594602</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am the child of an engineer, spent my childhood hanging out with other kids of engineers and their parents, and have spent most of my life working with engineers.  The place where I work now, every person is an electrical engineer except for our admin assistant.  I have never seen such a high proportion of people who pray, out loud, before eating *lunch*.  Two of my coworkers are creationists.  One has a PhD in electrical engineering.  There is a Bible in the bathroom, just in case you want to do some reading while on the throne.  I've worked in other jobs -- silversmithing, say -- where my coworkers were regular church attendees, but nobody ever said much about it.  It was important to them but they didn't tell you all about how their view of the world was Right.<p>
And on the other side, the atheists.   Again, other atheists I've worked with in other areas just didn't care about religion.  They didn't talk about it, they didn't think about it.  At this job, five of my coworkers will go out of their way, if any of the highly religious engineers are in earshot, to say things just like what you're saying, loudly, "I don't know why ANYONE who wasn't GOOFY would believe in a BIG INVISIBLE MAN in the SKY!"</p><p>
Normal people don't DO that.</p><p>
The people who are drawn to engineering tend to be very bright, sure of themselves, and little inclined to spend time worrying about what other people think of their appearance or opinions, because they're sure of themselves: introverts, in other words, who take their values from themselves rather than from society at large.  People who are bright, sure of themselves, and who consider what other people think of them, go into politics or become lawyers or high-level business, where telling someone that their beliefs are crazy is a career-limiting move.  But people drawn to engineering have strong senses of their self-confidence and self-approval.  That's why they're good at building stuff, and that's why they're good at deciding that God wants them to go blow up a building.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am the child of an engineer , spent my childhood hanging out with other kids of engineers and their parents , and have spent most of my life working with engineers .
The place where I work now , every person is an electrical engineer except for our admin assistant .
I have never seen such a high proportion of people who pray , out loud , before eating * lunch * .
Two of my coworkers are creationists .
One has a PhD in electrical engineering .
There is a Bible in the bathroom , just in case you want to do some reading while on the throne .
I 've worked in other jobs -- silversmithing , say -- where my coworkers were regular church attendees , but nobody ever said much about it .
It was important to them but they did n't tell you all about how their view of the world was Right .
And on the other side , the atheists .
Again , other atheists I 've worked with in other areas just did n't care about religion .
They did n't talk about it , they did n't think about it .
At this job , five of my coworkers will go out of their way , if any of the highly religious engineers are in earshot , to say things just like what you 're saying , loudly , " I do n't know why ANYONE who was n't GOOFY would believe in a BIG INVISIBLE MAN in the SKY !
" Normal people do n't DO that .
The people who are drawn to engineering tend to be very bright , sure of themselves , and little inclined to spend time worrying about what other people think of their appearance or opinions , because they 're sure of themselves : introverts , in other words , who take their values from themselves rather than from society at large .
People who are bright , sure of themselves , and who consider what other people think of them , go into politics or become lawyers or high-level business , where telling someone that their beliefs are crazy is a career-limiting move .
But people drawn to engineering have strong senses of their self-confidence and self-approval .
That 's why they 're good at building stuff , and that 's why they 're good at deciding that God wants them to go blow up a building .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am the child of an engineer, spent my childhood hanging out with other kids of engineers and their parents, and have spent most of my life working with engineers.
The place where I work now, every person is an electrical engineer except for our admin assistant.
I have never seen such a high proportion of people who pray, out loud, before eating *lunch*.
Two of my coworkers are creationists.
One has a PhD in electrical engineering.
There is a Bible in the bathroom, just in case you want to do some reading while on the throne.
I've worked in other jobs -- silversmithing, say -- where my coworkers were regular church attendees, but nobody ever said much about it.
It was important to them but they didn't tell you all about how their view of the world was Right.
And on the other side, the atheists.
Again, other atheists I've worked with in other areas just didn't care about religion.
They didn't talk about it, they didn't think about it.
At this job, five of my coworkers will go out of their way, if any of the highly religious engineers are in earshot, to say things just like what you're saying, loudly, "I don't know why ANYONE who wasn't GOOFY would believe in a BIG INVISIBLE MAN in the SKY!
"
Normal people don't DO that.
The people who are drawn to engineering tend to be very bright, sure of themselves, and little inclined to spend time worrying about what other people think of their appearance or opinions, because they're sure of themselves: introverts, in other words, who take their values from themselves rather than from society at large.
People who are bright, sure of themselves, and who consider what other people think of them, go into politics or become lawyers or high-level business, where telling someone that their beliefs are crazy is a career-limiting move.
But people drawn to engineering have strong senses of their self-confidence and self-approval.
That's why they're good at building stuff, and that's why they're good at deciding that God wants them to go blow up a building.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596926</id>
	<title>Re:Quick responses to common /. responses</title>
	<author>ukyoCE</author>
	<datestamp>1259867160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks for RTFA for us.  I'm surprised if people here don't already realize that engineers tend to be stubborn and militant.</p><p>When I stopped eating meat, two friends in particular were outraged and argued incessantly with me about it.  This is without any provocation from me - I don't care what other people do and take a very laid back approach to being vegetarian.</p><p>Both of these friends are now militant vegetarians.  Go figure.  They're always all-in, no middle ground or gray areas allowed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks for RTFA for us .
I 'm surprised if people here do n't already realize that engineers tend to be stubborn and militant.When I stopped eating meat , two friends in particular were outraged and argued incessantly with me about it .
This is without any provocation from me - I do n't care what other people do and take a very laid back approach to being vegetarian.Both of these friends are now militant vegetarians .
Go figure .
They 're always all-in , no middle ground or gray areas allowed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks for RTFA for us.
I'm surprised if people here don't already realize that engineers tend to be stubborn and militant.When I stopped eating meat, two friends in particular were outraged and argued incessantly with me about it.
This is without any provocation from me - I don't care what other people do and take a very laid back approach to being vegetarian.Both of these friends are now militant vegetarians.
Go figure.
They're always all-in, no middle ground or gray areas allowed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595282</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1259861940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion. Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook (until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof, which goes against what most of them say about faith."</p><p>If they bought into the superstition because their culture produced nothing else of note for the last few hundred years (not an insult, an observation of inconvenient fact) then they may have adopted engineering as a means to an end and not bought into skepticism. Mosques display some impressive engineering.</p><p>While modern people generally scorn religion as a joke played on primitives to manipulate them, many anti-modern people crave its comforting lies and are horny to kill for their imaginary celestial friend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion .
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook ( until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof , which goes against what most of them say about faith .
" If they bought into the superstition because their culture produced nothing else of note for the last few hundred years ( not an insult , an observation of inconvenient fact ) then they may have adopted engineering as a means to an end and not bought into skepticism .
Mosques display some impressive engineering.While modern people generally scorn religion as a joke played on primitives to manipulate them , many anti-modern people crave its comforting lies and are horny to kill for their imaginary celestial friend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion.
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook (until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof, which goes against what most of them say about faith.
"If they bought into the superstition because their culture produced nothing else of note for the last few hundred years (not an insult, an observation of inconvenient fact) then they may have adopted engineering as a means to an end and not bought into skepticism.
Mosques display some impressive engineering.While modern people generally scorn religion as a joke played on primitives to manipulate them, many anti-modern people crave its comforting lies and are horny to kill for their imaginary celestial friend.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599358</id>
	<title>Re:As an engineer let me say...</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1259833800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, I think part of the problem is the model of education turning out a "finished product" at the age of 23 or so.</p><p>Once upon a time, you could get a pretty good overview of all the knowledge in the world in a few years. If you were a gentleman of means, you could buy a library that was a reasonable cross section of the at knowledge and take it back home from you.  You could even pass it on to your heirs and it would be practically as good as the day you bought it.</p><p>The things that a liberal arts education is supposed to do for you are extremely unlikely to seem meaningful to somebody who's nineteen or twenty years old.  I'm not denigrating the intellectual abilities of young people. A young person can master mathematics and mechanics, which only depends on having mastered prior lessons in mathematics and mechanics.  I'm talking about life experience, which is something worth looking forward to obtaining.</p><p>If I could wave a magic wand and change one thing about society, I would change this: the assumption that education is only for the young. In the ages between 18 and 65, you are expected to spend four years (about 8.5\%) getting an education. I'd make it more like eight, and spread it out after the first three.   Say something like five weeks out of every year would be devoted to self-improvement.  You could improve your technical skills, of course, but as you get older you'd be able to make better use of what would seem like "fluff" to a twenty year old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , I think part of the problem is the model of education turning out a " finished product " at the age of 23 or so.Once upon a time , you could get a pretty good overview of all the knowledge in the world in a few years .
If you were a gentleman of means , you could buy a library that was a reasonable cross section of the at knowledge and take it back home from you .
You could even pass it on to your heirs and it would be practically as good as the day you bought it.The things that a liberal arts education is supposed to do for you are extremely unlikely to seem meaningful to somebody who 's nineteen or twenty years old .
I 'm not denigrating the intellectual abilities of young people .
A young person can master mathematics and mechanics , which only depends on having mastered prior lessons in mathematics and mechanics .
I 'm talking about life experience , which is something worth looking forward to obtaining.If I could wave a magic wand and change one thing about society , I would change this : the assumption that education is only for the young .
In the ages between 18 and 65 , you are expected to spend four years ( about 8.5 \ % ) getting an education .
I 'd make it more like eight , and spread it out after the first three .
Say something like five weeks out of every year would be devoted to self-improvement .
You could improve your technical skills , of course , but as you get older you 'd be able to make better use of what would seem like " fluff " to a twenty year old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, I think part of the problem is the model of education turning out a "finished product" at the age of 23 or so.Once upon a time, you could get a pretty good overview of all the knowledge in the world in a few years.
If you were a gentleman of means, you could buy a library that was a reasonable cross section of the at knowledge and take it back home from you.
You could even pass it on to your heirs and it would be practically as good as the day you bought it.The things that a liberal arts education is supposed to do for you are extremely unlikely to seem meaningful to somebody who's nineteen or twenty years old.
I'm not denigrating the intellectual abilities of young people.
A young person can master mathematics and mechanics, which only depends on having mastered prior lessons in mathematics and mechanics.
I'm talking about life experience, which is something worth looking forward to obtaining.If I could wave a magic wand and change one thing about society, I would change this: the assumption that education is only for the young.
In the ages between 18 and 65, you are expected to spend four years (about 8.5\%) getting an education.
I'd make it more like eight, and spread it out after the first three.
Say something like five weeks out of every year would be devoted to self-improvement.
You could improve your technical skills, of course, but as you get older you'd be able to make better use of what would seem like "fluff" to a twenty year old.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593126</id>
	<title>Corporations actively recruit engineers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Corporations actively recruit engineers and they are more likely to have experience living in a western society.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Corporations actively recruit engineers and they are more likely to have experience living in a western society .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Corporations actively recruit engineers and they are more likely to have experience living in a western society.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596128</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>kenshin33</author>
	<datestamp>1259864400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IMO, engineers (or any other student for that matter given he's not a egocentric prick<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)) are may be more sensitive to some injustices in the world, because of what they now know (sometimes ignorance is a bliss they say). some, given a little push might react radically.
<br>
It's a simple Robin-hood / Hero complex, somebody sold then this idea "you're doing a good thing for the world". the price for this glory? either their life, knowledge or both.
<br>
PS: you can may be add to that : the fact that if one turns to his roots in a foreign country, most of the time it will be  radical. always wondered why ???</htmltext>
<tokenext>IMO , engineers ( or any other student for that matter given he 's not a egocentric prick : ) ) are may be more sensitive to some injustices in the world , because of what they now know ( sometimes ignorance is a bliss they say ) .
some , given a little push might react radically .
It 's a simple Robin-hood / Hero complex , somebody sold then this idea " you 're doing a good thing for the world " .
the price for this glory ?
either their life , knowledge or both .
PS : you can may be add to that : the fact that if one turns to his roots in a foreign country , most of the time it will be radical .
always wondered why ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMO, engineers (or any other student for that matter given he's not a egocentric prick :)) are may be more sensitive to some injustices in the world, because of what they now know (sometimes ignorance is a bliss they say).
some, given a little push might react radically.
It's a simple Robin-hood / Hero complex, somebody sold then this idea "you're doing a good thing for the world".
the price for this glory?
either their life, knowledge or both.
PS: you can may be add to that : the fact that if one turns to his roots in a foreign country, most of the time it will be  radical.
always wondered why ??
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594774</id>
	<title>It Makes Sense</title>
	<author>b4upoo</author>
	<datestamp>1259860320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>       With some of the mind bending math that engineers must study it is no wonder at all that they often get very, very weird. As a society we have not yet faced the fact that education is actually a cause of a certain type of brain damage. It is easily observable in college sophomores who display all manner of weird social behavior. Areas of the brain that have important functions are not in proper use simple because the brain is being ravaged by excessive concentration and focus.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; If you get around people in the trades much you soon find that they think that all college graduates and students are weirdos who don't know their asses from their elbows.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; At the outer limit we see idiot savants who lack basic survival skills and yet display tremendous genius. Albert Einstein lived on the verge of being like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With some of the mind bending math that engineers must study it is no wonder at all that they often get very , very weird .
As a society we have not yet faced the fact that education is actually a cause of a certain type of brain damage .
It is easily observable in college sophomores who display all manner of weird social behavior .
Areas of the brain that have important functions are not in proper use simple because the brain is being ravaged by excessive concentration and focus .
                If you get around people in the trades much you soon find that they think that all college graduates and students are weirdos who do n't know their asses from their elbows .
                At the outer limit we see idiot savants who lack basic survival skills and yet display tremendous genius .
Albert Einstein lived on the verge of being like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>       With some of the mind bending math that engineers must study it is no wonder at all that they often get very, very weird.
As a society we have not yet faced the fact that education is actually a cause of a certain type of brain damage.
It is easily observable in college sophomores who display all manner of weird social behavior.
Areas of the brain that have important functions are not in proper use simple because the brain is being ravaged by excessive concentration and focus.
                If you get around people in the trades much you soon find that they think that all college graduates and students are weirdos who don't know their asses from their elbows.
                At the outer limit we see idiot savants who lack basic survival skills and yet display tremendous genius.
Albert Einstein lived on the verge of being like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593422</id>
	<title>As an engineer let me say...</title>
	<author>EvilTwinSkippy</author>
	<datestamp>1259855820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem isn't an engineering education. The problem is a complete an total lack of humanities while undertaking said education. Well, not total lack, but a general consideration that it's a pain in the ass and not required to get your job done.</p><p>I nary saw a history class, and the only "humanities" we were offered were labeled such. (I.E. a premade minimal class just to say were had it.)</p><p>You also have the problem in that Engineering degrees are so in demand, our engineering schools have become diploma mills. Self-contained enclaves. There was no effort on the part of my school to connect what we were learning to anything else. If anything the attitude was "Engineers were special", and everything (including basic math) had a "For engineers" in the title.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is n't an engineering education .
The problem is a complete an total lack of humanities while undertaking said education .
Well , not total lack , but a general consideration that it 's a pain in the ass and not required to get your job done.I nary saw a history class , and the only " humanities " we were offered were labeled such .
( I.E. a premade minimal class just to say were had it .
) You also have the problem in that Engineering degrees are so in demand , our engineering schools have become diploma mills .
Self-contained enclaves .
There was no effort on the part of my school to connect what we were learning to anything else .
If anything the attitude was " Engineers were special " , and everything ( including basic math ) had a " For engineers " in the title .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem isn't an engineering education.
The problem is a complete an total lack of humanities while undertaking said education.
Well, not total lack, but a general consideration that it's a pain in the ass and not required to get your job done.I nary saw a history class, and the only "humanities" we were offered were labeled such.
(I.E. a premade minimal class just to say were had it.
)You also have the problem in that Engineering degrees are so in demand, our engineering schools have become diploma mills.
Self-contained enclaves.
There was no effort on the part of my school to connect what we were learning to anything else.
If anything the attitude was "Engineers were special", and everything (including basic math) had a "For engineers" in the title.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595528</id>
	<title>Re:It's a cultural thing</title>
	<author>pjpII</author>
	<datestamp>1259862540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I will add to this as a grad student in Arabic linguistics and culture:</p><p>In Arab/Middle Eastern and generally third world culture, there is a lot more value placed on getting a degree in something that will be lucrative. Becoming a doctor or engineer is extremely important in these societies (lawyers don't make much, so it's not as important), and a system of testing reinforces this: only students who get the highest scores on the tests can enroll in the medical and engineering faculty of most Middle Eastern universities, while the lower the test score is the more liberal artsy the degree will be. I knew a couple of girls who really wanted to study biomedical engineering, but ended up in the English language and literature department due to their test scores.</p><p>There is also an immense amount of pressure to get a degree in a prestigious, money making field, which pushes a lot of students to pursue these degrees.</p><p>The results of this study, however, aren't necessarily applicable to the situation in the Middle East, I feel. First, liberal arts educations in the Middle East do NOT emphasize critical thinking. Like almost all fields, they focus on memorization - all tests in almost all departments are multiple choice. Some of my friends who study liberal arts subjects there have never had to write an essay - when one of them did, it was terrible, and failed to advance a critical thesis in any way shape or form. It's not like the US, where students are trained to deconstruct everything in liberal arts, while in engineering its more mathmatical. In the Middle East, both science and liberal arts are taught in substantially similar ways, with a strong emphasis on memorization.</p><p>Second, many students who do become engineers do so for economic reasons, not because of their personal interests. Almost all major literary figures in the Middle East had day jobs, and engineering is not necessarily a bad choice. A friend in Damascus is a struggling actor, but he's enrolled in a engineering program since his parents wouldn't support him otherwise. Thus, the kind of self selection that is important to the authors' argument really isn't at play to the same degree in the Middle East as it would be in the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I will add to this as a grad student in Arabic linguistics and culture : In Arab/Middle Eastern and generally third world culture , there is a lot more value placed on getting a degree in something that will be lucrative .
Becoming a doctor or engineer is extremely important in these societies ( lawyers do n't make much , so it 's not as important ) , and a system of testing reinforces this : only students who get the highest scores on the tests can enroll in the medical and engineering faculty of most Middle Eastern universities , while the lower the test score is the more liberal artsy the degree will be .
I knew a couple of girls who really wanted to study biomedical engineering , but ended up in the English language and literature department due to their test scores.There is also an immense amount of pressure to get a degree in a prestigious , money making field , which pushes a lot of students to pursue these degrees.The results of this study , however , are n't necessarily applicable to the situation in the Middle East , I feel .
First , liberal arts educations in the Middle East do NOT emphasize critical thinking .
Like almost all fields , they focus on memorization - all tests in almost all departments are multiple choice .
Some of my friends who study liberal arts subjects there have never had to write an essay - when one of them did , it was terrible , and failed to advance a critical thesis in any way shape or form .
It 's not like the US , where students are trained to deconstruct everything in liberal arts , while in engineering its more mathmatical .
In the Middle East , both science and liberal arts are taught in substantially similar ways , with a strong emphasis on memorization.Second , many students who do become engineers do so for economic reasons , not because of their personal interests .
Almost all major literary figures in the Middle East had day jobs , and engineering is not necessarily a bad choice .
A friend in Damascus is a struggling actor , but he 's enrolled in a engineering program since his parents would n't support him otherwise .
Thus , the kind of self selection that is important to the authors ' argument really is n't at play to the same degree in the Middle East as it would be in the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I will add to this as a grad student in Arabic linguistics and culture:In Arab/Middle Eastern and generally third world culture, there is a lot more value placed on getting a degree in something that will be lucrative.
Becoming a doctor or engineer is extremely important in these societies (lawyers don't make much, so it's not as important), and a system of testing reinforces this: only students who get the highest scores on the tests can enroll in the medical and engineering faculty of most Middle Eastern universities, while the lower the test score is the more liberal artsy the degree will be.
I knew a couple of girls who really wanted to study biomedical engineering, but ended up in the English language and literature department due to their test scores.There is also an immense amount of pressure to get a degree in a prestigious, money making field, which pushes a lot of students to pursue these degrees.The results of this study, however, aren't necessarily applicable to the situation in the Middle East, I feel.
First, liberal arts educations in the Middle East do NOT emphasize critical thinking.
Like almost all fields, they focus on memorization - all tests in almost all departments are multiple choice.
Some of my friends who study liberal arts subjects there have never had to write an essay - when one of them did, it was terrible, and failed to advance a critical thesis in any way shape or form.
It's not like the US, where students are trained to deconstruct everything in liberal arts, while in engineering its more mathmatical.
In the Middle East, both science and liberal arts are taught in substantially similar ways, with a strong emphasis on memorization.Second, many students who do become engineers do so for economic reasons, not because of their personal interests.
Almost all major literary figures in the Middle East had day jobs, and engineering is not necessarily a bad choice.
A friend in Damascus is a struggling actor, but he's enrolled in a engineering program since his parents wouldn't support him otherwise.
Thus, the kind of self selection that is important to the authors' argument really isn't at play to the same degree in the Middle East as it would be in the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601372</id>
	<title>Obvious answer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259846880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Terrorist = Unamerican</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Terrorist = Unamerican</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Terrorist = Unamerican</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594578</id>
	<title>i smell a rat</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>could it be that they are highly trained professionals by the united states military?</p><p>the 9/11 hijackers were trained in us military bases in san diego.<br>The word al qadiea is a name created by the US's CIA refferring to their own contacts.</p><p>the is ample evidence pointing to controlled demolition in the 9/11 attacks. ample evidence of a false flag type of attack in the 7/7 bombings.</p><p>perhaps we all have the duty to look beneith the surface of the official news story</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>could it be that they are highly trained professionals by the united states military ? the 9/11 hijackers were trained in us military bases in san diego.The word al qadiea is a name created by the US 's CIA refferring to their own contacts.the is ample evidence pointing to controlled demolition in the 9/11 attacks .
ample evidence of a false flag type of attack in the 7/7 bombings.perhaps we all have the duty to look beneith the surface of the official news story</tokentext>
<sentencetext>could it be that they are highly trained professionals by the united states military?the 9/11 hijackers were trained in us military bases in san diego.The word al qadiea is a name created by the US's CIA refferring to their own contacts.the is ample evidence pointing to controlled demolition in the 9/11 attacks.
ample evidence of a false flag type of attack in the 7/7 bombings.perhaps we all have the duty to look beneith the surface of the official news story</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602544</id>
	<title>Bet they were terrorists first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>They were probably terrorists first and figured, or were told, to get an engineering degree to help their cause, bastards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They were probably terrorists first and figured , or were told , to get an engineering degree to help their cause , bastards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They were probably terrorists first and figured, or were told, to get an engineering degree to help their cause, bastards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593294</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>bwalling</author>
	<datestamp>1259855340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe they're looking at it in the wrong direction.  Religious zealot who wants to carry out an elaborate attack gets an engineering degree to pull it off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they 're looking at it in the wrong direction .
Religious zealot who wants to carry out an elaborate attack gets an engineering degree to pull it off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they're looking at it in the wrong direction.
Religious zealot who wants to carry out an elaborate attack gets an engineering degree to pull it off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593142</id>
	<title>The real question is ...</title>
	<author>jsnipy</author>
	<datestamp>1259854560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would they play engineer in TF2?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would they play engineer in TF2 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would they play engineer in TF2?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594536</id>
	<title>Like any other job</title>
	<author>binaryseraph</author>
	<datestamp>1259859480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Really it's like any other high paying job- I think if you get the Engineering degree you can participate in the 401k plan.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really it 's like any other high paying job- I think if you get the Engineering degree you can participate in the 401k plan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really it's like any other high paying job- I think if you get the Engineering degree you can participate in the 401k plan.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593730</id>
	<title>jounalism degrees don't enable you to make bombs</title>
	<author>assertation</author>
	<datestamp>1259856960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The obvious point: Terrorists need people with money and people with the skills to make bombs.</p><p>Not much room for English or Journalism majors at the Al Quedia training camp.</p><p>The communication skills from those disciplines are useful, but the Islamic terrorists already have the SUV/Saudi Arabian funded clerics taking care of brain washing and recruitment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The obvious point : Terrorists need people with money and people with the skills to make bombs.Not much room for English or Journalism majors at the Al Quedia training camp.The communication skills from those disciplines are useful , but the Islamic terrorists already have the SUV/Saudi Arabian funded clerics taking care of brain washing and recruitment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The obvious point: Terrorists need people with money and people with the skills to make bombs.Not much room for English or Journalism majors at the Al Quedia training camp.The communication skills from those disciplines are useful, but the Islamic terrorists already have the SUV/Saudi Arabian funded clerics taking care of brain washing and recruitment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596608</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1259865900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above. Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.</p></div><p>I think it's more that being very intelligent, you are far more likely to believe in your own understanding of reality and moral system regardless of everyone else. These people probably believed they could see a great conspiracy against Islam, which only they saw exactly because they were intelligent and educated. They could see through the deceptions and coverups and link events together to reveal the master plan while the rest of the world was blind. Everything that speaks in favor of your world view is true, everything that speaks against is a deception - it is the ultimate in confirmation bias. Higher intelligence would not help, it would only reinforce that belief.</p><p>One thing that is fairly clear about most of society's rules, it'd be a lot better for me if they applied to everyone but me. Morality aside, you want the others to be hens and you the fox in the henhouse. Now I'm not trying to defend anyone, but practical reality is that many people aren't intelligent enough to be criminals. They get caught, they go to jail, the risk/reward works out in favor of not breaking the law. High intelligence can swing those odds in your favor, and to paraphrase Al Capone: "You can get farther with morality and threat of jail time than you can with just morality." So I don't think it directly impacts morality, but it certainly gives capability to those who are already morally corrupt.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that ( counter-intuitively perhaps ) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent , learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics , homicidal maniacs , perverts , terrorists , psychopaths , all-round assholes or all of the above .
Moral outlook and intelligence do n't seem to be very strongly related at all.I think it 's more that being very intelligent , you are far more likely to believe in your own understanding of reality and moral system regardless of everyone else .
These people probably believed they could see a great conspiracy against Islam , which only they saw exactly because they were intelligent and educated .
They could see through the deceptions and coverups and link events together to reveal the master plan while the rest of the world was blind .
Everything that speaks in favor of your world view is true , everything that speaks against is a deception - it is the ultimate in confirmation bias .
Higher intelligence would not help , it would only reinforce that belief.One thing that is fairly clear about most of society 's rules , it 'd be a lot better for me if they applied to everyone but me .
Morality aside , you want the others to be hens and you the fox in the henhouse .
Now I 'm not trying to defend anyone , but practical reality is that many people are n't intelligent enough to be criminals .
They get caught , they go to jail , the risk/reward works out in favor of not breaking the law .
High intelligence can swing those odds in your favor , and to paraphrase Al Capone : " You can get farther with morality and threat of jail time than you can with just morality .
" So I do n't think it directly impacts morality , but it certainly gives capability to those who are already morally corrupt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above.
Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.I think it's more that being very intelligent, you are far more likely to believe in your own understanding of reality and moral system regardless of everyone else.
These people probably believed they could see a great conspiracy against Islam, which only they saw exactly because they were intelligent and educated.
They could see through the deceptions and coverups and link events together to reveal the master plan while the rest of the world was blind.
Everything that speaks in favor of your world view is true, everything that speaks against is a deception - it is the ultimate in confirmation bias.
Higher intelligence would not help, it would only reinforce that belief.One thing that is fairly clear about most of society's rules, it'd be a lot better for me if they applied to everyone but me.
Morality aside, you want the others to be hens and you the fox in the henhouse.
Now I'm not trying to defend anyone, but practical reality is that many people aren't intelligent enough to be criminals.
They get caught, they go to jail, the risk/reward works out in favor of not breaking the law.
High intelligence can swing those odds in your favor, and to paraphrase Al Capone: "You can get farther with morality and threat of jail time than you can with just morality.
" So I don't think it directly impacts morality, but it certainly gives capability to those who are already morally corrupt.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593600</id>
	<title>Thomas Jefferson != murder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When did Thomas Jefferson ever try to murder innocent civilians or stone women because they were raped?  How about try to kill a person because he drew a cartoon?  Thomas Jefferson did or advocated none of these things or anything like it.  It looks like you may need to crack open your history book.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When did Thomas Jefferson ever try to murder innocent civilians or stone women because they were raped ?
How about try to kill a person because he drew a cartoon ?
Thomas Jefferson did or advocated none of these things or anything like it .
It looks like you may need to crack open your history book .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When did Thomas Jefferson ever try to murder innocent civilians or stone women because they were raped?
How about try to kill a person because he drew a cartoon?
Thomas Jefferson did or advocated none of these things or anything like it.
It looks like you may need to crack open your history book.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596090</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259864280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FWIW, my undergrad degree is in the liberal arts (the classical liberal arts; I studied here: http://www.stjohnscollege.edu ) and my master's degree is in mechanical engineering. People use the term "liberal arts" to mean lots of different things; it can refer to anything from a true Great Books education to "I couldn't choose a major."</p><p>Many engineering and science students dismiss the liberal arts, but they shouldn't. According to the strictest definition, the seven liberal arts include grammar and rhetoric but also mathematics and logic. Additionally, certain branches of philosophy are extremely math-intensive. The upshot here is that somebody with a liberal arts degree can have an education just as rigorous as that possessed by any engineering graduate.</p><p>Similarly, the term "engineer" can refer to somebody with an associates degree who is essentially a CAD operator or even just a janitor (the dreaded "sanitation engineer"). I've met plenty of engineers with four-year degrees from top schools who are weak in critical thinking, even in terms of their own field. This is a well-known hazard; engineers use the derisive phrase "plug-and-chug" to refer to problems that don't require much thought.</p><p>I will concede that there's a huge amount of variability in what people mean by "liberal arts," but that's all the more reason to be careful when making declarations about how liberal arts students are trained and what they're able to cope with.</p><p>In my experience, smart, thoughtful people end up earning all sorts of different degrees--and some of them have no degree at all. Sure, prestigious degrees are a proxy for "smart and thoughtful," but the correlation isn't as strong as some people seem to think.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FWIW , my undergrad degree is in the liberal arts ( the classical liberal arts ; I studied here : http : //www.stjohnscollege.edu ) and my master 's degree is in mechanical engineering .
People use the term " liberal arts " to mean lots of different things ; it can refer to anything from a true Great Books education to " I could n't choose a major .
" Many engineering and science students dismiss the liberal arts , but they should n't .
According to the strictest definition , the seven liberal arts include grammar and rhetoric but also mathematics and logic .
Additionally , certain branches of philosophy are extremely math-intensive .
The upshot here is that somebody with a liberal arts degree can have an education just as rigorous as that possessed by any engineering graduate.Similarly , the term " engineer " can refer to somebody with an associates degree who is essentially a CAD operator or even just a janitor ( the dreaded " sanitation engineer " ) .
I 've met plenty of engineers with four-year degrees from top schools who are weak in critical thinking , even in terms of their own field .
This is a well-known hazard ; engineers use the derisive phrase " plug-and-chug " to refer to problems that do n't require much thought.I will concede that there 's a huge amount of variability in what people mean by " liberal arts , " but that 's all the more reason to be careful when making declarations about how liberal arts students are trained and what they 're able to cope with.In my experience , smart , thoughtful people end up earning all sorts of different degrees--and some of them have no degree at all .
Sure , prestigious degrees are a proxy for " smart and thoughtful , " but the correlation is n't as strong as some people seem to think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FWIW, my undergrad degree is in the liberal arts (the classical liberal arts; I studied here: http://www.stjohnscollege.edu ) and my master's degree is in mechanical engineering.
People use the term "liberal arts" to mean lots of different things; it can refer to anything from a true Great Books education to "I couldn't choose a major.
"Many engineering and science students dismiss the liberal arts, but they shouldn't.
According to the strictest definition, the seven liberal arts include grammar and rhetoric but also mathematics and logic.
Additionally, certain branches of philosophy are extremely math-intensive.
The upshot here is that somebody with a liberal arts degree can have an education just as rigorous as that possessed by any engineering graduate.Similarly, the term "engineer" can refer to somebody with an associates degree who is essentially a CAD operator or even just a janitor (the dreaded "sanitation engineer").
I've met plenty of engineers with four-year degrees from top schools who are weak in critical thinking, even in terms of their own field.
This is a well-known hazard; engineers use the derisive phrase "plug-and-chug" to refer to problems that don't require much thought.I will concede that there's a huge amount of variability in what people mean by "liberal arts," but that's all the more reason to be careful when making declarations about how liberal arts students are trained and what they're able to cope with.In my experience, smart, thoughtful people end up earning all sorts of different degrees--and some of them have no degree at all.
Sure, prestigious degrees are a proxy for "smart and thoughtful," but the correlation isn't as strong as some people seem to think.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592996</id>
	<title>Better question</title>
	<author>onyxruby</author>
	<datestamp>1259853900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do so many terrorists have a complete failure to use their training or logic? There are so many logical holes in the theater we call security, an engineer should be able to exploit them like there's no tomorrow. Yet they continue to do show incompetence on large scale attacks due to logical flaws in their planning. Meanwhile countless exploitable targets go unchallenged on a routine basis. Perhaps it is failed engineers that become terrorists?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do so many terrorists have a complete failure to use their training or logic ?
There are so many logical holes in the theater we call security , an engineer should be able to exploit them like there 's no tomorrow .
Yet they continue to do show incompetence on large scale attacks due to logical flaws in their planning .
Meanwhile countless exploitable targets go unchallenged on a routine basis .
Perhaps it is failed engineers that become terrorists ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do so many terrorists have a complete failure to use their training or logic?
There are so many logical holes in the theater we call security, an engineer should be able to exploit them like there's no tomorrow.
Yet they continue to do show incompetence on large scale attacks due to logical flaws in their planning.
Meanwhile countless exploitable targets go unchallenged on a routine basis.
Perhaps it is failed engineers that become terrorists?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</id>
	<title>Necessary skills</title>
	<author>antura</author>
	<datestamp>1259853360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd guess art students aren't as good at making bombs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd guess art students are n't as good at making bombs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd guess art students aren't as good at making bombs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595122</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>kungfugleek</author>
	<datestamp>1259861520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you're right that engineering is the art of compromise, but I still hate it.  I would love all the time and resources in the world to make the "perfect" product, but it never happens.  I have to compromise, and engineering is all about that, but I still hate it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're right that engineering is the art of compromise , but I still hate it .
I would love all the time and resources in the world to make the " perfect " product , but it never happens .
I have to compromise , and engineering is all about that , but I still hate it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're right that engineering is the art of compromise, but I still hate it.
I would love all the time and resources in the world to make the "perfect" product, but it never happens.
I have to compromise, and engineering is all about that, but I still hate it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597690</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259870220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The answer is:</p><p>PC LOAD LETTER drives them to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The answer is : PC LOAD LETTER drives them to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The answer is:PC LOAD LETTER drives them to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30609876</id>
	<title>Why Do So Many Terrorists Have Engineering Degree</title>
	<author>lsatenstein</author>
	<datestamp>1262254560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I look at the mindset of an engineer, we see that they are very oriented to analysis and problem solving and have not studied any of the humanity subjects. For the most part they lack people skills, and therefore, cannot relate to happiness, sadness or tolerance for errors.

Therefore, when faced with what they are convinced is less then perfection, (human design), they are more ready to give their life to correct the situation.

I also believe that these "brainwashed" individuals are not successful in life or marriage. I don't see a man with 4 kids committing suicide unless their is dispair in the individuals life.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I look at the mindset of an engineer , we see that they are very oriented to analysis and problem solving and have not studied any of the humanity subjects .
For the most part they lack people skills , and therefore , can not relate to happiness , sadness or tolerance for errors .
Therefore , when faced with what they are convinced is less then perfection , ( human design ) , they are more ready to give their life to correct the situation .
I also believe that these " brainwashed " individuals are not successful in life or marriage .
I do n't see a man with 4 kids committing suicide unless their is dispair in the individuals life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I look at the mindset of an engineer, we see that they are very oriented to analysis and problem solving and have not studied any of the humanity subjects.
For the most part they lack people skills, and therefore, cannot relate to happiness, sadness or tolerance for errors.
Therefore, when faced with what they are convinced is less then perfection, (human design), they are more ready to give their life to correct the situation.
I also believe that these "brainwashed" individuals are not successful in life or marriage.
I don't see a man with 4 kids committing suicide unless their is dispair in the individuals life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602578</id>
	<title>Re:What about rich kids becoming terrorists?</title>
	<author>kbahey</author>
	<datestamp>1259857860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Poor people at the bottom of the social ladder seldom rise on their own against injustice. When it happens it is often mob violence not organized resistance, or activism. More often the leaders of resistance/activism are middle class or from the wealthy.</p><p>Was the historical Buddha a poor person? No he was royalty. He did sympathize with the poor and sick that he became one.</p><p>Did you know that Nelson Mandela, for example, comes from local royal lineage?</p><p>Bin Laden was rich initially, by inheritance, until he went to Afghanistan for fighting the Soviets. He spend a lot of his money there. His wealth dwindled after he criticized the king of Saudi Arabia and his citizenship was dropped and forced into exile (first to Sudan). After he was exiled, his wife and kids in Saudi Arabia were supported by his brothers: they were never given cash lest they would send it to Bin Laden, but the school bills and grocery were all settled on his brothers' credit. He never sent a penny, nor did he receive any from his family.</p><p>Another example of rich people going astray: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patty\_Hearst" title="wikipedia.org">Patty Hearst</a> [wikipedia.org] was initially kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army, but then joined them, wielded a weapon in robbery for them. She was partially coerced, but she could have also ran away. She was from a rich background too being an heiress of publishing empire.</p><p>The Nigerian guy has changed over the years. He was lonely, cut ties with his rich family too. See <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/30/AR2009123002723.html?hpid=topnews" title="washingtonpost.com">here</a> [washingtonpost.com] for more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Poor people at the bottom of the social ladder seldom rise on their own against injustice .
When it happens it is often mob violence not organized resistance , or activism .
More often the leaders of resistance/activism are middle class or from the wealthy.Was the historical Buddha a poor person ?
No he was royalty .
He did sympathize with the poor and sick that he became one.Did you know that Nelson Mandela , for example , comes from local royal lineage ? Bin Laden was rich initially , by inheritance , until he went to Afghanistan for fighting the Soviets .
He spend a lot of his money there .
His wealth dwindled after he criticized the king of Saudi Arabia and his citizenship was dropped and forced into exile ( first to Sudan ) .
After he was exiled , his wife and kids in Saudi Arabia were supported by his brothers : they were never given cash lest they would send it to Bin Laden , but the school bills and grocery were all settled on his brothers ' credit .
He never sent a penny , nor did he receive any from his family.Another example of rich people going astray : Patty Hearst [ wikipedia.org ] was initially kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army , but then joined them , wielded a weapon in robbery for them .
She was partially coerced , but she could have also ran away .
She was from a rich background too being an heiress of publishing empire.The Nigerian guy has changed over the years .
He was lonely , cut ties with his rich family too .
See here [ washingtonpost.com ] for more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poor people at the bottom of the social ladder seldom rise on their own against injustice.
When it happens it is often mob violence not organized resistance, or activism.
More often the leaders of resistance/activism are middle class or from the wealthy.Was the historical Buddha a poor person?
No he was royalty.
He did sympathize with the poor and sick that he became one.Did you know that Nelson Mandela, for example, comes from local royal lineage?Bin Laden was rich initially, by inheritance, until he went to Afghanistan for fighting the Soviets.
He spend a lot of his money there.
His wealth dwindled after he criticized the king of Saudi Arabia and his citizenship was dropped and forced into exile (first to Sudan).
After he was exiled, his wife and kids in Saudi Arabia were supported by his brothers: they were never given cash lest they would send it to Bin Laden, but the school bills and grocery were all settled on his brothers' credit.
He never sent a penny, nor did he receive any from his family.Another example of rich people going astray: Patty Hearst [wikipedia.org] was initially kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army, but then joined them, wielded a weapon in robbery for them.
She was partially coerced, but she could have also ran away.
She was from a rich background too being an heiress of publishing empire.The Nigerian guy has changed over the years.
He was lonely, cut ties with his rich family too.
See here [washingtonpost.com] for more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593134</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would be compromise with people and not with materials/construction. "My way is the right way," in essence. Engineering and technical people tend to avoid confronting the human factor since those are things that are not predictable and accountable.This is the eternal struggle between IT and business people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be compromise with people and not with materials/construction .
" My way is the right way , " in essence .
Engineering and technical people tend to avoid confronting the human factor since those are things that are not predictable and accountable.This is the eternal struggle between IT and business people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be compromise with people and not with materials/construction.
"My way is the right way," in essence.
Engineering and technical people tend to avoid confronting the human factor since those are things that are not predictable and accountable.This is the eternal struggle between IT and business people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593056</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly.</p><p>I mean if engineers hated compromise then I wouldn't have to remove the engine in my car just to change a spark plug.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly.I mean if engineers hated compromise then I would n't have to remove the engine in my car just to change a spark plug .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.I mean if engineers hated compromise then I wouldn't have to remove the engine in my car just to change a spark plug.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595420</id>
	<title>BULLSHIT, here's why. . .</title>
	<author>Fantastic Lad</author>
	<datestamp>1259862240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having read through their explanation of the sample of 404 "known terrorists" they derived their figures from, I have to say that they are clearly jumping to conclusions. .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</p><blockquote><div><p>One could question the validity of our result. <b>The list of names and the subset of<br>individuals in it on whom we found information are both selected by the public<br>availability of data,</b> which in turn depends largely on whether the individuals came to the<br>attention of the authorities because they were killed, captured or <b>investigated.</b> However,<br>the chances of finding engineers relative to the chances of finding graduates in any other   13<br>subject should be unaffected by these selection biases. For a bias to occur we would have<br>to assume that engineers are more likely than other educated individuals to be killed,<br>caught or investigated because of greater incompetence. This seems implausible; if<br>anything the opposite should be the case. If they fell into the investigative net they<br>arguably did so because they were particularly active, prone to violence and able to use it,<br>which would indeed show the existence of the correlation that interests us.</p></div></blockquote><p>Here's the thing; If you are an engineering type, then chances are you are comfortable with information technology to a higher degree than others.  --I've known a lot of different kinds of students and not all of them are computer savvy.  Further, if you are an oil worker or a baker or an unemployed man whose house has been run over by a tractor and you have notions of social justice through violence, how much awareness of you are the secret services going to have versus an engineer with an internet connection?  <b>--You know, a guy whose Google search footprint and subsequent psychological profile screams, "Malcontent!"</b>  --Surveillance is easy when you don't have to leave the Homeland office to build your suspect list.</p><p>And a sample of 404 people, (nearly all taken from internet sources, I might add), for such a squishy study is, while interesting, hardly damning proof of anything.  --I mean, just the definition, 'terrorist' is a bullshit one these days.  Every time a military bomb wipes out a village, it is usually reported that most of the people killed were conveniently, "Terrorists".  I had no idea the world had so many engineers!  And frankly, based on everything I've read, (and I've read a truckload on this), I happen to believe that a lot of high-profile 'terrorism' is performed for false-flag purposes by mind-control patsies of one sort or another.  Heck, the kid who set his pants on fire just a few days ago aboard an international flight, when you dig into that highly suspicious story, appears to have been in zombie-mode and to have had several handlers who put him on the flight, by-passing security.</p><p>I would be VERY cautious about taking a study like this one at face value.  I mean, yes, engineers do tend to carry certain social characteristics, and as I've always said, they are one of the most powerful groups on the planet because they make everything <i>work.</i>  They define reality.  And as such, the military industrial complex has a vested interest in making damned sure all the Pavlovian programming has well and truly taken hold in that group, with regular inoculations, so that they are easily controlled.  Top priority slaves, as it were, making slavery as a way of life possible.</p><p>Geeks have been punished and programmed and used by society their whole lives exactly <i>because</i> of their social traits.  But that doesn't make them prone to becoming systematic killers.  Who got blamed during that Columbine massacre?  The misfits.  But upon closer inspection, it turns out those trench coat kids were not your or my kind of misfit.  They didn't hang out in the computer lab and their bombs didn't work.  --When it comes to labeling a social group, I'd be more worried about those Tea Party people with their guns and down-home religion, conservative rage and neighborhood militias.  And I'm sorry, but Palin clones don't strike me as the type who could engineer their way out of a cardboard box let alone get a degree.</p><p>And even THAT is an exaggeration.</p><p>What I am saying is this: be VERY careful with this kind of thing.  Everybody can look suspicious when state paranoia turns its many cameras inward upon its own population.  This is actually the typical trend with fascism; first its the evil out there, then it's the evil within.  Next thing you know, engineers will be encouraged to self-police their ranks and inform on their friends.  Fuck. That.</p><p>I know several engineers, as I'm sure many of you do as well.  Seriously; how many of them would ever go out of their way to harm somebody?</p><p>Exactly.</p><p>-FL</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having read through their explanation of the sample of 404 " known terrorists " they derived their figures from , I have to say that they are clearly jumping to conclusions .
. .One could question the validity of our result .
The list of names and the subset ofindividuals in it on whom we found information are both selected by the publicavailability of data , which in turn depends largely on whether the individuals came to theattention of the authorities because they were killed , captured or investigated .
However,the chances of finding engineers relative to the chances of finding graduates in any other 13subject should be unaffected by these selection biases .
For a bias to occur we would haveto assume that engineers are more likely than other educated individuals to be killed,caught or investigated because of greater incompetence .
This seems implausible ; ifanything the opposite should be the case .
If they fell into the investigative net theyarguably did so because they were particularly active , prone to violence and able to use it,which would indeed show the existence of the correlation that interests us.Here 's the thing ; If you are an engineering type , then chances are you are comfortable with information technology to a higher degree than others .
--I 've known a lot of different kinds of students and not all of them are computer savvy .
Further , if you are an oil worker or a baker or an unemployed man whose house has been run over by a tractor and you have notions of social justice through violence , how much awareness of you are the secret services going to have versus an engineer with an internet connection ?
--You know , a guy whose Google search footprint and subsequent psychological profile screams , " Malcontent !
" --Surveillance is easy when you do n't have to leave the Homeland office to build your suspect list.And a sample of 404 people , ( nearly all taken from internet sources , I might add ) , for such a squishy study is , while interesting , hardly damning proof of anything .
--I mean , just the definition , 'terrorist ' is a bullshit one these days .
Every time a military bomb wipes out a village , it is usually reported that most of the people killed were conveniently , " Terrorists " .
I had no idea the world had so many engineers !
And frankly , based on everything I 've read , ( and I 've read a truckload on this ) , I happen to believe that a lot of high-profile 'terrorism ' is performed for false-flag purposes by mind-control patsies of one sort or another .
Heck , the kid who set his pants on fire just a few days ago aboard an international flight , when you dig into that highly suspicious story , appears to have been in zombie-mode and to have had several handlers who put him on the flight , by-passing security.I would be VERY cautious about taking a study like this one at face value .
I mean , yes , engineers do tend to carry certain social characteristics , and as I 've always said , they are one of the most powerful groups on the planet because they make everything work .
They define reality .
And as such , the military industrial complex has a vested interest in making damned sure all the Pavlovian programming has well and truly taken hold in that group , with regular inoculations , so that they are easily controlled .
Top priority slaves , as it were , making slavery as a way of life possible.Geeks have been punished and programmed and used by society their whole lives exactly because of their social traits .
But that does n't make them prone to becoming systematic killers .
Who got blamed during that Columbine massacre ?
The misfits .
But upon closer inspection , it turns out those trench coat kids were not your or my kind of misfit .
They did n't hang out in the computer lab and their bombs did n't work .
--When it comes to labeling a social group , I 'd be more worried about those Tea Party people with their guns and down-home religion , conservative rage and neighborhood militias .
And I 'm sorry , but Palin clones do n't strike me as the type who could engineer their way out of a cardboard box let alone get a degree.And even THAT is an exaggeration.What I am saying is this : be VERY careful with this kind of thing .
Everybody can look suspicious when state paranoia turns its many cameras inward upon its own population .
This is actually the typical trend with fascism ; first its the evil out there , then it 's the evil within .
Next thing you know , engineers will be encouraged to self-police their ranks and inform on their friends .
Fuck. That.I know several engineers , as I 'm sure many of you do as well .
Seriously ; how many of them would ever go out of their way to harm somebody ? Exactly.-FL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having read through their explanation of the sample of 404 "known terrorists" they derived their figures from, I have to say that they are clearly jumping to conclusions.
. .One could question the validity of our result.
The list of names and the subset ofindividuals in it on whom we found information are both selected by the publicavailability of data, which in turn depends largely on whether the individuals came to theattention of the authorities because they were killed, captured or investigated.
However,the chances of finding engineers relative to the chances of finding graduates in any other   13subject should be unaffected by these selection biases.
For a bias to occur we would haveto assume that engineers are more likely than other educated individuals to be killed,caught or investigated because of greater incompetence.
This seems implausible; ifanything the opposite should be the case.
If they fell into the investigative net theyarguably did so because they were particularly active, prone to violence and able to use it,which would indeed show the existence of the correlation that interests us.Here's the thing; If you are an engineering type, then chances are you are comfortable with information technology to a higher degree than others.
--I've known a lot of different kinds of students and not all of them are computer savvy.
Further, if you are an oil worker or a baker or an unemployed man whose house has been run over by a tractor and you have notions of social justice through violence, how much awareness of you are the secret services going to have versus an engineer with an internet connection?
--You know, a guy whose Google search footprint and subsequent psychological profile screams, "Malcontent!
"  --Surveillance is easy when you don't have to leave the Homeland office to build your suspect list.And a sample of 404 people, (nearly all taken from internet sources, I might add), for such a squishy study is, while interesting, hardly damning proof of anything.
--I mean, just the definition, 'terrorist' is a bullshit one these days.
Every time a military bomb wipes out a village, it is usually reported that most of the people killed were conveniently, "Terrorists".
I had no idea the world had so many engineers!
And frankly, based on everything I've read, (and I've read a truckload on this), I happen to believe that a lot of high-profile 'terrorism' is performed for false-flag purposes by mind-control patsies of one sort or another.
Heck, the kid who set his pants on fire just a few days ago aboard an international flight, when you dig into that highly suspicious story, appears to have been in zombie-mode and to have had several handlers who put him on the flight, by-passing security.I would be VERY cautious about taking a study like this one at face value.
I mean, yes, engineers do tend to carry certain social characteristics, and as I've always said, they are one of the most powerful groups on the planet because they make everything work.
They define reality.
And as such, the military industrial complex has a vested interest in making damned sure all the Pavlovian programming has well and truly taken hold in that group, with regular inoculations, so that they are easily controlled.
Top priority slaves, as it were, making slavery as a way of life possible.Geeks have been punished and programmed and used by society their whole lives exactly because of their social traits.
But that doesn't make them prone to becoming systematic killers.
Who got blamed during that Columbine massacre?
The misfits.
But upon closer inspection, it turns out those trench coat kids were not your or my kind of misfit.
They didn't hang out in the computer lab and their bombs didn't work.
--When it comes to labeling a social group, I'd be more worried about those Tea Party people with their guns and down-home religion, conservative rage and neighborhood militias.
And I'm sorry, but Palin clones don't strike me as the type who could engineer their way out of a cardboard box let alone get a degree.And even THAT is an exaggeration.What I am saying is this: be VERY careful with this kind of thing.
Everybody can look suspicious when state paranoia turns its many cameras inward upon its own population.
This is actually the typical trend with fascism; first its the evil out there, then it's the evil within.
Next thing you know, engineers will be encouraged to self-police their ranks and inform on their friends.
Fuck. That.I know several engineers, as I'm sure many of you do as well.
Seriously; how many of them would ever go out of their way to harm somebody?Exactly.-FL
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596650</id>
	<title>Why many, not all engineers are conservative</title>
	<author>assertation</author>
	<datestamp>1259866080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One reason why many, not all, engineers are conservative:</p><p>1. Regardless of what they do, people believe they are doing the right thing<br>2. Engineers are people<br>3. Engineers want to believe they are doing the right thing<br>4. Engineers need jobs/money.<br>5. Most, not all, engineering jobs are associated with the military ( in the US )<br>6. Republicans do more business with companies that build military hardware<br>7. Republican policy/tendencies create more engineering jobs and money for engineers.<br>8. =&gt; People who like engineering tend to be republican.</p><p>In other words, people's views shift with who writes their paychecks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One reason why many , not all , engineers are conservative : 1 .
Regardless of what they do , people believe they are doing the right thing2 .
Engineers are people3 .
Engineers want to believe they are doing the right thing4 .
Engineers need jobs/money.5 .
Most , not all , engineering jobs are associated with the military ( in the US ) 6 .
Republicans do more business with companies that build military hardware7 .
Republican policy/tendencies create more engineering jobs and money for engineers.8 .
= &gt; People who like engineering tend to be republican.In other words , people 's views shift with who writes their paychecks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One reason why many, not all, engineers are conservative:1.
Regardless of what they do, people believe they are doing the right thing2.
Engineers are people3.
Engineers want to believe they are doing the right thing4.
Engineers need jobs/money.5.
Most, not all, engineering jobs are associated with the military ( in the US )6.
Republicans do more business with companies that build military hardware7.
Republican policy/tendencies create more engineering jobs and money for engineers.8.
=&gt; People who like engineering tend to be republican.In other words, people's views shift with who writes their paychecks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593748</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh? "The Love Guru" was a HUGE BOMB!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
" The Love Guru " was a HUGE BOMB !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
"The Love Guru" was a HUGE BOMB!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593618</id>
	<title>What a sueprise,</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I were looking for people to blow up stuff, I would not look for economists, biologist or romanists, but for people who know how buildings, vehicles, and machines are build and how they could be most easily damaged. And this is what engineers are learning.<br>I think the high rate of engineers is because the recruiters are specifically looking for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were looking for people to blow up stuff , I would not look for economists , biologist or romanists , but for people who know how buildings , vehicles , and machines are build and how they could be most easily damaged .
And this is what engineers are learning.I think the high rate of engineers is because the recruiters are specifically looking for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I were looking for people to blow up stuff, I would not look for economists, biologist or romanists, but for people who know how buildings, vehicles, and machines are build and how they could be most easily damaged.
And this is what engineers are learning.I think the high rate of engineers is because the recruiters are specifically looking for them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592832</id>
	<title>Dupe?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I could've sworn I read nearly the same article over a year or more ago.. which was posted on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could 've sworn I read nearly the same article over a year or more ago.. which was posted on / .
as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I could've sworn I read nearly the same article over a year or more ago.. which was posted on /.
as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601432</id>
	<title>Re:Eh</title>
	<author>servognome</author>
	<datestamp>1259847360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Must have been bottom of the class engineers who barely passed at all. All of the terrorist attacks carried out (all 5-10 of them over two decades) against the U.S. were poorly planned and poorly executed.</p></div></blockquote><p>Unless I'm mistaken, these aren't people who earned a degree in terrorism engineering.  I'm sure most on Slashdot know engineers with giant egos that pretend to be experts outside of their field of study.  Problem comes up, the know-it-all goes to fix it, and ends up failing miserably despite their intelligence.  The terrorists work so hard coming up with ingenious schemes to sneak the bomb on board the plane, that they overlook the little detail of making sure it's gonna explode.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Must have been bottom of the class engineers who barely passed at all .
All of the terrorist attacks carried out ( all 5-10 of them over two decades ) against the U.S. were poorly planned and poorly executed.Unless I 'm mistaken , these are n't people who earned a degree in terrorism engineering .
I 'm sure most on Slashdot know engineers with giant egos that pretend to be experts outside of their field of study .
Problem comes up , the know-it-all goes to fix it , and ends up failing miserably despite their intelligence .
The terrorists work so hard coming up with ingenious schemes to sneak the bomb on board the plane , that they overlook the little detail of making sure it 's gon na explode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Must have been bottom of the class engineers who barely passed at all.
All of the terrorist attacks carried out (all 5-10 of them over two decades) against the U.S. were poorly planned and poorly executed.Unless I'm mistaken, these aren't people who earned a degree in terrorism engineering.
I'm sure most on Slashdot know engineers with giant egos that pretend to be experts outside of their field of study.
Problem comes up, the know-it-all goes to fix it, and ends up failing miserably despite their intelligence.
The terrorists work so hard coming up with ingenious schemes to sneak the bomb on board the plane, that they overlook the little detail of making sure it's gonna explode.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593118</id>
	<title>Another great mystery</title>
	<author>Zero\_\_Kelvin</author>
	<datestamp>1259854440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That reminds me of the question I was asking the other day:<br> <br>Why does American Airlines recruit so many people who know how to fly airplanes?</htmltext>
<tokenext>That reminds me of the question I was asking the other day : Why does American Airlines recruit so many people who know how to fly airplanes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That reminds me of the question I was asking the other day: Why does American Airlines recruit so many people who know how to fly airplanes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593314</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>EvilTwinSkippy</author>
	<datestamp>1259855460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And not all religious people are terrorists.
<p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/Yes I am an engineer, why do you ask?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And not all religious people are terrorists .
/Yes I am an engineer , why do you ask ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And not all religious people are terrorists.
/Yes I am an engineer, why do you ask?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594782</id>
	<title>Conflict with Christianity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259860320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>


Follow the linked article and you get to the <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2227245/entry/2227246" title="slate.com">Atta article</a> [slate.com]
on his ideas on urban development in Aleppo. What's interesting
is that he saw Islamic and Christian culture in fundamental and
irreconciliable conflict...and he may have been right. We
live in a largely secular society and it's hard for us to fathom its
religious underpinning but the basis for much of our Western culture
and society are rooted in the simple Christian gospel messages of Jesus
which recognize that all people should be loved, regardless of their
race, sex, money, age, vulnerability, or power. So<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...if Jesus was truly the divine Son of God, then the inevitable
result of the conflict is failure for the ideology of terror as a means
to perpetuate values which are counter to the Gospels of Jesus.  Much of our
technology was developed to accomplish Christian-based objectives (labor-saving, health, nutrition, transportation, communication) and that
would become especially obvious to a student of that technology (such as
an engineer.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Follow the linked article and you get to the Atta article [ slate.com ] on his ideas on urban development in Aleppo .
What 's interesting is that he saw Islamic and Christian culture in fundamental and irreconciliable conflict...and he may have been right .
We live in a largely secular society and it 's hard for us to fathom its religious underpinning but the basis for much of our Western culture and society are rooted in the simple Christian gospel messages of Jesus which recognize that all people should be loved , regardless of their race , sex , money , age , vulnerability , or power .
So ...if Jesus was truly the divine Son of God , then the inevitable result of the conflict is failure for the ideology of terror as a means to perpetuate values which are counter to the Gospels of Jesus .
Much of our technology was developed to accomplish Christian-based objectives ( labor-saving , health , nutrition , transportation , communication ) and that would become especially obvious to a student of that technology ( such as an engineer .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>


Follow the linked article and you get to the Atta article [slate.com]
on his ideas on urban development in Aleppo.
What's interesting
is that he saw Islamic and Christian culture in fundamental and
irreconciliable conflict...and he may have been right.
We
live in a largely secular society and it's hard for us to fathom its
religious underpinning but the basis for much of our Western culture
and society are rooted in the simple Christian gospel messages of Jesus
which recognize that all people should be loved, regardless of their
race, sex, money, age, vulnerability, or power.
So ...if Jesus was truly the divine Son of God, then the inevitable
result of the conflict is failure for the ideology of terror as a means
to perpetuate values which are counter to the Gospels of Jesus.
Much of our
technology was developed to accomplish Christian-based objectives (labor-saving, health, nutrition, transportation, communication) and that
would become especially obvious to a student of that technology (such as
an engineer.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596804</id>
	<title>Re:What about rich kids becoming terrorists?</title>
	<author>jd.schmidt</author>
	<datestamp>1259866680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm happy that with this Nigerian terrorist that the media is emphasizing his wealthy and privileged background.</p><p>I was disappointed that the wealthy, privileged, backgrounds of Osama Bin Laden and almost all of the 19 9/11 hijackers were not emphasized more.</p><p>As with Marxism, Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.</p><p>It is about is about rich people with unresolved issues telling the poor what to think and egging them on to take actions that really don't help the poor...........exactly the complaint that these self appointed "vanguard activists" have.</p></div><p>You should listen to more liberal media, they were very clear Bin Laden was a rich kid who basically hated the US because he viewed it as the major patron/support for the government he didn't like at home.</p><p>What is going on is the people see their current goverment/social struture is corrupt so they try to rethink how society ought to be put together.  So they become attracted to radical new ideas that on the face seem like they might work.  Since they rich and otherwise empowered they have the ability to act on their beliefs.</p><p>The poor, speaking from personal experience, spend most of their lives keeping their head down and are well aware the new "saviours" might be every bit as bad as the previous crew.  But when things get bad enough, any change might be for the better.  Just remember what Marxism was replacing!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm happy that with this Nigerian terrorist that the media is emphasizing his wealthy and privileged background.I was disappointed that the wealthy , privileged , backgrounds of Osama Bin Laden and almost all of the 19 9/11 hijackers were not emphasized more.As with Marxism , Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.It is about is about rich people with unresolved issues telling the poor what to think and egging them on to take actions that really do n't help the poor...........exactly the complaint that these self appointed " vanguard activists " have.You should listen to more liberal media , they were very clear Bin Laden was a rich kid who basically hated the US because he viewed it as the major patron/support for the government he did n't like at home.What is going on is the people see their current goverment/social struture is corrupt so they try to rethink how society ought to be put together .
So they become attracted to radical new ideas that on the face seem like they might work .
Since they rich and otherwise empowered they have the ability to act on their beliefs.The poor , speaking from personal experience , spend most of their lives keeping their head down and are well aware the new " saviours " might be every bit as bad as the previous crew .
But when things get bad enough , any change might be for the better .
Just remember what Marxism was replacing !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm happy that with this Nigerian terrorist that the media is emphasizing his wealthy and privileged background.I was disappointed that the wealthy, privileged, backgrounds of Osama Bin Laden and almost all of the 19 9/11 hijackers were not emphasized more.As with Marxism, Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.It is about is about rich people with unresolved issues telling the poor what to think and egging them on to take actions that really don't help the poor...........exactly the complaint that these self appointed "vanguard activists" have.You should listen to more liberal media, they were very clear Bin Laden was a rich kid who basically hated the US because he viewed it as the major patron/support for the government he didn't like at home.What is going on is the people see their current goverment/social struture is corrupt so they try to rethink how society ought to be put together.
So they become attracted to radical new ideas that on the face seem like they might work.
Since they rich and otherwise empowered they have the ability to act on their beliefs.The poor, speaking from personal experience, spend most of their lives keeping their head down and are well aware the new "saviours" might be every bit as bad as the previous crew.
But when things get bad enough, any change might be for the better.
Just remember what Marxism was replacing!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592948</id>
	<title>Most engineers don't know how to talk to girls</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most male engineers don't have fantastic communiation skills, and are thus less likely to be occupied with fun things like chatting up girls etc. Thus, when they get tired of studies it is easier to make they stray. Pretty obvious really. A marketing student will be busy going to parties etc. all year rather than studying so is a) less likely to get bored with hard work and difficult studies and b) have something fun to do when not studying.</p><p>It follows that it is much harder to recruit a marketing person.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most male engineers do n't have fantastic communiation skills , and are thus less likely to be occupied with fun things like chatting up girls etc .
Thus , when they get tired of studies it is easier to make they stray .
Pretty obvious really .
A marketing student will be busy going to parties etc .
all year rather than studying so is a ) less likely to get bored with hard work and difficult studies and b ) have something fun to do when not studying.It follows that it is much harder to recruit a marketing person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most male engineers don't have fantastic communiation skills, and are thus less likely to be occupied with fun things like chatting up girls etc.
Thus, when they get tired of studies it is easier to make they stray.
Pretty obvious really.
A marketing student will be busy going to parties etc.
all year rather than studying so is a) less likely to get bored with hard work and difficult studies and b) have something fun to do when not studying.It follows that it is much harder to recruit a marketing person.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593676</id>
	<title>It depends on who writes your paycheck</title>
	<author>assertation</author>
	<datestamp>1259856780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was in college I was amazed at how politically naive and how conservative Engineering students were.</p><p>Many of them were better at things like puzzles or math than I was, but man, I could sell them the Brooklyn bridge.</p><p>To be fair, a lot of it has to do with who writes or who will write your paycheck.</p><p>That is true for everyone in every profession.</p><p>I did meet engineering students who were liberal and or non-superficial thinkers. Interestingly they all got out of the profession eventually.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was in college I was amazed at how politically naive and how conservative Engineering students were.Many of them were better at things like puzzles or math than I was , but man , I could sell them the Brooklyn bridge.To be fair , a lot of it has to do with who writes or who will write your paycheck.That is true for everyone in every profession.I did meet engineering students who were liberal and or non-superficial thinkers .
Interestingly they all got out of the profession eventually .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was in college I was amazed at how politically naive and how conservative Engineering students were.Many of them were better at things like puzzles or math than I was, but man, I could sell them the Brooklyn bridge.To be fair, a lot of it has to do with who writes or who will write your paycheck.That is true for everyone in every profession.I did meet engineering students who were liberal and or non-superficial thinkers.
Interestingly they all got out of the profession eventually.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594544</id>
	<title>Remember University?</title>
	<author>florescent\_beige</author>
	<datestamp>1259859480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember what Engineering school was like. It wouldn't surprise me if there is more to this than just practical skills.</p><p>First of all, Skule was harrowing and lonely. Nobody else on campus hit the books harder than eng students and that already is a reason that, shall we say, our social skills aren't always top notch. On top of that there is the condition of apartness that comes from specializing in something that nobody else gets and that gets magnified by the disrespectful attitude towards the arts you find at eng school. We all know what that was like.</p><p>And there's more. At my school the eng faculties operated on an attrition basis, failing almost half the class each year. I understand that was financially motivated, the big year 1 and 2 classes bring in tuition that supports 3 and 4's. That creates a lot of people feeling the way you do when you blow out of college, a little bit lost.</p><p>And finally there is the engineering curriculum. It's not all that well rounded. It's always been my opinion that Engineering should be a 5 year degree with some social and poli sci, or have a pre-eng phase like medicine so people could get channeled away from it in an orderly fashion instead of getting dumped out on the street when they fail. Pre-eng would be a better general-purpose education for people that don't make it all the way through.</p><p>I just think the normal approach to eng education is almost guaranteed to create outsiders.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember what Engineering school was like .
It would n't surprise me if there is more to this than just practical skills.First of all , Skule was harrowing and lonely .
Nobody else on campus hit the books harder than eng students and that already is a reason that , shall we say , our social skills are n't always top notch .
On top of that there is the condition of apartness that comes from specializing in something that nobody else gets and that gets magnified by the disrespectful attitude towards the arts you find at eng school .
We all know what that was like.And there 's more .
At my school the eng faculties operated on an attrition basis , failing almost half the class each year .
I understand that was financially motivated , the big year 1 and 2 classes bring in tuition that supports 3 and 4 's .
That creates a lot of people feeling the way you do when you blow out of college , a little bit lost.And finally there is the engineering curriculum .
It 's not all that well rounded .
It 's always been my opinion that Engineering should be a 5 year degree with some social and poli sci , or have a pre-eng phase like medicine so people could get channeled away from it in an orderly fashion instead of getting dumped out on the street when they fail .
Pre-eng would be a better general-purpose education for people that do n't make it all the way through.I just think the normal approach to eng education is almost guaranteed to create outsiders .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember what Engineering school was like.
It wouldn't surprise me if there is more to this than just practical skills.First of all, Skule was harrowing and lonely.
Nobody else on campus hit the books harder than eng students and that already is a reason that, shall we say, our social skills aren't always top notch.
On top of that there is the condition of apartness that comes from specializing in something that nobody else gets and that gets magnified by the disrespectful attitude towards the arts you find at eng school.
We all know what that was like.And there's more.
At my school the eng faculties operated on an attrition basis, failing almost half the class each year.
I understand that was financially motivated, the big year 1 and 2 classes bring in tuition that supports 3 and 4's.
That creates a lot of people feeling the way you do when you blow out of college, a little bit lost.And finally there is the engineering curriculum.
It's not all that well rounded.
It's always been my opinion that Engineering should be a 5 year degree with some social and poli sci, or have a pre-eng phase like medicine so people could get channeled away from it in an orderly fashion instead of getting dumped out on the street when they fail.
Pre-eng would be a better general-purpose education for people that don't make it all the way through.I just think the normal approach to eng education is almost guaranteed to create outsiders.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595882</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Jeremi</author>
	<datestamp>1259863680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion.</i></p><p>The key is that anything you learned before you were 6 or so was installed before any critical-thinking filters were acquired, and thus may be permanent.  All your logical engineering skills can co-exist with your early childhood learning, and your brain can compartmentalize the two modes of thinking so that it never has any problems with the contradictions.</p><p>So once you have (a) your early-childhood beliefs that allow you to conclude that (people X) are a problem, combined with your engineer's training, and the engineer's belief that any problem (even social/religious problems) can be solved simply by applying the right physical materials to the problem, you have your recipe for becoming a bright, talented young terrorist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion.The key is that anything you learned before you were 6 or so was installed before any critical-thinking filters were acquired , and thus may be permanent .
All your logical engineering skills can co-exist with your early childhood learning , and your brain can compartmentalize the two modes of thinking so that it never has any problems with the contradictions.So once you have ( a ) your early-childhood beliefs that allow you to conclude that ( people X ) are a problem , combined with your engineer 's training , and the engineer 's belief that any problem ( even social/religious problems ) can be solved simply by applying the right physical materials to the problem , you have your recipe for becoming a bright , talented young terrorist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion.The key is that anything you learned before you were 6 or so was installed before any critical-thinking filters were acquired, and thus may be permanent.
All your logical engineering skills can co-exist with your early childhood learning, and your brain can compartmentalize the two modes of thinking so that it never has any problems with the contradictions.So once you have (a) your early-childhood beliefs that allow you to conclude that (people X) are a problem, combined with your engineer's training, and the engineer's belief that any problem (even social/religious problems) can be solved simply by applying the right physical materials to the problem, you have your recipe for becoming a bright, talented young terrorist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800</id>
	<title>Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259852940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Could it be that engineering degrees are a dime-a-dozen in oil-rich countries where middle-eastern terrorists usually originate? How many people in these countries <strong>don't</strong> have engineering degrees?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Could it be that engineering degrees are a dime-a-dozen in oil-rich countries where middle-eastern terrorists usually originate ?
How many people in these countries do n't have engineering degrees ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could it be that engineering degrees are a dime-a-dozen in oil-rich countries where middle-eastern terrorists usually originate?
How many people in these countries don't have engineering degrees?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594826</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>FatAlb3rt</author>
	<datestamp>1259860440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>It's only in the western world today that engineers are seen as some kind of low level creep that creates atomic bombs, weapons and biohazards</i> <br>
<br>
Huh, news to me.  <br>
<br>
Signed, <br>
FatAlb3rt - BSME, MSCompE</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's only in the western world today that engineers are seen as some kind of low level creep that creates atomic bombs , weapons and biohazards Huh , news to me .
Signed , FatAlb3rt - BSME , MSCompE</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's only in the western world today that engineers are seen as some kind of low level creep that creates atomic bombs, weapons and biohazards 

Huh, news to me.
Signed, 
FatAlb3rt - BSME, MSCompE</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592874</id>
	<title>Because</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>They think the WTC architecture is ugly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They think the WTC architecture is ugly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They think the WTC architecture is ugly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260</id>
	<title>What about rich kids becoming terrorists?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm happy that with this Nigerian terrorist that the media is emphasizing his wealthy and privileged background.</p><p>I was disappointed that the wealthy, privileged, backgrounds of Osama Bin Laden and almost all of the 19 9/11 hijackers were not emphasized more.</p><p>As with Marxism, Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.</p><p>It is about is about rich people with unresolved issues telling the poor what to think and egging them on to take actions that really don't help the poor...........exactly the complaint that these self appointed "vanguard activists" have.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm happy that with this Nigerian terrorist that the media is emphasizing his wealthy and privileged background.I was disappointed that the wealthy , privileged , backgrounds of Osama Bin Laden and almost all of the 19 9/11 hijackers were not emphasized more.As with Marxism , Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.It is about is about rich people with unresolved issues telling the poor what to think and egging them on to take actions that really do n't help the poor...........exactly the complaint that these self appointed " vanguard activists " have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm happy that with this Nigerian terrorist that the media is emphasizing his wealthy and privileged background.I was disappointed that the wealthy, privileged, backgrounds of Osama Bin Laden and almost all of the 19 9/11 hijackers were not emphasized more.As with Marxism, Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.It is about is about rich people with unresolved issues telling the poor what to think and egging them on to take actions that really don't help the poor...........exactly the complaint that these self appointed "vanguard activists" have.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593006</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but man, they look really nice when they don't work. I mean, could an engineer really make the colors go together like that?  And seriously, who uses red and green wires? Is it Christmas?  A nice set of matching mauve is sooo much better at offsetting the grey c4.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but man , they look really nice when they do n't work .
I mean , could an engineer really make the colors go together like that ?
And seriously , who uses red and green wires ?
Is it Christmas ?
A nice set of matching mauve is sooo much better at offsetting the grey c4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but man, they look really nice when they don't work.
I mean, could an engineer really make the colors go together like that?
And seriously, who uses red and green wires?
Is it Christmas?
A nice set of matching mauve is sooo much better at offsetting the grey c4.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595502</id>
	<title>athiests and the tradition of religion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259862480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are reasons to uphold the traditions of religion even if you don't believe the religion itself.</p><p>"The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal."<br>from What I saw in America<br>by Gilbert Keith Chesterton</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are reasons to uphold the traditions of religion even if you do n't believe the religion itself .
" The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal ; and it is right ; for if they were not created equal , they were certainly evolved unequal .
" from What I saw in Americaby Gilbert Keith Chesterton</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are reasons to uphold the traditions of religion even if you don't believe the religion itself.
"The Declaration of Independence dogmatically bases all rights on the fact that God created all men equal; and it is right; for if they were not created equal, they were certainly evolved unequal.
"from What I saw in Americaby Gilbert Keith Chesterton</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330</id>
	<title>Simple answer, wrong question.</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1259855520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You sould be asking why so many terrorists have college degrees.</p><p>It is not causality.</p><p>Colleges worldwide are infested with left-wing socialist professors.  No surprise that their graduates are at least open to the suggestion that these views deserve their support and adoption.</p><p>And recruitment is greatly simplified, in an ostensibly open, 'free speech' environment.  Tenure insulates many professors from productive criticism.  Salt in a few motiviated believers, and most any political/religious movement has ready-made converts.</p><p>Except, of course, for the more conventional movements, which are of course discredited continually.  But that's part of the process.  Understood.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You sould be asking why so many terrorists have college degrees.It is not causality.Colleges worldwide are infested with left-wing socialist professors .
No surprise that their graduates are at least open to the suggestion that these views deserve their support and adoption.And recruitment is greatly simplified , in an ostensibly open , 'free speech ' environment .
Tenure insulates many professors from productive criticism .
Salt in a few motiviated believers , and most any political/religious movement has ready-made converts.Except , of course , for the more conventional movements , which are of course discredited continually .
But that 's part of the process .
Understood .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You sould be asking why so many terrorists have college degrees.It is not causality.Colleges worldwide are infested with left-wing socialist professors.
No surprise that their graduates are at least open to the suggestion that these views deserve their support and adoption.And recruitment is greatly simplified, in an ostensibly open, 'free speech' environment.
Tenure insulates many professors from productive criticism.
Salt in a few motiviated believers, and most any political/religious movement has ready-made converts.Except, of course, for the more conventional movements, which are of course discredited continually.
But that's part of the process.
Understood.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595840</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259863500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said but to just stress one subtlety a bit further...</p><p>I think engineer/analytical/critical thinker types are so opinionated exactly because they feel they have arrived at their opinions after rigorous thought and reason.  They have felt the need to answer a question for themselves by deconstructing it fully and building up a seemingly air-tight response to this question based on provable, always-true type principles and axioms.</p><p>So when you argue with an "engineer" (like me) he/she can easily become emphatic and seem stubborn because your disagreement may feel to them like a casual dismissal of something he/she thought carefully about, or your disagreement only serves to highlight to him/her (the engineer) some error that you must have made, violating one of the various principles or supporting facts they have used to answer the question in their own mind.</p><p>And yes I suppose that type of principled logical thinking can certainly correlate with a commitment to very black and white, and possibly very misguided, principles.</p><p>Bottom line though, there are terrorists and bad people with all kinds of personalities and backgrounds.  If there is any higher occurrence of engineering training among the ranks of "terrorists" I would say it is simply because people with that kind of training are more likely to have the skills and critical thinking abilities required to make a detailed technical plan, usually involving technical know-how, and to execute it.  Engineering training, like any tool or skill, will always have equal potential for good or bad use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said but to just stress one subtlety a bit further...I think engineer/analytical/critical thinker types are so opinionated exactly because they feel they have arrived at their opinions after rigorous thought and reason .
They have felt the need to answer a question for themselves by deconstructing it fully and building up a seemingly air-tight response to this question based on provable , always-true type principles and axioms.So when you argue with an " engineer " ( like me ) he/she can easily become emphatic and seem stubborn because your disagreement may feel to them like a casual dismissal of something he/she thought carefully about , or your disagreement only serves to highlight to him/her ( the engineer ) some error that you must have made , violating one of the various principles or supporting facts they have used to answer the question in their own mind.And yes I suppose that type of principled logical thinking can certainly correlate with a commitment to very black and white , and possibly very misguided , principles.Bottom line though , there are terrorists and bad people with all kinds of personalities and backgrounds .
If there is any higher occurrence of engineering training among the ranks of " terrorists " I would say it is simply because people with that kind of training are more likely to have the skills and critical thinking abilities required to make a detailed technical plan , usually involving technical know-how , and to execute it .
Engineering training , like any tool or skill , will always have equal potential for good or bad use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said but to just stress one subtlety a bit further...I think engineer/analytical/critical thinker types are so opinionated exactly because they feel they have arrived at their opinions after rigorous thought and reason.
They have felt the need to answer a question for themselves by deconstructing it fully and building up a seemingly air-tight response to this question based on provable, always-true type principles and axioms.So when you argue with an "engineer" (like me) he/she can easily become emphatic and seem stubborn because your disagreement may feel to them like a casual dismissal of something he/she thought carefully about, or your disagreement only serves to highlight to him/her (the engineer) some error that you must have made, violating one of the various principles or supporting facts they have used to answer the question in their own mind.And yes I suppose that type of principled logical thinking can certainly correlate with a commitment to very black and white, and possibly very misguided, principles.Bottom line though, there are terrorists and bad people with all kinds of personalities and backgrounds.
If there is any higher occurrence of engineering training among the ranks of "terrorists" I would say it is simply because people with that kind of training are more likely to have the skills and critical thinking abilities required to make a detailed technical plan, usually involving technical know-how, and to execute it.
Engineering training, like any tool or skill, will always have equal potential for good or bad use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597086</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>minorproblem</author>
	<datestamp>1259867820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am an engineer and can sum up how we think in one sentence.  "If you had thought about this as much as i have you would understand why i am right..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am an engineer and can sum up how we think in one sentence .
" If you had thought about this as much as i have you would understand why i am right... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am an engineer and can sum up how we think in one sentence.
"If you had thought about this as much as i have you would understand why i am right..."</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593798</id>
	<title>Re:Ease of travel?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's just western paranoia. Most of the the deadliest terrorist attacks happen in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. You don't need engineering degrees to get into these countries. Get over it, 9/11 was <b>one</b> attack. Go count the terrorist attacks in India or Pakistan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's just western paranoia .
Most of the the deadliest terrorist attacks happen in Afghanistan , Pakistan and India .
You do n't need engineering degrees to get into these countries .
Get over it , 9/11 was one attack .
Go count the terrorist attacks in India or Pakistan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's just western paranoia.
Most of the the deadliest terrorist attacks happen in Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.
You don't need engineering degrees to get into these countries.
Get over it, 9/11 was one attack.
Go count the terrorist attacks in India or Pakistan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593416</id>
	<title>Could be because..</title>
	<author>PePe242</author>
	<datestamp>1259855820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>engineers do not take history classes...</htmltext>
<tokenext>engineers do not take history classes.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>engineers do not take history classes...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594366</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>also, Liberal Arts graduates find it difficult to get sufficient time off from McD's to make bombs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>also , Liberal Arts graduates find it difficult to get sufficient time off from McD 's to make bombs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>also, Liberal Arts graduates find it difficult to get sufficient time off from McD's to make bombs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593140</id>
	<title>We Live in an Illogical World</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Engineers crave logic. Logical people are all driven somewhat crazy by the world we live in. That will manifest itself in all sorts of strange ways. This time, it manifested itself in exploding underwear (not a very smart engineer, judging by the design). As a kind of engineer myself, I look at how limited the damage would have been, if he had blown up the plane, versus the cost of going all ape-shit over it and I naturally come to the conclusion that people need to chill the fuck out. Even if they made airport security perfect, I can think of at least a dozen non-airplane ways to kill just as many people, without the terrorist(s) even having to sacrifice his life. The way to reduce terrorism is to stop creating new ones by stop bombing their families and stop manipulating their governments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineers crave logic .
Logical people are all driven somewhat crazy by the world we live in .
That will manifest itself in all sorts of strange ways .
This time , it manifested itself in exploding underwear ( not a very smart engineer , judging by the design ) .
As a kind of engineer myself , I look at how limited the damage would have been , if he had blown up the plane , versus the cost of going all ape-shit over it and I naturally come to the conclusion that people need to chill the fuck out .
Even if they made airport security perfect , I can think of at least a dozen non-airplane ways to kill just as many people , without the terrorist ( s ) even having to sacrifice his life .
The way to reduce terrorism is to stop creating new ones by stop bombing their families and stop manipulating their governments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineers crave logic.
Logical people are all driven somewhat crazy by the world we live in.
That will manifest itself in all sorts of strange ways.
This time, it manifested itself in exploding underwear (not a very smart engineer, judging by the design).
As a kind of engineer myself, I look at how limited the damage would have been, if he had blown up the plane, versus the cost of going all ape-shit over it and I naturally come to the conclusion that people need to chill the fuck out.
Even if they made airport security perfect, I can think of at least a dozen non-airplane ways to kill just as many people, without the terrorist(s) even having to sacrifice his life.
The way to reduce terrorism is to stop creating new ones by stop bombing their families and stop manipulating their governments.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593492</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>nhytefall</author>
	<datestamp>1259856000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean, ask someone who has just built a perfect scale replica of a trebuchet why he did it. He'll feed you some bullshit about history and what not, but I think ultimately he doesn't really know why he did it.</p></div><p>
We build them to throw pumpkins.<br> <br>
The history part... that is just to convince others *not* to build trebuchets, to lessen the competition.
<br>
Please hand in your geek card now.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , ask someone who has just built a perfect scale replica of a trebuchet why he did it .
He 'll feed you some bullshit about history and what not , but I think ultimately he does n't really know why he did it .
We build them to throw pumpkins .
The history part... that is just to convince others * not * to build trebuchets , to lessen the competition .
Please hand in your geek card now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, ask someone who has just built a perfect scale replica of a trebuchet why he did it.
He'll feed you some bullshit about history and what not, but I think ultimately he doesn't really know why he did it.
We build them to throw pumpkins.
The history part... that is just to convince others *not* to build trebuchets, to lessen the competition.
Please hand in your geek card now.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599788</id>
	<title>Re:It's a cultural thing</title>
	<author>kbahey</author>
	<datestamp>1259836080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are on to something but then totally miss it: titles are big in Egyptian Arabic, not the profession itself.</p><p>Speaking as someone born and raised in Egypt, Arabic being my mother tongue, the society there is very large on titles. If you are writing a letter to an official in the USA, you address it to "Dear Sir/Madam" or to "Mr. John Doe/Ms. Jane Doe". In Egypt, you are asked to address the official with all the titles that he/she got. For example "Al Sayed Al Ostaz Al Doctor Al Kimya'ee John Doe" (Mr ? Dr Chemist John Doe, meaning he has a Ph.D and a Chemical Engineer).</p><p>Unlike a few other places in the Arab world, you never call someone with their first name, unless they are a close friend or relative of the same age as you. Anyone else has to get a title, even menial labor. For relatives there is "uncle" for older male. "Father and mother" for parents. "Abeh" for male older cousins (From Turkish Agabey), "Ablah" for older female cousins<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...etc. So, this is where Ostaz comes in (derives from Farsi Ustad, meaning "Master", but used for anyone you don't know the qualifications for). Then comes Bash Muhandes (Bash is Turkish meaning "Head", so this means Head of Engineers), which applies to the man who fixes your car who has no degree at all, the untrained plumbers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...etc. Then comes Doctor, which applies for physicians, pharmacists, dentists and vets too. And so on and on and on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... In some cases calling someone by the wrong title annoys them, for example calling someone a mere Ostaz, while he is actually a doctor!</p><p>In other parts of the Arab world (Levant, Gulf), the <a href="http://baheyeldin.com/linguistics/misused-terms-abu-and-abdul.html" title="baheyeldin.com">kunya</a> [baheyeldin.com] is used (hence the names, "Abu-something"), so the titles are used less.</p><p>It has gotten annoying that you find email addresses and Facebook profiles with the title in the name "Dr Ashraf Something" or drsomething@gmail.com.</p><p>Two professions are at the apex of social respect: they are doctors and engineers (architects, civil engineers,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...etc.) because the universities ask for the highest marks to admit students. Doctors being more respected I would say.</p><p>So, being an engineer is not something everyone just craves. There are other social status professions that are perhaps more appealing. But the main point is that the overuse of titles is rampant, and means little in practice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are on to something but then totally miss it : titles are big in Egyptian Arabic , not the profession itself.Speaking as someone born and raised in Egypt , Arabic being my mother tongue , the society there is very large on titles .
If you are writing a letter to an official in the USA , you address it to " Dear Sir/Madam " or to " Mr. John Doe/Ms .
Jane Doe " .
In Egypt , you are asked to address the official with all the titles that he/she got .
For example " Al Sayed Al Ostaz Al Doctor Al Kimya'ee John Doe " ( Mr ?
Dr Chemist John Doe , meaning he has a Ph.D and a Chemical Engineer ) .Unlike a few other places in the Arab world , you never call someone with their first name , unless they are a close friend or relative of the same age as you .
Anyone else has to get a title , even menial labor .
For relatives there is " uncle " for older male .
" Father and mother " for parents .
" Abeh " for male older cousins ( From Turkish Agabey ) , " Ablah " for older female cousins ...etc .
So , this is where Ostaz comes in ( derives from Farsi Ustad , meaning " Master " , but used for anyone you do n't know the qualifications for ) .
Then comes Bash Muhandes ( Bash is Turkish meaning " Head " , so this means Head of Engineers ) , which applies to the man who fixes your car who has no degree at all , the untrained plumbers ...etc .
Then comes Doctor , which applies for physicians , pharmacists , dentists and vets too .
And so on and on and on ... In some cases calling someone by the wrong title annoys them , for example calling someone a mere Ostaz , while he is actually a doctor ! In other parts of the Arab world ( Levant , Gulf ) , the kunya [ baheyeldin.com ] is used ( hence the names , " Abu-something " ) , so the titles are used less.It has gotten annoying that you find email addresses and Facebook profiles with the title in the name " Dr Ashraf Something " or drsomething @ gmail.com.Two professions are at the apex of social respect : they are doctors and engineers ( architects , civil engineers , ...etc .
) because the universities ask for the highest marks to admit students .
Doctors being more respected I would say.So , being an engineer is not something everyone just craves .
There are other social status professions that are perhaps more appealing .
But the main point is that the overuse of titles is rampant , and means little in practice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are on to something but then totally miss it: titles are big in Egyptian Arabic, not the profession itself.Speaking as someone born and raised in Egypt, Arabic being my mother tongue, the society there is very large on titles.
If you are writing a letter to an official in the USA, you address it to "Dear Sir/Madam" or to "Mr. John Doe/Ms.
Jane Doe".
In Egypt, you are asked to address the official with all the titles that he/she got.
For example "Al Sayed Al Ostaz Al Doctor Al Kimya'ee John Doe" (Mr ?
Dr Chemist John Doe, meaning he has a Ph.D and a Chemical Engineer).Unlike a few other places in the Arab world, you never call someone with their first name, unless they are a close friend or relative of the same age as you.
Anyone else has to get a title, even menial labor.
For relatives there is "uncle" for older male.
"Father and mother" for parents.
"Abeh" for male older cousins (From Turkish Agabey), "Ablah" for older female cousins ...etc.
So, this is where Ostaz comes in (derives from Farsi Ustad, meaning "Master", but used for anyone you don't know the qualifications for).
Then comes Bash Muhandes (Bash is Turkish meaning "Head", so this means Head of Engineers), which applies to the man who fixes your car who has no degree at all, the untrained plumbers ...etc.
Then comes Doctor, which applies for physicians, pharmacists, dentists and vets too.
And so on and on and on ... In some cases calling someone by the wrong title annoys them, for example calling someone a mere Ostaz, while he is actually a doctor!In other parts of the Arab world (Levant, Gulf), the kunya [baheyeldin.com] is used (hence the names, "Abu-something"), so the titles are used less.It has gotten annoying that you find email addresses and Facebook profiles with the title in the name "Dr Ashraf Something" or drsomething@gmail.com.Two professions are at the apex of social respect: they are doctors and engineers (architects, civil engineers, ...etc.
) because the universities ask for the highest marks to admit students.
Doctors being more respected I would say.So, being an engineer is not something everyone just craves.
There are other social status professions that are perhaps more appealing.
But the main point is that the overuse of titles is rampant, and means little in practice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595162</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Pandrake</author>
	<datestamp>1259861580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My father did exactly that (build a scale replica of a trebuchet) as a gift to me, as well as help someone else he knows build a much larger catapult. He knows exactly why he did it: It's fun to launch objects into the sky with nothing more than wood and rope. Not because he can, nor to take pride in engineering acomplishment. Just because and only because the doing of the launching thing is fun, the building thing ain't so much fun but it's worth it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My father did exactly that ( build a scale replica of a trebuchet ) as a gift to me , as well as help someone else he knows build a much larger catapult .
He knows exactly why he did it : It 's fun to launch objects into the sky with nothing more than wood and rope .
Not because he can , nor to take pride in engineering acomplishment .
Just because and only because the doing of the launching thing is fun , the building thing ai n't so much fun but it 's worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My father did exactly that (build a scale replica of a trebuchet) as a gift to me, as well as help someone else he knows build a much larger catapult.
He knows exactly why he did it: It's fun to launch objects into the sky with nothing more than wood and rope.
Not because he can, nor to take pride in engineering acomplishment.
Just because and only because the doing of the launching thing is fun, the building thing ain't so much fun but it's worth it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595116</id>
	<title>Darwin</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1259861520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The surviving terrorists probably are engineers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The surviving terrorists probably are engineers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The surviving terrorists probably are engineers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597240</id>
	<title>art and engineering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259868300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The more sophisticated our skills, the more sophisticated our artistic expressions.  When engineers commit acts of terrorism, it isn't an expression of their identity as engineers, but rather an expression of their identity as sophisticated and diabolical artists, so perhaps we should ask what drives artists to terror, since nearly every terrorist is an artist, bent upon self-expression at any cost.  Most of the artists whose names we know are artists who are skilled in their chosen medium.  Engineering, organizational planning, and the psychology of political economy are the media of terrorism.  We have only heard of those who have the skills necessary to achieve their desired, but deplorable, expressive effect... so naturally, we often hear of engineers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The more sophisticated our skills , the more sophisticated our artistic expressions .
When engineers commit acts of terrorism , it is n't an expression of their identity as engineers , but rather an expression of their identity as sophisticated and diabolical artists , so perhaps we should ask what drives artists to terror , since nearly every terrorist is an artist , bent upon self-expression at any cost .
Most of the artists whose names we know are artists who are skilled in their chosen medium .
Engineering , organizational planning , and the psychology of political economy are the media of terrorism .
We have only heard of those who have the skills necessary to achieve their desired , but deplorable , expressive effect... so naturally , we often hear of engineers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The more sophisticated our skills, the more sophisticated our artistic expressions.
When engineers commit acts of terrorism, it isn't an expression of their identity as engineers, but rather an expression of their identity as sophisticated and diabolical artists, so perhaps we should ask what drives artists to terror, since nearly every terrorist is an artist, bent upon self-expression at any cost.
Most of the artists whose names we know are artists who are skilled in their chosen medium.
Engineering, organizational planning, and the psychology of political economy are the media of terrorism.
We have only heard of those who have the skills necessary to achieve their desired, but deplorable, expressive effect... so naturally, we often hear of engineers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597564</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1259869680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion... this sort of engineering mindset..."</p><p>If you were to replace the word "engineering" with "science" then I would agree with you. Scientific inquiry features the kind of search for evidence that you describe. Engineering can, to a greater degree, be regarded as a bunch of techniques that you're trained to follow (particularly so for some young people forced by their parents into engineering school for financial reasons). Dare I say "trained to follow 'religiously'"?</p><p>Research data FTA: "Gambetta and Hertog updated a study that was first published in 1972, when a pair of researchers named Seymour Lipset and Carl Ladd surveyed the ideological bent of their fellow American academics. According to the original paper, engineers described themselves as 'strongly conservative' and 'deeply religious' more often than professors in any other field. Gambetta and Hertog repeated this analysis for data gathered in 1984, so it might better match up with their terrorist sample. They found similar results, with 46 percent of the (male American) engineers describing themselves as both conservative and religious, compared with 22 percent of scientists."</p><p>So there's the facts, engineering professors 46\% religious &amp; conservative, science professors 22\% religious &amp; conservative. Big difference. Searchable survey data archive at: <a href="http://www.thearda.com/Archive/Files/Codebooks/NSHEF84\_CB.asp" title="thearda.com">http://www.thearda.com/Archive/Files/Codebooks/NSHEF84\_CB.asp</a> [thearda.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion... this sort of engineering mindset... " If you were to replace the word " engineering " with " science " then I would agree with you .
Scientific inquiry features the kind of search for evidence that you describe .
Engineering can , to a greater degree , be regarded as a bunch of techniques that you 're trained to follow ( particularly so for some young people forced by their parents into engineering school for financial reasons ) .
Dare I say " trained to follow 'religiously ' " ? Research data FTA : " Gambetta and Hertog updated a study that was first published in 1972 , when a pair of researchers named Seymour Lipset and Carl Ladd surveyed the ideological bent of their fellow American academics .
According to the original paper , engineers described themselves as 'strongly conservative ' and 'deeply religious ' more often than professors in any other field .
Gambetta and Hertog repeated this analysis for data gathered in 1984 , so it might better match up with their terrorist sample .
They found similar results , with 46 percent of the ( male American ) engineers describing themselves as both conservative and religious , compared with 22 percent of scientists .
" So there 's the facts , engineering professors 46 \ % religious &amp; conservative , science professors 22 \ % religious &amp; conservative .
Big difference .
Searchable survey data archive at : http : //www.thearda.com/Archive/Files/Codebooks/NSHEF84 \ _CB.asp [ thearda.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion... this sort of engineering mindset..."If you were to replace the word "engineering" with "science" then I would agree with you.
Scientific inquiry features the kind of search for evidence that you describe.
Engineering can, to a greater degree, be regarded as a bunch of techniques that you're trained to follow (particularly so for some young people forced by their parents into engineering school for financial reasons).
Dare I say "trained to follow 'religiously'"?Research data FTA: "Gambetta and Hertog updated a study that was first published in 1972, when a pair of researchers named Seymour Lipset and Carl Ladd surveyed the ideological bent of their fellow American academics.
According to the original paper, engineers described themselves as 'strongly conservative' and 'deeply religious' more often than professors in any other field.
Gambetta and Hertog repeated this analysis for data gathered in 1984, so it might better match up with their terrorist sample.
They found similar results, with 46 percent of the (male American) engineers describing themselves as both conservative and religious, compared with 22 percent of scientists.
"So there's the facts, engineering professors 46\% religious &amp; conservative, science professors 22\% religious &amp; conservative.
Big difference.
Searchable survey data archive at: http://www.thearda.com/Archive/Files/Codebooks/NSHEF84\_CB.asp [thearda.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598626</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259873520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Arafat had an Engineering degree from somewhere too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Arafat had an Engineering degree from somewhere too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Arafat had an Engineering degree from somewhere too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593780</id>
	<title>I'll bite...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a software engineer by trade. Note, I do not call myself a programmer, as that has an entirely different tone to it.</p><p>I can see where recruiting young engineers would be best. When I was 20, I was a sharp network engineer (again engineer) working on integrating a section of the Exxon and Mobil servers when they merged. At that time I was also studying several translations of the christian bible trying to find meaning in life.</p><p>I can see how someone with an analytical mind, logical training, and a sort of philosophical interest could be of use to nearly any cause.</p><p>Quite a few years later I am married, have a good life, and gave up the network bit for my hobby (coding). I am back in college, aiming for a degree that matters to me and now am much less prone to theological stints. Wisdom comes with age.</p><p>If you catch the young engineer while he's figuring out the world, yeah, he may just sign on for [random cause].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a software engineer by trade .
Note , I do not call myself a programmer , as that has an entirely different tone to it.I can see where recruiting young engineers would be best .
When I was 20 , I was a sharp network engineer ( again engineer ) working on integrating a section of the Exxon and Mobil servers when they merged .
At that time I was also studying several translations of the christian bible trying to find meaning in life.I can see how someone with an analytical mind , logical training , and a sort of philosophical interest could be of use to nearly any cause.Quite a few years later I am married , have a good life , and gave up the network bit for my hobby ( coding ) .
I am back in college , aiming for a degree that matters to me and now am much less prone to theological stints .
Wisdom comes with age.If you catch the young engineer while he 's figuring out the world , yeah , he may just sign on for [ random cause ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a software engineer by trade.
Note, I do not call myself a programmer, as that has an entirely different tone to it.I can see where recruiting young engineers would be best.
When I was 20, I was a sharp network engineer (again engineer) working on integrating a section of the Exxon and Mobil servers when they merged.
At that time I was also studying several translations of the christian bible trying to find meaning in life.I can see how someone with an analytical mind, logical training, and a sort of philosophical interest could be of use to nearly any cause.Quite a few years later I am married, have a good life, and gave up the network bit for my hobby (coding).
I am back in college, aiming for a degree that matters to me and now am much less prone to theological stints.
Wisdom comes with age.If you catch the young engineer while he's figuring out the world, yeah, he may just sign on for [random cause].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594818</id>
	<title>Contempt for Humanities = Uncritical Ideology</title>
	<author>Der Einzige</author>
	<datestamp>1259860440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The snipes at the liberal arts in this thread perfectly illustrate why engineers make excellent unthinking soldiers. If you're trained to think that all questions of value, philosophy, politics and ethics are merely the irrational quibbles of unintelligent people, then you'll never learn the subjects, or how to evaluate them critically. And if you believe that thinking about or engaging with politics is a waste of time, you will tend to uncritically accept that whatever prejudices you were raised on are "common sense," "the plain truth," or "God's revealed wisdom."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The snipes at the liberal arts in this thread perfectly illustrate why engineers make excellent unthinking soldiers .
If you 're trained to think that all questions of value , philosophy , politics and ethics are merely the irrational quibbles of unintelligent people , then you 'll never learn the subjects , or how to evaluate them critically .
And if you believe that thinking about or engaging with politics is a waste of time , you will tend to uncritically accept that whatever prejudices you were raised on are " common sense , " " the plain truth , " or " God 's revealed wisdom .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The snipes at the liberal arts in this thread perfectly illustrate why engineers make excellent unthinking soldiers.
If you're trained to think that all questions of value, philosophy, politics and ethics are merely the irrational quibbles of unintelligent people, then you'll never learn the subjects, or how to evaluate them critically.
And if you believe that thinking about or engaging with politics is a waste of time, you will tend to uncritically accept that whatever prejudices you were raised on are "common sense," "the plain truth," or "God's revealed wisdom.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593022</id>
	<title>Engineers are usefull</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe its because engineers are usefull.<br>Why would a terrorist group want an  accountant, or a journalist?<br>Engineers can build bombs . A lawyer is just an annoying parasite .</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe its because engineers are usefull.Why would a terrorist group want an accountant , or a journalist ? Engineers can build bombs .
A lawyer is just an annoying parasite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe its because engineers are usefull.Why would a terrorist group want an  accountant, or a journalist?Engineers can build bombs .
A lawyer is just an annoying parasite .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597052</id>
	<title>The Matrix</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259867700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't beleave this discussion gone on this long without a reference to The Matrix.  </p><p>(I'm sure the true engineers among us will see what I'm getting at.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't beleave this discussion gone on this long without a reference to The Matrix .
( I 'm sure the true engineers among us will see what I 'm getting at .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't beleave this discussion gone on this long without a reference to The Matrix.
(I'm sure the true engineers among us will see what I'm getting at.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593542</id>
	<title>Re:We Live in an Illogical World</title>
	<author>Duradin</author>
	<datestamp>1259856240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The way to reduce terrorism is to stop creating new ones by stop bombing their families and stop manipulating their governments."</p><p>You don't have to bomb any family members to get new terrorists.</p><p>Someone will say that the "great satan" America just blew up a charity hospital for widows and children of martyred suicide bombers (actually a training camp with 0 women or children) and someone will get pissed off that someone is killing their women (only they get to do that) and go blow himself up.</p><p>If the "great satan" America didn't need a government to manipulate in some of those countries there probably wouldn't be a government at all. The current political boundaries are due to the former colonial powers, not the will of the people. Group A that hates group B are stuck together because someone like the British thought that a good looking map was more important than keeping A and B apart. The Mid East has been a killing field for millennia. Even without America (and even with) they'd still be busily killing each other over whose cousin did what five hundred years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The way to reduce terrorism is to stop creating new ones by stop bombing their families and stop manipulating their governments .
" You do n't have to bomb any family members to get new terrorists.Someone will say that the " great satan " America just blew up a charity hospital for widows and children of martyred suicide bombers ( actually a training camp with 0 women or children ) and someone will get pissed off that someone is killing their women ( only they get to do that ) and go blow himself up.If the " great satan " America did n't need a government to manipulate in some of those countries there probably would n't be a government at all .
The current political boundaries are due to the former colonial powers , not the will of the people .
Group A that hates group B are stuck together because someone like the British thought that a good looking map was more important than keeping A and B apart .
The Mid East has been a killing field for millennia .
Even without America ( and even with ) they 'd still be busily killing each other over whose cousin did what five hundred years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The way to reduce terrorism is to stop creating new ones by stop bombing their families and stop manipulating their governments.
"You don't have to bomb any family members to get new terrorists.Someone will say that the "great satan" America just blew up a charity hospital for widows and children of martyred suicide bombers (actually a training camp with 0 women or children) and someone will get pissed off that someone is killing their women (only they get to do that) and go blow himself up.If the "great satan" America didn't need a government to manipulate in some of those countries there probably wouldn't be a government at all.
The current political boundaries are due to the former colonial powers, not the will of the people.
Group A that hates group B are stuck together because someone like the British thought that a good looking map was more important than keeping A and B apart.
The Mid East has been a killing field for millennia.
Even without America (and even with) they'd still be busily killing each other over whose cousin did what five hundred years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595388</id>
	<title>Engineering</title>
	<author>toxique</author>
	<datestamp>1259862180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, those motherf**** use their degrees and knowledge to kill,harm and destroy the infidels instead of helping their "brothers" to relieve poverty, build and make a better life for them in their shithole countries.
they give a damn for the degrees, it is just a weapon to fight the "infidels". Their goal is to turn back time and live like 1000 years ago in the darkness of the middleage.
Those engineers are happy in Afghanistan/waziristan living in tents in the middle of the desert</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , those motherf * * * * use their degrees and knowledge to kill,harm and destroy the infidels instead of helping their " brothers " to relieve poverty , build and make a better life for them in their shithole countries .
they give a damn for the degrees , it is just a weapon to fight the " infidels " .
Their goal is to turn back time and live like 1000 years ago in the darkness of the middleage .
Those engineers are happy in Afghanistan/waziristan living in tents in the middle of the desert</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, those motherf**** use their degrees and knowledge to kill,harm and destroy the infidels instead of helping their "brothers" to relieve poverty, build and make a better life for them in their shithole countries.
they give a damn for the degrees, it is just a weapon to fight the "infidels".
Their goal is to turn back time and live like 1000 years ago in the darkness of the middleage.
Those engineers are happy in Afghanistan/waziristan living in tents in the middle of the desert</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594278</id>
	<title>Re:Simple answer, wrong question.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259858820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Colleges worldwide are infested with left-wing socialist professors. No surprise that their graduates are at least open to the suggestion that these views deserve their support and adoption."</p><p>Not sure what you mean by "these views" (trying to link leftism with terrorism?), but many terrorists are from right-wing dictatorships such as Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Colleges worldwide are infested with left-wing socialist professors .
No surprise that their graduates are at least open to the suggestion that these views deserve their support and adoption .
" Not sure what you mean by " these views " ( trying to link leftism with terrorism ?
) , but many terrorists are from right-wing dictatorships such as Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Colleges worldwide are infested with left-wing socialist professors.
No surprise that their graduates are at least open to the suggestion that these views deserve their support and adoption.
"Not sure what you mean by "these views" (trying to link leftism with terrorism?
), but many terrorists are from right-wing dictatorships such as Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594098</id>
	<title>Re:As an engineer let me say...</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1259858160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You also have the problem in that Engineering degrees are so in demand, our engineering schools have become diploma mills. Self-contained enclaves. There was no effort on the part of my school to connect what we were learning to anything else.</p></div><p>The problem isn't the field takes too long to learn, its the curriculum is designed for incoming folks starting at too low of a level.</p><p>There are two ways to teach a curriculum.  Assume you're starting at zero skill a completely blank slate, like foreign languages, higher math (calculus), comp sci.  Or assume you're starting at an "average high school level" like literature (they assume you already know how to read), math overall (they assume, sometimes incorrectly, that you already know algebra, geometery, etc).</p><p>I think it's time to move engineering in general out of the "start at zero class" and over to the "fine tuning class".  Or perhaps get rid of the idea of bachelors engineering degrees and switch to a masters level program, much like medical or legal school.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You also have the problem in that Engineering degrees are so in demand , our engineering schools have become diploma mills .
Self-contained enclaves .
There was no effort on the part of my school to connect what we were learning to anything else.The problem is n't the field takes too long to learn , its the curriculum is designed for incoming folks starting at too low of a level.There are two ways to teach a curriculum .
Assume you 're starting at zero skill a completely blank slate , like foreign languages , higher math ( calculus ) , comp sci .
Or assume you 're starting at an " average high school level " like literature ( they assume you already know how to read ) , math overall ( they assume , sometimes incorrectly , that you already know algebra , geometery , etc ) .I think it 's time to move engineering in general out of the " start at zero class " and over to the " fine tuning class " .
Or perhaps get rid of the idea of bachelors engineering degrees and switch to a masters level program , much like medical or legal school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You also have the problem in that Engineering degrees are so in demand, our engineering schools have become diploma mills.
Self-contained enclaves.
There was no effort on the part of my school to connect what we were learning to anything else.The problem isn't the field takes too long to learn, its the curriculum is designed for incoming folks starting at too low of a level.There are two ways to teach a curriculum.
Assume you're starting at zero skill a completely blank slate, like foreign languages, higher math (calculus), comp sci.
Or assume you're starting at an "average high school level" like literature (they assume you already know how to read), math overall (they assume, sometimes incorrectly, that you already know algebra, geometery, etc).I think it's time to move engineering in general out of the "start at zero class" and over to the "fine tuning class".
Or perhaps get rid of the idea of bachelors engineering degrees and switch to a masters level program, much like medical or legal school.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594432</id>
	<title>Engineers get scolarships easier.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an engineer of an "underdeveloped" country and someone who's got scholarships abroad, I can tell that only engineers can get scholarships easy and don't have to sell their houses to study abroad.<br>Engineers can work at research labs with their stay full paid without having the highest degrees, not even a bachelor is needed for an engineer to work. Instead, if you want to get a work as a researcher in any other profession you need several years of experience and a lot of your own money because you start without any payment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an engineer of an " underdeveloped " country and someone who 's got scholarships abroad , I can tell that only engineers can get scholarships easy and do n't have to sell their houses to study abroad.Engineers can work at research labs with their stay full paid without having the highest degrees , not even a bachelor is needed for an engineer to work .
Instead , if you want to get a work as a researcher in any other profession you need several years of experience and a lot of your own money because you start without any payment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an engineer of an "underdeveloped" country and someone who's got scholarships abroad, I can tell that only engineers can get scholarships easy and don't have to sell their houses to study abroad.Engineers can work at research labs with their stay full paid without having the highest degrees, not even a bachelor is needed for an engineer to work.
Instead, if you want to get a work as a researcher in any other profession you need several years of experience and a lot of your own money because you start without any payment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594780</id>
	<title>Re:You'd think engineers would be more rational</title>
	<author>hierofalcon</author>
	<datestamp>1259860320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes. We are and we do.</p><p>So when a person that I know who attended our church services in a wheel chair went up during an evangelist's healing service and requested healing and left the building without needing a wheel chair or my wife who had been to a doctor and a specialist and gotten a temporarily manageable but ultimately can't do anything about it diagnosis went up for healing and came back also visibly improved and neither subsequently regressed to their previous state (at least so far) to give but two examples, I must analyze the situation as an engineer. I know that the individuals weren't faking it in the first place. I saw what their condition was before. I saw what their condition was immediately after. All that happened in between was prayer to God for healing.</p><p>The engineer in me says - well - what's written in the book must be true because there's no other explanation. There was no other input to the closed system during the event. I've sought out the answer, and found it. The people who believe without seeing any signs or wonders get more credit, but when you're presented with them in your direct viewing, the engineer kicks in and says this rational easy to read and understand document from a few thousand years ago was right all along. We pick the simplest explanation that fits the observed facts, and the Bible does that for me.</p><p>That doesn't mean that every Christian who needs healing is healed. Everyone in the general area of Israel wasn't healed by Christ either. One evangelist who has a healing ministry will tell you flat out that he doesn't have a 100\% success rate. What he will also say is that when someone calls for healing, he will ask them not to tell him anything about what is wrong. He prays to God, and if he gets a clear vision of what is actually wrong with the person - which doesn't always happen - he feels that it is God's will to heal them and he has a great success rate in those cases. If he can't get an idea of what is wrong, then he doesn't pray. It doesn't help that the church today has fallen in oh so many long ways from what the Early Church was.</p><p>The liberal arts person would figure out how to reason his or her way around what their eyes just saw (or probably didn't come often enough in the first place to get to know the people and realize that it wasn't faked). They've been conditioned by reading slashdot and the like that the only real explanation for what they just witnessed couldn't possibly be true, so they either make up their own weird explanation or go away and try to forget everything about what they just saw. The scoffers reading the above testimonies will feel the same way, although they'll probably take the time to reply. It doesn't change the reality that the simplest, most rational and logical explanation is that God exists, the Bible is correct, and God is still carrying out the promises He made to Christians a couple thousand years ago.</p><p>That isn't to say that there may not be some natural predisposition to order that leads engineers to religion. It also isn't to say that there aren't cults out there that are good at deceiving people and that engineers may be more susceptible due to that predisposition. When we have such a large group of people in the U.S. who have not been exposed to the religion of our forefathers because the generation of the 60's and 70's checked out of religion altogether and didn't pass it on to their kids, they may turn to whatever they discover on their own, following in their parents path of rejecting anything that smacks of traditional boring church and seeking out something that looks cool. The recent history of scandal in some leaders in churches hasn't helped any either - but God isn't the one to blame for those things. I'm pretty sure He's just as unhappy as the rest of us at some things that are going on today and that have gone on in recent history.</p><p>For what it's worth, "It was God's will" when something goes wrong is rarely the correct answer in my experience. God's pretty good about warning people in advance if He's about to lower the boom (Daniel and Revelation come to mind for modern day examples) and it is always His will that people change so the judgment won't happen at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
We are and we do.So when a person that I know who attended our church services in a wheel chair went up during an evangelist 's healing service and requested healing and left the building without needing a wheel chair or my wife who had been to a doctor and a specialist and gotten a temporarily manageable but ultimately ca n't do anything about it diagnosis went up for healing and came back also visibly improved and neither subsequently regressed to their previous state ( at least so far ) to give but two examples , I must analyze the situation as an engineer .
I know that the individuals were n't faking it in the first place .
I saw what their condition was before .
I saw what their condition was immediately after .
All that happened in between was prayer to God for healing.The engineer in me says - well - what 's written in the book must be true because there 's no other explanation .
There was no other input to the closed system during the event .
I 've sought out the answer , and found it .
The people who believe without seeing any signs or wonders get more credit , but when you 're presented with them in your direct viewing , the engineer kicks in and says this rational easy to read and understand document from a few thousand years ago was right all along .
We pick the simplest explanation that fits the observed facts , and the Bible does that for me.That does n't mean that every Christian who needs healing is healed .
Everyone in the general area of Israel was n't healed by Christ either .
One evangelist who has a healing ministry will tell you flat out that he does n't have a 100 \ % success rate .
What he will also say is that when someone calls for healing , he will ask them not to tell him anything about what is wrong .
He prays to God , and if he gets a clear vision of what is actually wrong with the person - which does n't always happen - he feels that it is God 's will to heal them and he has a great success rate in those cases .
If he ca n't get an idea of what is wrong , then he does n't pray .
It does n't help that the church today has fallen in oh so many long ways from what the Early Church was.The liberal arts person would figure out how to reason his or her way around what their eyes just saw ( or probably did n't come often enough in the first place to get to know the people and realize that it was n't faked ) .
They 've been conditioned by reading slashdot and the like that the only real explanation for what they just witnessed could n't possibly be true , so they either make up their own weird explanation or go away and try to forget everything about what they just saw .
The scoffers reading the above testimonies will feel the same way , although they 'll probably take the time to reply .
It does n't change the reality that the simplest , most rational and logical explanation is that God exists , the Bible is correct , and God is still carrying out the promises He made to Christians a couple thousand years ago.That is n't to say that there may not be some natural predisposition to order that leads engineers to religion .
It also is n't to say that there are n't cults out there that are good at deceiving people and that engineers may be more susceptible due to that predisposition .
When we have such a large group of people in the U.S. who have not been exposed to the religion of our forefathers because the generation of the 60 's and 70 's checked out of religion altogether and did n't pass it on to their kids , they may turn to whatever they discover on their own , following in their parents path of rejecting anything that smacks of traditional boring church and seeking out something that looks cool .
The recent history of scandal in some leaders in churches has n't helped any either - but God is n't the one to blame for those things .
I 'm pretty sure He 's just as unhappy as the rest of us at some things that are going on today and that have gone on in recent history.For what it 's worth , " It was God 's will " when something goes wrong is rarely the correct answer in my experience .
God 's pretty good about warning people in advance if He 's about to lower the boom ( Daniel and Revelation come to mind for modern day examples ) and it is always His will that people change so the judgment wo n't happen at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
We are and we do.So when a person that I know who attended our church services in a wheel chair went up during an evangelist's healing service and requested healing and left the building without needing a wheel chair or my wife who had been to a doctor and a specialist and gotten a temporarily manageable but ultimately can't do anything about it diagnosis went up for healing and came back also visibly improved and neither subsequently regressed to their previous state (at least so far) to give but two examples, I must analyze the situation as an engineer.
I know that the individuals weren't faking it in the first place.
I saw what their condition was before.
I saw what their condition was immediately after.
All that happened in between was prayer to God for healing.The engineer in me says - well - what's written in the book must be true because there's no other explanation.
There was no other input to the closed system during the event.
I've sought out the answer, and found it.
The people who believe without seeing any signs or wonders get more credit, but when you're presented with them in your direct viewing, the engineer kicks in and says this rational easy to read and understand document from a few thousand years ago was right all along.
We pick the simplest explanation that fits the observed facts, and the Bible does that for me.That doesn't mean that every Christian who needs healing is healed.
Everyone in the general area of Israel wasn't healed by Christ either.
One evangelist who has a healing ministry will tell you flat out that he doesn't have a 100\% success rate.
What he will also say is that when someone calls for healing, he will ask them not to tell him anything about what is wrong.
He prays to God, and if he gets a clear vision of what is actually wrong with the person - which doesn't always happen - he feels that it is God's will to heal them and he has a great success rate in those cases.
If he can't get an idea of what is wrong, then he doesn't pray.
It doesn't help that the church today has fallen in oh so many long ways from what the Early Church was.The liberal arts person would figure out how to reason his or her way around what their eyes just saw (or probably didn't come often enough in the first place to get to know the people and realize that it wasn't faked).
They've been conditioned by reading slashdot and the like that the only real explanation for what they just witnessed couldn't possibly be true, so they either make up their own weird explanation or go away and try to forget everything about what they just saw.
The scoffers reading the above testimonies will feel the same way, although they'll probably take the time to reply.
It doesn't change the reality that the simplest, most rational and logical explanation is that God exists, the Bible is correct, and God is still carrying out the promises He made to Christians a couple thousand years ago.That isn't to say that there may not be some natural predisposition to order that leads engineers to religion.
It also isn't to say that there aren't cults out there that are good at deceiving people and that engineers may be more susceptible due to that predisposition.
When we have such a large group of people in the U.S. who have not been exposed to the religion of our forefathers because the generation of the 60's and 70's checked out of religion altogether and didn't pass it on to their kids, they may turn to whatever they discover on their own, following in their parents path of rejecting anything that smacks of traditional boring church and seeking out something that looks cool.
The recent history of scandal in some leaders in churches hasn't helped any either - but God isn't the one to blame for those things.
I'm pretty sure He's just as unhappy as the rest of us at some things that are going on today and that have gone on in recent history.For what it's worth, "It was God's will" when something goes wrong is rarely the correct answer in my experience.
God's pretty good about warning people in advance if He's about to lower the boom (Daniel and Revelation come to mind for modern day examples) and it is always His will that people change so the judgment won't happen at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595510</id>
	<title>Re:EE times came to a similar conclusion</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1259862540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at the paranoia present in nearly every story here on Slashdot. I think a better question would be, "why are engineers predisposed to paranoia?"</p><p>The terrorists are probably looking for that more than planning skills... from my experience, a lot of engineers are terrible at planning, at least planning anything that involves human beings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at the paranoia present in nearly every story here on Slashdot .
I think a better question would be , " why are engineers predisposed to paranoia ?
" The terrorists are probably looking for that more than planning skills... from my experience , a lot of engineers are terrible at planning , at least planning anything that involves human beings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at the paranoia present in nearly every story here on Slashdot.
I think a better question would be, "why are engineers predisposed to paranoia?
"The terrorists are probably looking for that more than planning skills... from my experience, a lot of engineers are terrible at planning, at least planning anything that involves human beings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593534</id>
	<title>Re:Thomas Jefferson</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Inventor and engineer, also a revolutionary. Lucky for him (and us), a successful one.
<br> <br>
Wonder what names the British called him and his compatriots? Blow the dust off your history book and find out.
<br> <br>
Boy did I ever post this anonymously.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
So, what you're saying is that history is viewed through the eyes of the winners (of war)?
<br> <br>
Gee, Captain Obvious, thanks for that little pearl of wisdom.
<br> <br>
I just love it when pseudo-intellectuals point out an obvious and trivial fact as though it's some form of original thought; something nobody could ever have possibly considered before.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Inventor and engineer , also a revolutionary .
Lucky for him ( and us ) , a successful one .
Wonder what names the British called him and his compatriots ?
Blow the dust off your history book and find out .
Boy did I ever post this anonymously .
So , what you 're saying is that history is viewed through the eyes of the winners ( of war ) ?
Gee , Captain Obvious , thanks for that little pearl of wisdom .
I just love it when pseudo-intellectuals point out an obvious and trivial fact as though it 's some form of original thought ; something nobody could ever have possibly considered before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inventor and engineer, also a revolutionary.
Lucky for him (and us), a successful one.
Wonder what names the British called him and his compatriots?
Blow the dust off your history book and find out.
Boy did I ever post this anonymously.
So, what you're saying is that history is viewed through the eyes of the winners (of war)?
Gee, Captain Obvious, thanks for that little pearl of wisdom.
I just love it when pseudo-intellectuals point out an obvious and trivial fact as though it's some form of original thought; something nobody could ever have possibly considered before.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598110</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259871780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Engineers aren't the only ones with this flaw (and yes, it is a flaw). What is "true" today can change after further research or additional facts, which is probably why young guys make better engineers than geezers.</p><p>If you think you know everything, you can never learn anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineers are n't the only ones with this flaw ( and yes , it is a flaw ) .
What is " true " today can change after further research or additional facts , which is probably why young guys make better engineers than geezers.If you think you know everything , you can never learn anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineers aren't the only ones with this flaw (and yes, it is a flaw).
What is "true" today can change after further research or additional facts, which is probably why young guys make better engineers than geezers.If you think you know everything, you can never learn anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601244</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1259845800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tell me, do you assume that the laws of physics will continue to operate the same way tomorrow as they have today?  I assume the existence of God and His laws in the same way.</p><p><i>Lehitraot</i>,<br>Computer Science major and semi-practicing Jew</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell me , do you assume that the laws of physics will continue to operate the same way tomorrow as they have today ?
I assume the existence of God and His laws in the same way.Lehitraot,Computer Science major and semi-practicing Jew</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell me, do you assume that the laws of physics will continue to operate the same way tomorrow as they have today?
I assume the existence of God and His laws in the same way.Lehitraot,Computer Science major and semi-practicing Jew</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597414</id>
	<title>Re:Why are so many terrorists literate?</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1259869020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like tighter airport security, it gets trod out every time some terrorism-related news comes up. It's an old fall back of the editors here on slow news days following a terrorist attack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like tighter airport security , it gets trod out every time some terrorism-related news comes up .
It 's an old fall back of the editors here on slow news days following a terrorist attack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like tighter airport security, it gets trod out every time some terrorism-related news comes up.
It's an old fall back of the editors here on slow news days following a terrorist attack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599830</id>
	<title>Re:Eh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259836320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, the recession would have been so much worse if we weren't shoveling money into an incinerator labeled "AXIS OF EVIL."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , the recession would have been so much worse if we were n't shoveling money into an incinerator labeled " AXIS OF EVIL .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, the recession would have been so much worse if we weren't shoveling money into an incinerator labeled "AXIS OF EVIL.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593350</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594960</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259860920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who has ever had considerable personal or employment experience with Engineers will tell you they are a bit of a breed apart. That certainly doesn't make them dogmatic sociopaths but<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and I'm painting with a VERY wide brush here<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... certain people are attracted to Engineering and Maths studies, and a subset of all Engineering/Maths graduates can be rigid and tend to prefer adherence to rules over just throwing paint around like Jackson Pollack.</p><p>It's not a bad thing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... we need both kinds of people and all shades in between.</p><p>It might be useful to remind ourselves here that terrorists are, any way you look at it, very rare individuals. You don't need a lot of people who fit your target profile. One is often enough. So, even though the vast majority of Engineering and Maths grads are not raving lunatics prone to radical action, we don't need that to be true in the first place. This all happens on an individual level, not the graduating class level.</p><p>Now, there are a few things in life that some people understand early in life (or their parents do). One, is if you want to get laid, go to a bar, or a coffee shop, or somewhere people who want to relax congregate. I think pretty much everyone gets this, since College teaches few things more perfectly.</p><p>But, a lot of people who get that don't get another, related one: if you want go get married, go to Church.</p><p>Now, if that's a place where radical elements also happen to hang out, and just for argument's sake, let's just say people whose job it is to recruit followers are the gregarious, hopefully charismatic kind, what do we get? This doesn't have to be an Islamic Church; we had the same thing in Northern Ireland for 100 years, we have problems with radical Clerics in Israel, the Russian, Polish, and other churches played a role in political action either for or against the ruling order, etc.</p><p>The rise of Nazism was in the beginning a beer hall thing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... just to illustrate that it doesn't need to be church, but I don't think Hitler found many Engineers in Munich Beer Halls who jumped at the chance to be a Brown Shirt thug. He'd find them later, for different roles, where they always are<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... at their employers, whom he courted with Industrial subsidies of one kind or another.</p><p>Back to Church, since Islamic Terrorists are all about the religious angle.</p><p>Marriage minded people who are somewhat rigid and supportive of rules, whom quite possibly either eschew liquor altogether or are awkward in social situations and thus don't go to many gathering places, meet opportunistic and predatory recruiters, each looking for a different thing but who just happen to be thrown together by their differing goals in the same social atmosphere. Hmmmmm<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who has ever had considerable personal or employment experience with Engineers will tell you they are a bit of a breed apart .
That certainly does n't make them dogmatic sociopaths but ... and I 'm painting with a VERY wide brush here ... certain people are attracted to Engineering and Maths studies , and a subset of all Engineering/Maths graduates can be rigid and tend to prefer adherence to rules over just throwing paint around like Jackson Pollack.It 's not a bad thing ... we need both kinds of people and all shades in between.It might be useful to remind ourselves here that terrorists are , any way you look at it , very rare individuals .
You do n't need a lot of people who fit your target profile .
One is often enough .
So , even though the vast majority of Engineering and Maths grads are not raving lunatics prone to radical action , we do n't need that to be true in the first place .
This all happens on an individual level , not the graduating class level.Now , there are a few things in life that some people understand early in life ( or their parents do ) .
One , is if you want to get laid , go to a bar , or a coffee shop , or somewhere people who want to relax congregate .
I think pretty much everyone gets this , since College teaches few things more perfectly.But , a lot of people who get that do n't get another , related one : if you want go get married , go to Church.Now , if that 's a place where radical elements also happen to hang out , and just for argument 's sake , let 's just say people whose job it is to recruit followers are the gregarious , hopefully charismatic kind , what do we get ?
This does n't have to be an Islamic Church ; we had the same thing in Northern Ireland for 100 years , we have problems with radical Clerics in Israel , the Russian , Polish , and other churches played a role in political action either for or against the ruling order , etc.The rise of Nazism was in the beginning a beer hall thing ... just to illustrate that it does n't need to be church , but I do n't think Hitler found many Engineers in Munich Beer Halls who jumped at the chance to be a Brown Shirt thug .
He 'd find them later , for different roles , where they always are ... at their employers , whom he courted with Industrial subsidies of one kind or another.Back to Church , since Islamic Terrorists are all about the religious angle.Marriage minded people who are somewhat rigid and supportive of rules , whom quite possibly either eschew liquor altogether or are awkward in social situations and thus do n't go to many gathering places , meet opportunistic and predatory recruiters , each looking for a different thing but who just happen to be thrown together by their differing goals in the same social atmosphere .
Hmmmmm ... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who has ever had considerable personal or employment experience with Engineers will tell you they are a bit of a breed apart.
That certainly doesn't make them dogmatic sociopaths but ... and I'm painting with a VERY wide brush here ... certain people are attracted to Engineering and Maths studies, and a subset of all Engineering/Maths graduates can be rigid and tend to prefer adherence to rules over just throwing paint around like Jackson Pollack.It's not a bad thing ... we need both kinds of people and all shades in between.It might be useful to remind ourselves here that terrorists are, any way you look at it, very rare individuals.
You don't need a lot of people who fit your target profile.
One is often enough.
So, even though the vast majority of Engineering and Maths grads are not raving lunatics prone to radical action, we don't need that to be true in the first place.
This all happens on an individual level, not the graduating class level.Now, there are a few things in life that some people understand early in life (or their parents do).
One, is if you want to get laid, go to a bar, or a coffee shop, or somewhere people who want to relax congregate.
I think pretty much everyone gets this, since College teaches few things more perfectly.But, a lot of people who get that don't get another, related one: if you want go get married, go to Church.Now, if that's a place where radical elements also happen to hang out, and just for argument's sake, let's just say people whose job it is to recruit followers are the gregarious, hopefully charismatic kind, what do we get?
This doesn't have to be an Islamic Church; we had the same thing in Northern Ireland for 100 years, we have problems with radical Clerics in Israel, the Russian, Polish, and other churches played a role in political action either for or against the ruling order, etc.The rise of Nazism was in the beginning a beer hall thing ... just to illustrate that it doesn't need to be church, but I don't think Hitler found many Engineers in Munich Beer Halls who jumped at the chance to be a Brown Shirt thug.
He'd find them later, for different roles, where they always are ... at their employers, whom he courted with Industrial subsidies of one kind or another.Back to Church, since Islamic Terrorists are all about the religious angle.Marriage minded people who are somewhat rigid and supportive of rules, whom quite possibly either eschew liquor altogether or are awkward in social situations and thus don't go to many gathering places, meet opportunistic and predatory recruiters, each looking for a different thing but who just happen to be thrown together by their differing goals in the same social atmosphere.
Hmmmmm ....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600420</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259840280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right you are. If I was an engineer and approached by some "religious authority" telling me I had a religious duty to blow up myself and as many others as possible, I would tell him "I'll build the bomb, you go blow it up, otherwise you are a stinking hypocrite". See how far you can make that fly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right you are .
If I was an engineer and approached by some " religious authority " telling me I had a religious duty to blow up myself and as many others as possible , I would tell him " I 'll build the bomb , you go blow it up , otherwise you are a stinking hypocrite " .
See how far you can make that fly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right you are.
If I was an engineer and approached by some "religious authority" telling me I had a religious duty to blow up myself and as many others as possible, I would tell him "I'll build the bomb, you go blow it up, otherwise you are a stinking hypocrite".
See how far you can make that fly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593366</id>
	<title>Frist pSot</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">Would take about 2 but With Netcraft</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would take about 2 but With Netcraft [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would take about 2 but With Netcraft [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suspect religion is not as important to these people as you may think.</p><p>I think there is another typical engineer trait that is more important.</p><p>Doing it because you can. To pull it off. Being absorbed in a project and seeing through.</p><p>I mean, ask someone who has just built a perfect scale replica of a trebuchet why he did it. He'll feed you some bullshit about history and what not, but I think ultimately he doesn't really know why he did it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suspect religion is not as important to these people as you may think.I think there is another typical engineer trait that is more important.Doing it because you can .
To pull it off .
Being absorbed in a project and seeing through.I mean , ask someone who has just built a perfect scale replica of a trebuchet why he did it .
He 'll feed you some bullshit about history and what not , but I think ultimately he does n't really know why he did it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suspect religion is not as important to these people as you may think.I think there is another typical engineer trait that is more important.Doing it because you can.
To pull it off.
Being absorbed in a project and seeing through.I mean, ask someone who has just built a perfect scale replica of a trebuchet why he did it.
He'll feed you some bullshit about history and what not, but I think ultimately he doesn't really know why he did it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595550</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259862660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is, you get a simple answer.</p><p>Ask an eng the same, you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors.<br>
&nbsp;</p> </div><p>It's obviously WHITE.  I can derive all other colors by separating them from pure white light, therefore white is superior to all other colors.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is , you get a simple answer.Ask an eng the same , you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors .
  It 's obviously WHITE .
I can derive all other colors by separating them from pure white light , therefore white is superior to all other colors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is, you get a simple answer.Ask an eng the same, you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors.
  It's obviously WHITE.
I can derive all other colors by separating them from pure white light, therefore white is superior to all other colors.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599706</id>
	<title>Re:Insecure personality</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259835660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I became deeply involved in a Church late in high school, and was firmly discouraged from pursuing liberal arts, especially philosophy.  Engineering was acceptable, not the least because they can earn enough for substantial tithe money.  It was a sabbatarian church though; the lack of entry-level engineering positions not requiring Saturday work in the mid-80s was very disappointing.  So it failed to work out, in lots of ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I became deeply involved in a Church late in high school , and was firmly discouraged from pursuing liberal arts , especially philosophy .
Engineering was acceptable , not the least because they can earn enough for substantial tithe money .
It was a sabbatarian church though ; the lack of entry-level engineering positions not requiring Saturday work in the mid-80s was very disappointing .
So it failed to work out , in lots of ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I became deeply involved in a Church late in high school, and was firmly discouraged from pursuing liberal arts, especially philosophy.
Engineering was acceptable, not the least because they can earn enough for substantial tithe money.
It was a sabbatarian church though; the lack of entry-level engineering positions not requiring Saturday work in the mid-80s was very disappointing.
So it failed to work out, in lots of ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592972</id>
	<title>Yes, there's correlation ...</title>
	<author>oneiros27</author>
	<datestamp>1259853780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, there's an issue of being more conservative to a certain degree, but I can come up with lots more reasons that might give a bias to engineering:</p><ul> <li>When I was an undergrad (~12 years ago), the school with the highest percentage of middle-eastern students in it was<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the engineering department.  If this is still true, then you'd be more likely to find a engineering student who had first-hand experiences in western society.</li><li>Engineers tend to think about problems differently than most other people. In the case of civil engineering, it tends to be big-picture issues, with people just a bunch of numbers (eg, amount of live load)  Could you end up with people with Aspergers or otherwise less empathetic as engineers?</li><li>Many engineering students have high hopes and want to change the world<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... then you get stuck in school and realize you're just another cog.  Could the handling of student's expectations be partially to blame?</li></ul><p>Now, luckily, in my case, I'm now an elected official, so have other ways to channel my energies to better the world<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but I think many of us have had the discussion of what could be done if we nuked the planet from orbit and started all over again.  Or even a tornado<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I'm sure we could fix up our downtown if we could get rid of a few of the eyesore buildings that the county built.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , there 's an issue of being more conservative to a certain degree , but I can come up with lots more reasons that might give a bias to engineering : When I was an undergrad ( ~ 12 years ago ) , the school with the highest percentage of middle-eastern students in it was ... the engineering department .
If this is still true , then you 'd be more likely to find a engineering student who had first-hand experiences in western society.Engineers tend to think about problems differently than most other people .
In the case of civil engineering , it tends to be big-picture issues , with people just a bunch of numbers ( eg , amount of live load ) Could you end up with people with Aspergers or otherwise less empathetic as engineers ? Many engineering students have high hopes and want to change the world ... then you get stuck in school and realize you 're just another cog .
Could the handling of student 's expectations be partially to blame ? Now , luckily , in my case , I 'm now an elected official , so have other ways to channel my energies to better the world ... but I think many of us have had the discussion of what could be done if we nuked the planet from orbit and started all over again .
Or even a tornado ... I 'm sure we could fix up our downtown if we could get rid of a few of the eyesore buildings that the county built .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, there's an issue of being more conservative to a certain degree, but I can come up with lots more reasons that might give a bias to engineering: When I was an undergrad (~12 years ago), the school with the highest percentage of middle-eastern students in it was ... the engineering department.
If this is still true, then you'd be more likely to find a engineering student who had first-hand experiences in western society.Engineers tend to think about problems differently than most other people.
In the case of civil engineering, it tends to be big-picture issues, with people just a bunch of numbers (eg, amount of live load)  Could you end up with people with Aspergers or otherwise less empathetic as engineers?Many engineering students have high hopes and want to change the world ... then you get stuck in school and realize you're just another cog.
Could the handling of student's expectations be partially to blame?Now, luckily, in my case, I'm now an elected official, so have other ways to channel my energies to better the world ... but I think many of us have had the discussion of what could be done if we nuked the planet from orbit and started all over again.
Or even a tornado ... I'm sure we could fix up our downtown if we could get rid of a few of the eyesore buildings that the county built.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596798</id>
	<title>it's because engineers don't get laid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259866620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>these guys are frustrated because they don't get laid.  i am willing to bet that many of these guys wouldn't care so much about religion or "western transgressions" if they had sex with a cute girl every day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>these guys are frustrated because they do n't get laid .
i am willing to bet that many of these guys would n't care so much about religion or " western transgressions " if they had sex with a cute girl every day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>these guys are frustrated because they don't get laid.
i am willing to bet that many of these guys wouldn't care so much about religion or "western transgressions" if they had sex with a cute girl every day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593576</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If I claim whatever about the metaphysical no proof ever can be given in the physical world. Religion claiming you need to believe are smart. Theirs is not only the most easy stance, it's the correct one. Of course most religious people do not bother with what their religion says and claim their belief is evident and forceable upon others. Too bad.</p><p>You want proof of the metaphysical while being unable to experience it? whatever proof will be physical, therefore nobody can prove it comes from outside, since you won't ever be able to prove you have discovered every possible law that governs the universe, from the inside. Tomorrow g could become 9.83 m/sq(s), it's most unlikely but not impossible per se.</p><p>I know that you'd be fine with a weaker proof. Most agnostics would. But God might be an engineer and technically you're not even able to prove that the concept of "proof" is defined outside our universe<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If I claim whatever about the metaphysical no proof ever can be given in the physical world .
Religion claiming you need to believe are smart .
Theirs is not only the most easy stance , it 's the correct one .
Of course most religious people do not bother with what their religion says and claim their belief is evident and forceable upon others .
Too bad.You want proof of the metaphysical while being unable to experience it ?
whatever proof will be physical , therefore nobody can prove it comes from outside , since you wo n't ever be able to prove you have discovered every possible law that governs the universe , from the inside .
Tomorrow g could become 9.83 m/sq ( s ) , it 's most unlikely but not impossible per se.I know that you 'd be fine with a weaker proof .
Most agnostics would .
But God might be an engineer and technically you 're not even able to prove that the concept of " proof " is defined outside our universe : D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I claim whatever about the metaphysical no proof ever can be given in the physical world.
Religion claiming you need to believe are smart.
Theirs is not only the most easy stance, it's the correct one.
Of course most religious people do not bother with what their religion says and claim their belief is evident and forceable upon others.
Too bad.You want proof of the metaphysical while being unable to experience it?
whatever proof will be physical, therefore nobody can prove it comes from outside, since you won't ever be able to prove you have discovered every possible law that governs the universe, from the inside.
Tomorrow g could become 9.83 m/sq(s), it's most unlikely but not impossible per se.I know that you'd be fine with a weaker proof.
Most agnostics would.
But God might be an engineer and technically you're not even able to prove that the concept of "proof" is defined outside our universe :D</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594612</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>radtea</author>
	<datestamp>1259859780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking,</i></p><p>Unlike, say, the Department of Women's Studies.</p><p>Seriously, only amongst religious engineers have I ever encountered any of the kind of black and white thinking that I've seen routinely in sociology and the like, and continue to hear about in those departments to this day.</p><p>So I'd have to say the problem with religious engineers is their religion, not their engineering degree.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking,Unlike , say , the Department of Women 's Studies.Seriously , only amongst religious engineers have I ever encountered any of the kind of black and white thinking that I 've seen routinely in sociology and the like , and continue to hear about in those departments to this day.So I 'd have to say the problem with religious engineers is their religion , not their engineering degree .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking,Unlike, say, the Department of Women's Studies.Seriously, only amongst religious engineers have I ever encountered any of the kind of black and white thinking that I've seen routinely in sociology and the like, and continue to hear about in those departments to this day.So I'd have to say the problem with religious engineers is their religion, not their engineering degree.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593914</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe it's the other way around?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty sure making others' suicide bombs is not considered the "dirty work" of that particular field of endeavor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty sure making others ' suicide bombs is not considered the " dirty work " of that particular field of endeavor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty sure making others' suicide bombs is not considered the "dirty work" of that particular field of endeavor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593324</id>
	<title>You're talking about bankers, right?</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1259855520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It pisses me off that as a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiots</p></div></blockquote><p>Goddam bankers, they're almost as bad as terrorists.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It pisses me off that as a result of the actions of a few idiots , a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS ( that is , the life 's work of at least a million people ) has been blown reacting to these idiotsGoddam bankers , they 're almost as bad as terrorists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It pisses me off that as a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiotsGoddam bankers, they're almost as bad as terrorists.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594296</id>
	<title>Obviously</title>
	<author>Gattman01</author>
	<datestamp>1259858880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously, they do it for the chicks.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously , they do it for the chicks.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously, they do it for the chicks.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595348</id>
	<title>Re:Engineering vs science?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259862060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't "carefully follow [...] laws of physics". The "laws" of physics are just words that describe how the world around us behaves. They are the condensate of many, many observations. Noone has a choice in "following" laws of physics. IOW, what you said is meaningless. Science doesn't really allow for much common use of "understanding" -- what we usually usurp for understanding is the question of "why". Science doesn't tell us why, it tells is how. The why aspect is taken up by philosophers and theologians. And xkcd<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't " carefully follow [ ... ] laws of physics " .
The " laws " of physics are just words that describe how the world around us behaves .
They are the condensate of many , many observations .
Noone has a choice in " following " laws of physics .
IOW , what you said is meaningless .
Science does n't really allow for much common use of " understanding " -- what we usually usurp for understanding is the question of " why " .
Science does n't tell us why , it tells is how .
The why aspect is taken up by philosophers and theologians .
And xkcd : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't "carefully follow [...] laws of physics".
The "laws" of physics are just words that describe how the world around us behaves.
They are the condensate of many, many observations.
Noone has a choice in "following" laws of physics.
IOW, what you said is meaningless.
Science doesn't really allow for much common use of "understanding" -- what we usually usurp for understanding is the question of "why".
Science doesn't tell us why, it tells is how.
The why aspect is taken up by philosophers and theologians.
And xkcd :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594046</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>alder</author>
	<datestamp>1259857980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I always heard "You can have it fast, good, or cheap, pick two"</p></div></blockquote><p>
And yet, while well known, it is a gross oversimplification. For instance, "fast, good, but expensive" is also known as the task of making a "baby in a month by 9 women"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) Unfortunately the solution of the "fast, good, or cheap" is much closer to 1 than to 2.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always heard " You can have it fast , good , or cheap , pick two " And yet , while well known , it is a gross oversimplification .
For instance , " fast , good , but expensive " is also known as the task of making a " baby in a month by 9 women " ; - ) Unfortunately the solution of the " fast , good , or cheap " is much closer to 1 than to 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always heard "You can have it fast, good, or cheap, pick two"
And yet, while well known, it is a gross oversimplification.
For instance, "fast, good, but expensive" is also known as the task of making a "baby in a month by 9 women" ;-) Unfortunately the solution of the "fast, good, or cheap" is much closer to 1 than to 2.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595218</id>
	<title>Re:Engineers make the best soldiers</title>
	<author>stewbacca</author>
	<datestamp>1259861700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hah, as a former Intel soldier, all I can say is I never met a sapper that was half as intelligent as my lowest ranking squad member<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hah , as a former Intel soldier , all I can say is I never met a sapper that was half as intelligent as my lowest ranking squad member ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hah, as a former Intel soldier, all I can say is I never met a sapper that was half as intelligent as my lowest ranking squad member ;-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596960</id>
	<title>Placement exams</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259867340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In many countries outside the USA, you must take a placement exam. So if you get 90\% or higher, you go into medicine, you get 80\% or higher, you go into engineering, you get 70\%, you go to law and anything below that, you go into religious studies. I don't think it really has anything to do with what can they do with an engineering degree but rather its what was scored on their placement exam.</p><p>my 2cents.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In many countries outside the USA , you must take a placement exam .
So if you get 90 \ % or higher , you go into medicine , you get 80 \ % or higher , you go into engineering , you get 70 \ % , you go to law and anything below that , you go into religious studies .
I do n't think it really has anything to do with what can they do with an engineering degree but rather its what was scored on their placement exam.my 2cents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In many countries outside the USA, you must take a placement exam.
So if you get 90\% or higher, you go into medicine, you get 80\% or higher, you go into engineering, you get 70\%, you go to law and anything below that, you go into religious studies.
I don't think it really has anything to do with what can they do with an engineering degree but rather its what was scored on their placement exam.my 2cents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597692</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>grolaw</author>
	<datestamp>1259870220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at all of the ATM menus out there.  Why, it's a veritable fiesta of variations on a theme, no two alike (just like apps running under Windoze).  Each one of these menus was created by somebody who knew better than anybody else how the ATM should interact with the average human.</p><p>That kind of concrete thinking makes for a committed terrorist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at all of the ATM menus out there .
Why , it 's a veritable fiesta of variations on a theme , no two alike ( just like apps running under Windoze ) .
Each one of these menus was created by somebody who knew better than anybody else how the ATM should interact with the average human.That kind of concrete thinking makes for a committed terrorist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at all of the ATM menus out there.
Why, it's a veritable fiesta of variations on a theme, no two alike (just like apps running under Windoze).
Each one of these menus was created by somebody who knew better than anybody else how the ATM should interact with the average human.That kind of concrete thinking makes for a committed terrorist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593136</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>NotSoHeavyD2</author>
	<datestamp>1259854560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me? Uh oh. We're a "no-go" on that one, Houston</p></div><p>Err, well if you were already religious you might be more willing to put up with all the crap required to get an engineering degree. (Since you know, you're really doing it for god.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me ?
Uh oh .
We 're a " no-go " on that one , HoustonErr , well if you were already religious you might be more willing to put up with all the crap required to get an engineering degree .
( Since you know , you 're really doing it for god .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me?
Uh oh.
We're a "no-go" on that one, HoustonErr, well if you were already religious you might be more willing to put up with all the crap required to get an engineering degree.
(Since you know, you're really doing it for god.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593058</id>
	<title>and how it started....</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1259854200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suppose English/Classics students argue, but they know its all futile in the larger scheme of things, as Cicero said "we're all dead, get over it losers".</p><p>Maths students argue, but only over dividing the bill.</p><p>Humanities/Politics students argue over everything, but that's all - they have no ability to do anything practical.</p><p>Engineering students, they're different. From arguing over Emacs or Vi, its no wonder they're seen as the most promising ones for a career in terrorism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suppose English/Classics students argue , but they know its all futile in the larger scheme of things , as Cicero said " we 're all dead , get over it losers " .Maths students argue , but only over dividing the bill.Humanities/Politics students argue over everything , but that 's all - they have no ability to do anything practical.Engineering students , they 're different .
From arguing over Emacs or Vi , its no wonder they 're seen as the most promising ones for a career in terrorism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suppose English/Classics students argue, but they know its all futile in the larger scheme of things, as Cicero said "we're all dead, get over it losers".Maths students argue, but only over dividing the bill.Humanities/Politics students argue over everything, but that's all - they have no ability to do anything practical.Engineering students, they're different.
From arguing over Emacs or Vi, its no wonder they're seen as the most promising ones for a career in terrorism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593358</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe it's the other way around?</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1259855640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> The resources for recruiting are not placed upon any skill at all, as can been seen they are specifically targeted at vulnerable people who lack skill in dealing with a modern society and have problems when dealing with women upon an equal rather than subservient basis. The question is why are struggling extrovert misogynists drawn to engineering. </p><p> The straight forward clearly defined rules of engineering and physics seems to suit their personality, of what is defined as right is right and never changes, rather than the more complex, flexible and adaptable world of social interactions.  Do those individuals lack the ability of bridging the gap between the rigid world of religion and the far more flexible reality of human interactions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The resources for recruiting are not placed upon any skill at all , as can been seen they are specifically targeted at vulnerable people who lack skill in dealing with a modern society and have problems when dealing with women upon an equal rather than subservient basis .
The question is why are struggling extrovert misogynists drawn to engineering .
The straight forward clearly defined rules of engineering and physics seems to suit their personality , of what is defined as right is right and never changes , rather than the more complex , flexible and adaptable world of social interactions .
Do those individuals lack the ability of bridging the gap between the rigid world of religion and the far more flexible reality of human interactions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The resources for recruiting are not placed upon any skill at all, as can been seen they are specifically targeted at vulnerable people who lack skill in dealing with a modern society and have problems when dealing with women upon an equal rather than subservient basis.
The question is why are struggling extrovert misogynists drawn to engineering.
The straight forward clearly defined rules of engineering and physics seems to suit their personality, of what is defined as right is right and never changes, rather than the more complex, flexible and adaptable world of social interactions.
Do those individuals lack the ability of bridging the gap between the rigid world of religion and the far more flexible reality of human interactions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594696</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>lawpoop</author>
	<datestamp>1259860080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above. Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.</p></div><p>That's true, but I also think that

<br> <br>If you're poor, your overriding goal in life is to survive. You don't have a very "empowered" mindset. Other articles have noted that the terrorists are all from middle class backgrounds. If you're middle-class, you have enough mental breathing room to ask "What do I want to be when I grow up?" and "How can I make the world a better place?" You feel that you have some power or leverage in life and society. You can make choices that can have real impact. In other words, you feel "empowered". <br> <br>So why do terrorists have engineering degrees? Probably because they are middle-class.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that ( counter-intuitively perhaps ) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent , learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics , homicidal maniacs , perverts , terrorists , psychopaths , all-round assholes or all of the above .
Moral outlook and intelligence do n't seem to be very strongly related at all.That 's true , but I also think that If you 're poor , your overriding goal in life is to survive .
You do n't have a very " empowered " mindset .
Other articles have noted that the terrorists are all from middle class backgrounds .
If you 're middle-class , you have enough mental breathing room to ask " What do I want to be when I grow up ?
" and " How can I make the world a better place ?
" You feel that you have some power or leverage in life and society .
You can make choices that can have real impact .
In other words , you feel " empowered " .
So why do terrorists have engineering degrees ?
Probably because they are middle-class .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above.
Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.That's true, but I also think that

 If you're poor, your overriding goal in life is to survive.
You don't have a very "empowered" mindset.
Other articles have noted that the terrorists are all from middle class backgrounds.
If you're middle-class, you have enough mental breathing room to ask "What do I want to be when I grow up?
" and "How can I make the world a better place?
" You feel that you have some power or leverage in life and society.
You can make choices that can have real impact.
In other words, you feel "empowered".
So why do terrorists have engineering degrees?
Probably because they are middle-class.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592916</id>
	<title>Why is nobody investigating the real problem</title>
	<author>For a Free Internet</author>
	<datestamp>1259853540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The insidious Italian conspiracy that controls all global terrorism. Obama is their puppet. And they are the financial underwiters of "slash-dot" so watch what you say!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The insidious Italian conspiracy that controls all global terrorism .
Obama is their puppet .
And they are the financial underwiters of " slash-dot " so watch what you say ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The insidious Italian conspiracy that controls all global terrorism.
Obama is their puppet.
And they are the financial underwiters of "slash-dot" so watch what you say!!!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596518</id>
	<title>There was no failure to use logic or training</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1259865600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Why do so many terrorists have a complete failure to use their training or logic?</i></p><p>I would argue there was no failure to use logic in the most recent attack.</p><p>After all, the guy did not know his father had warned anyone, so he wasn't really concerned about getting on a plane - he had a valid U.S. Visa.  There was no question he would get on, and thus no need to use any tricks to conceal identity.  In fact this is why I don't really see Bruce's workaround for the need to present ID as much of a security flaw, because in practice few people even know they are on a list and so many people easily get on even if they are on such a list...</p><p>As for the bomb itself, well the device itself was actually pretty well thought out (he could have even had a pat-down without them finding anything), it's just that he apparently got something wrong in execution.  You have to think he practiced beforehand, but the problem is as always, stuff in the field works differently and also how to you really practice doing something by hand that is meant to blow you up as quickly as possible?  They probably practiced with some kind of remote activation technique that he messed up doing by hand.</p><p>People think todays security sucks and it does suck from the standpoint of the traveller but it has imposed enough constraints on being sure you get an item through security that even an engineer has a hard time getting a working device through.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do so many terrorists have a complete failure to use their training or logic ? I would argue there was no failure to use logic in the most recent attack.After all , the guy did not know his father had warned anyone , so he was n't really concerned about getting on a plane - he had a valid U.S. Visa. There was no question he would get on , and thus no need to use any tricks to conceal identity .
In fact this is why I do n't really see Bruce 's workaround for the need to present ID as much of a security flaw , because in practice few people even know they are on a list and so many people easily get on even if they are on such a list...As for the bomb itself , well the device itself was actually pretty well thought out ( he could have even had a pat-down without them finding anything ) , it 's just that he apparently got something wrong in execution .
You have to think he practiced beforehand , but the problem is as always , stuff in the field works differently and also how to you really practice doing something by hand that is meant to blow you up as quickly as possible ?
They probably practiced with some kind of remote activation technique that he messed up doing by hand.People think todays security sucks and it does suck from the standpoint of the traveller but it has imposed enough constraints on being sure you get an item through security that even an engineer has a hard time getting a working device through .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do so many terrorists have a complete failure to use their training or logic?I would argue there was no failure to use logic in the most recent attack.After all, the guy did not know his father had warned anyone, so he wasn't really concerned about getting on a plane - he had a valid U.S. Visa.  There was no question he would get on, and thus no need to use any tricks to conceal identity.
In fact this is why I don't really see Bruce's workaround for the need to present ID as much of a security flaw, because in practice few people even know they are on a list and so many people easily get on even if they are on such a list...As for the bomb itself, well the device itself was actually pretty well thought out (he could have even had a pat-down without them finding anything), it's just that he apparently got something wrong in execution.
You have to think he practiced beforehand, but the problem is as always, stuff in the field works differently and also how to you really practice doing something by hand that is meant to blow you up as quickly as possible?
They probably practiced with some kind of remote activation technique that he messed up doing by hand.People think todays security sucks and it does suck from the standpoint of the traveller but it has imposed enough constraints on being sure you get an item through security that even an engineer has a hard time getting a working device through.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594286</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>cnvandev</author>
	<datestamp>1259858820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really? In the engineering education I've been exposed to (I'm in a Canadian engineering program right now) they heavily play up the importance of eliminating bias and groupthink to find the "best" option. There's an immense stress on the idea that there is no "right" option, and that even the option you <i>choose</i> to be right has to be properly sourced and cited with a fully documented process, so you are accountable for your decisions. In fact, that accountability is an immense part of the "professional" part of the education, and I'd argue that's why engineers <i>wouldn't</i> make good extremists; they'd be looking for the kind of backup that just isn't there with some religious beliefs.</p><p>Add that to the fact that hackers and nerds, more so than other groups I've seen, tend to be more questioning of traditional religions than the average person - and it's <a href="http://catb.org/jargon/html/religion.html" title="catb.org" rel="nofollow">not just me who notices</a> [catb.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
In the engineering education I 've been exposed to ( I 'm in a Canadian engineering program right now ) they heavily play up the importance of eliminating bias and groupthink to find the " best " option .
There 's an immense stress on the idea that there is no " right " option , and that even the option you choose to be right has to be properly sourced and cited with a fully documented process , so you are accountable for your decisions .
In fact , that accountability is an immense part of the " professional " part of the education , and I 'd argue that 's why engineers would n't make good extremists ; they 'd be looking for the kind of backup that just is n't there with some religious beliefs.Add that to the fact that hackers and nerds , more so than other groups I 've seen , tend to be more questioning of traditional religions than the average person - and it 's not just me who notices [ catb.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
In the engineering education I've been exposed to (I'm in a Canadian engineering program right now) they heavily play up the importance of eliminating bias and groupthink to find the "best" option.
There's an immense stress on the idea that there is no "right" option, and that even the option you choose to be right has to be properly sourced and cited with a fully documented process, so you are accountable for your decisions.
In fact, that accountability is an immense part of the "professional" part of the education, and I'd argue that's why engineers wouldn't make good extremists; they'd be looking for the kind of backup that just isn't there with some religious beliefs.Add that to the fact that hackers and nerds, more so than other groups I've seen, tend to be more questioning of traditional religions than the average person - and it's not just me who notices [catb.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601938</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259851620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For more information on why you're like this, google INTJ:<br><a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=INTJ" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?q=INTJ</a> [google.com]</p><p>The first few links are good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For more information on why you 're like this , google INTJ : http : //www.google.com/search ? q = INTJ [ google.com ] The first few links are good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For more information on why you're like this, google INTJ:http://www.google.com/search?q=INTJ [google.com]The first few links are good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596748</id>
	<title>Re:Eh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259866440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're looking in the wrong direction bud.  It's in the interest of the people who are benefiting most to see to it that the target population is mad as hell, then reap in the rewards of said trillion dollars.  Torture?  Check.  Fox news harping?  Check.  Two sides, ready to kill.<br>PROFIT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're looking in the wrong direction bud .
It 's in the interest of the people who are benefiting most to see to it that the target population is mad as hell , then reap in the rewards of said trillion dollars .
Torture ? Check .
Fox news harping ?
Check. Two sides , ready to kill.PROFIT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're looking in the wrong direction bud.
It's in the interest of the people who are benefiting most to see to it that the target population is mad as hell, then reap in the rewards of said trillion dollars.
Torture?  Check.
Fox news harping?
Check.  Two sides, ready to kill.PROFIT.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599498</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>arminw</author>
	<datestamp>1259834460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...non-productive stuff like sociology...</p><p>You add to that the armies of lawyers we add to our society every year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...non-productive stuff like sociology...You add to that the armies of lawyers we add to our society every year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...non-productive stuff like sociology...You add to that the armies of lawyers we add to our society every year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592908</id>
	<title>The Real Reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Engineering students get dates and have nothing else do, so they might as well get on a plane and blow up their underwear.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineering students get dates and have nothing else do , so they might as well get on a plane and blow up their underwear .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineering students get dates and have nothing else do, so they might as well get on a plane and blow up their underwear.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592876</id>
	<title>Stop blaming englineers!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Did those so called researchers see the obvious? The engineering students/terrorists are all Muslim!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Did those so called researchers see the obvious ?
The engineering students/terrorists are all Muslim !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did those so called researchers see the obvious?
The engineering students/terrorists are all Muslim!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</id>
	<title>"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So many of the Engineers I have known view "seeing both sides of the story" as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise.  "Right is Right, Wrong is Wrong, I'm Right, and that's all there is to it.  Period.  Full Stop.  Now If You'll Excuse Me, I've got to get back to My Important Thing."</p><p>Of course, more times than not, they ARE right.  Just pains in the ass, and living in their Own Private Idaho.</p><p>It's not every engineer, of course, but a much larger percentage than, say, the writers or entertainers or sales-and-marketing suits whose company I have frequented over the past few decades.  I've never made the connection before, but yes, most of the socially-dysfunctional engineers I know would make really good religious extremists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So many of the Engineers I have known view " seeing both sides of the story " as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise .
" Right is Right , Wrong is Wrong , I 'm Right , and that 's all there is to it .
Period. Full Stop .
Now If You 'll Excuse Me , I 've got to get back to My Important Thing .
" Of course , more times than not , they ARE right .
Just pains in the ass , and living in their Own Private Idaho.It 's not every engineer , of course , but a much larger percentage than , say , the writers or entertainers or sales-and-marketing suits whose company I have frequented over the past few decades .
I 've never made the connection before , but yes , most of the socially-dysfunctional engineers I know would make really good religious extremists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So many of the Engineers I have known view "seeing both sides of the story" as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise.
"Right is Right, Wrong is Wrong, I'm Right, and that's all there is to it.
Period.  Full Stop.
Now If You'll Excuse Me, I've got to get back to My Important Thing.
"Of course, more times than not, they ARE right.
Just pains in the ass, and living in their Own Private Idaho.It's not every engineer, of course, but a much larger percentage than, say, the writers or entertainers or sales-and-marketing suits whose company I have frequented over the past few decades.
I've never made the connection before, but yes, most of the socially-dysfunctional engineers I know would make really good religious extremists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596534</id>
	<title>ererere</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259865600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's because Arabs (males) in general like engineering, and most "terrorists" are Arab, so you'll have a higher likelihood of a "terrorist" with an engineering degree, not because "terrorists" go around campus engineering depts. looking for recruits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's because Arabs ( males ) in general like engineering , and most " terrorists " are Arab , so you 'll have a higher likelihood of a " terrorist " with an engineering degree , not because " terrorists " go around campus engineering depts .
looking for recruits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's because Arabs (males) in general like engineering, and most "terrorists" are Arab, so you'll have a higher likelihood of a "terrorist" with an engineering degree, not because "terrorists" go around campus engineering depts.
looking for recruits.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597388</id>
	<title>Re:Simple answer, wrong question.</title>
	<author>HughsOnFirst</author>
	<datestamp>1259868960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems like it is the right wing fundamentalists that are trying to attack the liberal 'free speech' societies. The left-wing socialist professors are the ones they are the most angry at.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems like it is the right wing fundamentalists that are trying to attack the liberal 'free speech ' societies .
The left-wing socialist professors are the ones they are the most angry at .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems like it is the right wing fundamentalists that are trying to attack the liberal 'free speech' societies.
The left-wing socialist professors are the ones they are the most angry at.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598088</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259871660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no they wouldn't because religion, extremist or not, is not rational.  a good engineer is rational to the core.  This rationality is what people label as 'anti-social' because it disregards feelings when they don't fit the facts/reality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no they would n't because religion , extremist or not , is not rational .
a good engineer is rational to the core .
This rationality is what people label as 'anti-social ' because it disregards feelings when they do n't fit the facts/reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no they wouldn't because religion, extremist or not, is not rational.
a good engineer is rational to the core.
This rationality is what people label as 'anti-social' because it disregards feelings when they don't fit the facts/reality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599232</id>
	<title>Founding Fathers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259833260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If "hold[ing] strong conservative and religious views" is their measure, then the Founding Fathers are terrorists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If " hold [ ing ] strong conservative and religious views " is their measure , then the Founding Fathers are terrorists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If "hold[ing] strong conservative and religious views" is their measure, then the Founding Fathers are terrorists.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596350</id>
	<title>Re:Quick responses to common /. responses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259865060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm at a loss how that paper survived pear review. Quite apart from the fact that the samples are ill-controlled and small, the paper tries to draw conclusions that don't follow from the data that it presents. This is a non-story.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm at a loss how that paper survived pear review .
Quite apart from the fact that the samples are ill-controlled and small , the paper tries to draw conclusions that do n't follow from the data that it presents .
This is a non-story .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm at a loss how that paper survived pear review.
Quite apart from the fact that the samples are ill-controlled and small, the paper tries to draw conclusions that don't follow from the data that it presents.
This is a non-story.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596722</id>
	<title>Simple - Engineering Students Don't Get Laid</title>
	<author>aquatone282</author>
	<datestamp>1259866320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're getting laid, you're much less likely to hate your fellow human beings and desire to blow them (and sometimes yourself) up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're getting laid , you 're much less likely to hate your fellow human beings and desire to blow them ( and sometimes yourself ) up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're getting laid, you're much less likely to hate your fellow human beings and desire to blow them (and sometimes yourself) up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597200</id>
	<title>Look no further</title>
	<author>mozzis</author>
	<datestamp>1259868120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Terrorist organizations have long recognized that engineering departments are fertile ground for recruitment and have concentrated their efforts there."

Liberal types love to speculate about how scary conservative religious people are. But the population of this site is both heavily skewed towards engineers and very liberal. The reason you see engineers as terrorists is because the terrorist organizations realize the value of engineering and recruit as many as they can.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Terrorist organizations have long recognized that engineering departments are fertile ground for recruitment and have concentrated their efforts there .
" Liberal types love to speculate about how scary conservative religious people are .
But the population of this site is both heavily skewed towards engineers and very liberal .
The reason you see engineers as terrorists is because the terrorist organizations realize the value of engineering and recruit as many as they can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Terrorist organizations have long recognized that engineering departments are fertile ground for recruitment and have concentrated their efforts there.
"

Liberal types love to speculate about how scary conservative religious people are.
But the population of this site is both heavily skewed towards engineers and very liberal.
The reason you see engineers as terrorists is because the terrorist organizations realize the value of engineering and recruit as many as they can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30618984</id>
	<title>Entry level job ...</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1230825660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>... on the customer support desk would make anyone want to blow something up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... on the customer support desk would make anyone want to blow something up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... on the customer support desk would make anyone want to blow something up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593544</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Whatshisface</author>
	<datestamp>1259856240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bingo!

This is the part that most people don't get.

Its amazing how many terrorists are not fundamentalist Muslims, but simply young kids from Muslim countries who are pissed off at the treatment their people get from the Americans and Israelis.

And every time a drone indiscriminately kills 30 civilians in a failed attempt to kill one Al-Qaeda member, they gain a few more recruits.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bingo !
This is the part that most people do n't get .
Its amazing how many terrorists are not fundamentalist Muslims , but simply young kids from Muslim countries who are pissed off at the treatment their people get from the Americans and Israelis .
And every time a drone indiscriminately kills 30 civilians in a failed attempt to kill one Al-Qaeda member , they gain a few more recruits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bingo!
This is the part that most people don't get.
Its amazing how many terrorists are not fundamentalist Muslims, but simply young kids from Muslim countries who are pissed off at the treatment their people get from the Americans and Israelis.
And every time a drone indiscriminately kills 30 civilians in a failed attempt to kill one Al-Qaeda member, they gain a few more recruits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593956</id>
	<title>there are a lot of religious engineers</title>
	<author>bigtrike</author>
	<datestamp>1259857680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've met quite a few religious engineers.  Engineering school doesn't teach evolution or anything that directly conflicts with the bible.  You can't test for the existence of god, so any argument for or against religion is pointless.  Some may see Pascal's wager as logical, others won't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've met quite a few religious engineers .
Engineering school does n't teach evolution or anything that directly conflicts with the bible .
You ca n't test for the existence of god , so any argument for or against religion is pointless .
Some may see Pascal 's wager as logical , others wo n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've met quite a few religious engineers.
Engineering school doesn't teach evolution or anything that directly conflicts with the bible.
You can't test for the existence of god, so any argument for or against religion is pointless.
Some may see Pascal's wager as logical, others won't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593826</id>
	<title>Maybe other disciplines take the non-bombers?</title>
	<author>Richard Kirk</author>
	<datestamp>1259857260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
I would not disagree if someone called me an engineer. I have no desire to blow things up. However, having read about a bomb plot, most engineers would wonder how they might have tackled the problem, and whether they might have done it. This is not the same as having the will to do the dirty deed, but it is a start. If there is enough of a trend for engineers to be targeted for indoctrination, then that might be enough in itself. However, let us supposed there is something real there. Suppose you have fundamentalist leanings, and the talent to follow a scientific discipline. What are you likely to study at University?
</p><p>
A mathematician might work out how to get past the searches, and how to get a bomb onto a plane. However, having determined that it is possible, I don't really see them actually doing it: the proof that it is possible might be satisfying in itself.
</p><p>
Good physics often requires serious thinking outside the box. Doesn't really sit with maniacal orthodoxy. Same, I guess for most pure and applied sciences.
</p><p>
People who do medicine often have the fanatical mindset, but it is fanatically pro-life rather than the other way.
</p><p>
People who drop out of science in the UK may go into IP or law, or something completely different. In these cases, they have decided not to use their main talents. This suggests they have some balance between what they are called to do, and what they want to do with their life.
</p><p>
So, if you are still here, then you are a part of the population that may or may not have a pro-bombing mindset. This does not mean you are a bomber, but merely part of a group that may have an above-average portion with a pro-bombing mindset because these people do not feel attracted to the other disciplines. If you are an engineer, you will want to do something with your talents. This may be to build something. However, you do not have the same 'pro-structure' belief you find in medicine. Architects are often keen to clear sites of buildings that they disagree with. The various architects who worked on the new Wembley Stadium could agree on nothing other than the famous Wembley Towers had to be demolished. A large building project may claim tens of lives, and yet people must continue to design, knowing that their project will probably kill.
</p><p>
Not proved. But I can think it might work.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would not disagree if someone called me an engineer .
I have no desire to blow things up .
However , having read about a bomb plot , most engineers would wonder how they might have tackled the problem , and whether they might have done it .
This is not the same as having the will to do the dirty deed , but it is a start .
If there is enough of a trend for engineers to be targeted for indoctrination , then that might be enough in itself .
However , let us supposed there is something real there .
Suppose you have fundamentalist leanings , and the talent to follow a scientific discipline .
What are you likely to study at University ?
A mathematician might work out how to get past the searches , and how to get a bomb onto a plane .
However , having determined that it is possible , I do n't really see them actually doing it : the proof that it is possible might be satisfying in itself .
Good physics often requires serious thinking outside the box .
Does n't really sit with maniacal orthodoxy .
Same , I guess for most pure and applied sciences .
People who do medicine often have the fanatical mindset , but it is fanatically pro-life rather than the other way .
People who drop out of science in the UK may go into IP or law , or something completely different .
In these cases , they have decided not to use their main talents .
This suggests they have some balance between what they are called to do , and what they want to do with their life .
So , if you are still here , then you are a part of the population that may or may not have a pro-bombing mindset .
This does not mean you are a bomber , but merely part of a group that may have an above-average portion with a pro-bombing mindset because these people do not feel attracted to the other disciplines .
If you are an engineer , you will want to do something with your talents .
This may be to build something .
However , you do not have the same 'pro-structure ' belief you find in medicine .
Architects are often keen to clear sites of buildings that they disagree with .
The various architects who worked on the new Wembley Stadium could agree on nothing other than the famous Wembley Towers had to be demolished .
A large building project may claim tens of lives , and yet people must continue to design , knowing that their project will probably kill .
Not proved .
But I can think it might work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
I would not disagree if someone called me an engineer.
I have no desire to blow things up.
However, having read about a bomb plot, most engineers would wonder how they might have tackled the problem, and whether they might have done it.
This is not the same as having the will to do the dirty deed, but it is a start.
If there is enough of a trend for engineers to be targeted for indoctrination, then that might be enough in itself.
However, let us supposed there is something real there.
Suppose you have fundamentalist leanings, and the talent to follow a scientific discipline.
What are you likely to study at University?
A mathematician might work out how to get past the searches, and how to get a bomb onto a plane.
However, having determined that it is possible, I don't really see them actually doing it: the proof that it is possible might be satisfying in itself.
Good physics often requires serious thinking outside the box.
Doesn't really sit with maniacal orthodoxy.
Same, I guess for most pure and applied sciences.
People who do medicine often have the fanatical mindset, but it is fanatically pro-life rather than the other way.
People who drop out of science in the UK may go into IP or law, or something completely different.
In these cases, they have decided not to use their main talents.
This suggests they have some balance between what they are called to do, and what they want to do with their life.
So, if you are still here, then you are a part of the population that may or may not have a pro-bombing mindset.
This does not mean you are a bomber, but merely part of a group that may have an above-average portion with a pro-bombing mindset because these people do not feel attracted to the other disciplines.
If you are an engineer, you will want to do something with your talents.
This may be to build something.
However, you do not have the same 'pro-structure' belief you find in medicine.
Architects are often keen to clear sites of buildings that they disagree with.
The various architects who worked on the new Wembley Stadium could agree on nothing other than the famous Wembley Towers had to be demolished.
A large building project may claim tens of lives, and yet people must continue to design, knowing that their project will probably kill.
Not proved.
But I can think it might work.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593850</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>Minwee</author>
	<datestamp>1259857320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, they can make them.  <a href="http://torontoist.com/2007/11/thorarinn\_ingi.php" title="torontoist.com">They just aren't the kind that explode and tend to have signs saying "This is not a bomb" on them</a> [torontoist.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , they can make them .
They just are n't the kind that explode and tend to have signs saying " This is not a bomb " on them [ torontoist.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, they can make them.
They just aren't the kind that explode and tend to have signs saying "This is not a bomb" on them [torontoist.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593050</id>
	<title>Engineers are conservative?</title>
	<author>johnnysaucepn</author>
	<datestamp>1259854140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe...

<a href="http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2009/climate-change-a-consensus-among-scientists/" title="informatio...utiful.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2009/climate-change-a-consensus-among-scientists/</a> [informatio...utiful.net]

"In fact, when you adjust the PetitionProject&rsquo;s odd categorisation &ndash; they filed &lsquo;chemical engineers&rsquo; as chemists and physical engineers as &lsquo;physicists&rsquo; &ndash; the total number of engineers who signed the petition, by our reckoning, jumps to 49\%"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe.. . http : //www.informationisbeautiful.net/2009/climate-change-a-consensus-among-scientists/ [ informatio...utiful.net ] " In fact , when you adjust the PetitionProject    s odd categorisation    they filed    chemical engineers    as chemists and physical engineers as    physicists       the total number of engineers who signed the petition , by our reckoning , jumps to 49 \ % "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe...

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2009/climate-change-a-consensus-among-scientists/ [informatio...utiful.net]

"In fact, when you adjust the PetitionProject’s odd categorisation – they filed ‘chemical engineers’ as chemists and physical engineers as ‘physicists’ – the total number of engineers who signed the petition, by our reckoning, jumps to 49\%"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594934</id>
	<title>Not hard to figure out</title>
	<author>GooberToo</author>
	<datestamp>1259860800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why so many of the terrorists have engineering degrees</p></div><p>Why do so taxi drivers have a medical degree in their own country? Not all pieces of paper are created equal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why so many of the terrorists have engineering degreesWhy do so taxi drivers have a medical degree in their own country ?
Not all pieces of paper are created equal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why so many of the terrorists have engineering degreesWhy do so taxi drivers have a medical degree in their own country?
Not all pieces of paper are created equal.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593694</id>
	<title>Mobility</title>
	<author>kenp2002</author>
	<datestamp>1259856840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A degree in engineering has one of the highest degrees of mobility in the world. Engineers are frequently dispatch across the globe for special projects from mining, bridge building, design, and implementation.</p><p>Much like churches and schools, predators go where there is prey. Churches and schools provide the perfect "fish in a barrel" environment, access to prey, authority, and oportunity. The same hold true for the preditor that preys on fear. They need to have an occupation that provides them the tools necessary. Not only would engineers have the skills to develop weapons and "Mac Guyver" solutions but ideally, the job environment endows the ability to travel without drawing attention. Engineers can travel all over for projects and confrences vs. say an automechanic. It would be suspicious for an average automechanic to have to travel to Prague for a conference but an engineer travelling abroad for their career sounds plausable.</p><p>I would suspect that fields that require or at the very least imply travel are prime targets for recruitment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A degree in engineering has one of the highest degrees of mobility in the world .
Engineers are frequently dispatch across the globe for special projects from mining , bridge building , design , and implementation.Much like churches and schools , predators go where there is prey .
Churches and schools provide the perfect " fish in a barrel " environment , access to prey , authority , and oportunity .
The same hold true for the preditor that preys on fear .
They need to have an occupation that provides them the tools necessary .
Not only would engineers have the skills to develop weapons and " Mac Guyver " solutions but ideally , the job environment endows the ability to travel without drawing attention .
Engineers can travel all over for projects and confrences vs. say an automechanic .
It would be suspicious for an average automechanic to have to travel to Prague for a conference but an engineer travelling abroad for their career sounds plausable.I would suspect that fields that require or at the very least imply travel are prime targets for recruitment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A degree in engineering has one of the highest degrees of mobility in the world.
Engineers are frequently dispatch across the globe for special projects from mining, bridge building, design, and implementation.Much like churches and schools, predators go where there is prey.
Churches and schools provide the perfect "fish in a barrel" environment, access to prey, authority, and oportunity.
The same hold true for the preditor that preys on fear.
They need to have an occupation that provides them the tools necessary.
Not only would engineers have the skills to develop weapons and "Mac Guyver" solutions but ideally, the job environment endows the ability to travel without drawing attention.
Engineers can travel all over for projects and confrences vs. say an automechanic.
It would be suspicious for an average automechanic to have to travel to Prague for a conference but an engineer travelling abroad for their career sounds plausable.I would suspect that fields that require or at the very least imply travel are prime targets for recruitment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595078</id>
	<title>Because engineering education is dogmatic..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259861280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Engineering education is very dogmatic.  Unlike proper scientists, Engineers are trained to accept a certain subset of physics/chemistry/biology, and use that to build stuff.  This is not exactly a bad thing -- this is the most efficient way to train people to build stuff.  But Engineers seem to forget sometimes that their understanding of the world isn't "the way it is", but merely "my understanding and perception of the world".  <br> <br>
Programmers are like this too, often to an even greater extent.  I think this mainly stems from the "that last guy was an idiot because he didn't code this in the same way I would have" mentality. Programmers probably aren't as good of candidates for terrorism, though, since they're less knowledgable in the explosion/bioweapons area.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineering education is very dogmatic .
Unlike proper scientists , Engineers are trained to accept a certain subset of physics/chemistry/biology , and use that to build stuff .
This is not exactly a bad thing -- this is the most efficient way to train people to build stuff .
But Engineers seem to forget sometimes that their understanding of the world is n't " the way it is " , but merely " my understanding and perception of the world " .
Programmers are like this too , often to an even greater extent .
I think this mainly stems from the " that last guy was an idiot because he did n't code this in the same way I would have " mentality .
Programmers probably are n't as good of candidates for terrorism , though , since they 're less knowledgable in the explosion/bioweapons area .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineering education is very dogmatic.
Unlike proper scientists, Engineers are trained to accept a certain subset of physics/chemistry/biology, and use that to build stuff.
This is not exactly a bad thing -- this is the most efficient way to train people to build stuff.
But Engineers seem to forget sometimes that their understanding of the world isn't "the way it is", but merely "my understanding and perception of the world".
Programmers are like this too, often to an even greater extent.
I think this mainly stems from the "that last guy was an idiot because he didn't code this in the same way I would have" mentality.
Programmers probably aren't as good of candidates for terrorism, though, since they're less knowledgable in the explosion/bioweapons area.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598984</id>
	<title>Re:Eh</title>
	<author>Marcika</author>
	<datestamp>1259832180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>As a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiots</p></div><p>Taken out of context, that could apply to the bankers on Wall Street.</p></div><p>Only by people who are ignorant of banking and the crisis. The trillion dollars that were "lost by bankers" in the crisis were never there (loans that were \_thought\_ to be worth 100\% though they would be never repaid, the US housing stock which was \_thought\_ to be twice as valuable as collateral for ABS/CDOs as it really is). Whereas the War on Terror and Homeland Security are pissing real wealth down the drain - gasoline, goods, vehicles, human lives and untold man-years of manufacturing/planning/organization etc).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a result of the actions of a few idiots , a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS ( that is , the life 's work of at least a million people ) has been blown reacting to these idiotsTaken out of context , that could apply to the bankers on Wall Street.Only by people who are ignorant of banking and the crisis .
The trillion dollars that were " lost by bankers " in the crisis were never there ( loans that were \ _thought \ _ to be worth 100 \ % though they would be never repaid , the US housing stock which was \ _thought \ _ to be twice as valuable as collateral for ABS/CDOs as it really is ) .
Whereas the War on Terror and Homeland Security are pissing real wealth down the drain - gasoline , goods , vehicles , human lives and untold man-years of manufacturing/planning/organization etc ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiotsTaken out of context, that could apply to the bankers on Wall Street.Only by people who are ignorant of banking and the crisis.
The trillion dollars that were "lost by bankers" in the crisis were never there (loans that were \_thought\_ to be worth 100\% though they would be never repaid, the US housing stock which was \_thought\_ to be twice as valuable as collateral for ABS/CDOs as it really is).
Whereas the War on Terror and Homeland Security are pissing real wealth down the drain - gasoline, goods, vehicles, human lives and untold man-years of manufacturing/planning/organization etc).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598634</id>
	<title>It's a socioeconomic thing.</title>
	<author>jafac</author>
	<datestamp>1259873580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those with socioeconomic backgrounds that allowed them to be educated to that level (engineering degrees), also have the intellectual means to understand the "rhetoric of revolution".  The logical arguments (right or wrong) of freedom, rights, oppression, etc.</p><p>A "typical" illiterate, though religiously-devout follower of (insert\_toxic\_fundamentalist\_cult\_here) can have a xenophobic mindset.  I think that's probably a very natural, human element. Fear of the unknown. Fear of the different.  But ignorant.</p><p>To embrace a complex philosophy that includes a 1000-year history of perceived oppression and mutual war of extermination, and a sophisticated conspiracy-theory involving some un-obvious interpretations of extra-scriptural prophecies, satan, the UN, imperialistic European "pagans" (Christians and what I've heard referred to as "Sephardic" Jews - Jews of European descent - whom they claim have no birthright to Palestine, and are therefore just European invaders under the pretense of a false claim to "divine-right") . . . I think you don't just take a starving orphan off the street and indoctrinate them to that.</p><p>All they've ever known is poverty and misery.  They just don't have the perspective and breadth of experience to grasp an idea of a "global jihad" - or that "revolution" means something other than swapping oppressive dictators.</p><p>If someone's known at least a little bit of middle-class lifestyle, maybe studied at a university in a wealthier country, and then gets exposed to the massive suffering that they've allowed themselves to be blind to - and opens up to the empathy, it's a powerful driver to reinforce that rhetoric.</p><p>There was also the theory that bin Laden got the idea to specifically recruit from more educated middle-upper-class people, because he wants to use the decadent west's own products against them.  As a sort of a political statement. A cocky move.  But that would only apply to Al Qaeda terrorists.</p><p>I don't know if the competence argument washes, because although the Khobar Towers and 911 operations - technically, were spectacularly successful, (if you look at it purely from an analytical planning-and-execution standpoint) the "shoe-bomber" and the "jockstrap bomber" were both embarrassing failures.  In fact - these spectacularly executed attacks used to be the hallmark and reputation of Al Qaeda.  If nothing else, their "brand" has obviously been diluted by very low-quality product now.  Likely, they've lost some irreplaceable expertise. I'd posit, also, that their operational secrecy forbids any kind of process improvement.  So all the obvious arguments for recruiting "engineers" don't seem to have borne fruit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those with socioeconomic backgrounds that allowed them to be educated to that level ( engineering degrees ) , also have the intellectual means to understand the " rhetoric of revolution " .
The logical arguments ( right or wrong ) of freedom , rights , oppression , etc.A " typical " illiterate , though religiously-devout follower of ( insert \ _toxic \ _fundamentalist \ _cult \ _here ) can have a xenophobic mindset .
I think that 's probably a very natural , human element .
Fear of the unknown .
Fear of the different .
But ignorant.To embrace a complex philosophy that includes a 1000-year history of perceived oppression and mutual war of extermination , and a sophisticated conspiracy-theory involving some un-obvious interpretations of extra-scriptural prophecies , satan , the UN , imperialistic European " pagans " ( Christians and what I 've heard referred to as " Sephardic " Jews - Jews of European descent - whom they claim have no birthright to Palestine , and are therefore just European invaders under the pretense of a false claim to " divine-right " ) .
. .
I think you do n't just take a starving orphan off the street and indoctrinate them to that.All they 've ever known is poverty and misery .
They just do n't have the perspective and breadth of experience to grasp an idea of a " global jihad " - or that " revolution " means something other than swapping oppressive dictators.If someone 's known at least a little bit of middle-class lifestyle , maybe studied at a university in a wealthier country , and then gets exposed to the massive suffering that they 've allowed themselves to be blind to - and opens up to the empathy , it 's a powerful driver to reinforce that rhetoric.There was also the theory that bin Laden got the idea to specifically recruit from more educated middle-upper-class people , because he wants to use the decadent west 's own products against them .
As a sort of a political statement .
A cocky move .
But that would only apply to Al Qaeda terrorists.I do n't know if the competence argument washes , because although the Khobar Towers and 911 operations - technically , were spectacularly successful , ( if you look at it purely from an analytical planning-and-execution standpoint ) the " shoe-bomber " and the " jockstrap bomber " were both embarrassing failures .
In fact - these spectacularly executed attacks used to be the hallmark and reputation of Al Qaeda .
If nothing else , their " brand " has obviously been diluted by very low-quality product now .
Likely , they 've lost some irreplaceable expertise .
I 'd posit , also , that their operational secrecy forbids any kind of process improvement .
So all the obvious arguments for recruiting " engineers " do n't seem to have borne fruit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those with socioeconomic backgrounds that allowed them to be educated to that level (engineering degrees), also have the intellectual means to understand the "rhetoric of revolution".
The logical arguments (right or wrong) of freedom, rights, oppression, etc.A "typical" illiterate, though religiously-devout follower of (insert\_toxic\_fundamentalist\_cult\_here) can have a xenophobic mindset.
I think that's probably a very natural, human element.
Fear of the unknown.
Fear of the different.
But ignorant.To embrace a complex philosophy that includes a 1000-year history of perceived oppression and mutual war of extermination, and a sophisticated conspiracy-theory involving some un-obvious interpretations of extra-scriptural prophecies, satan, the UN, imperialistic European "pagans" (Christians and what I've heard referred to as "Sephardic" Jews - Jews of European descent - whom they claim have no birthright to Palestine, and are therefore just European invaders under the pretense of a false claim to "divine-right") .
. .
I think you don't just take a starving orphan off the street and indoctrinate them to that.All they've ever known is poverty and misery.
They just don't have the perspective and breadth of experience to grasp an idea of a "global jihad" - or that "revolution" means something other than swapping oppressive dictators.If someone's known at least a little bit of middle-class lifestyle, maybe studied at a university in a wealthier country, and then gets exposed to the massive suffering that they've allowed themselves to be blind to - and opens up to the empathy, it's a powerful driver to reinforce that rhetoric.There was also the theory that bin Laden got the idea to specifically recruit from more educated middle-upper-class people, because he wants to use the decadent west's own products against them.
As a sort of a political statement.
A cocky move.
But that would only apply to Al Qaeda terrorists.I don't know if the competence argument washes, because although the Khobar Towers and 911 operations - technically, were spectacularly successful, (if you look at it purely from an analytical planning-and-execution standpoint) the "shoe-bomber" and the "jockstrap bomber" were both embarrassing failures.
In fact - these spectacularly executed attacks used to be the hallmark and reputation of Al Qaeda.
If nothing else, their "brand" has obviously been diluted by very low-quality product now.
Likely, they've lost some irreplaceable expertise.
I'd posit, also, that their operational secrecy forbids any kind of process improvement.
So all the obvious arguments for recruiting "engineers" don't seem to have borne fruit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598096</id>
	<title>Pissed Anonymous</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259871720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like how some of you talk about engineers. One thing though today when you go home<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... no that 30 mile trip<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... think about how your life would have been without an engineer. You would go home to a candle LOL!<br>I hate when you people generalize and besides this the US is based on Europe's minds that fled their countries because they didn't wanted to make genocide! And during the second world war the Americans stole all the technology from the germans and they still can't @#$\%ing build a good car!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like how some of you talk about engineers .
One thing though today when you go home ... no that 30 mile trip ... think about how your life would have been without an engineer .
You would go home to a candle LOL ! I hate when you people generalize and besides this the US is based on Europe 's minds that fled their countries because they did n't wanted to make genocide !
And during the second world war the Americans stole all the technology from the germans and they still ca n't @ # $ \ % ing build a good car !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like how some of you talk about engineers.
One thing though today when you go home ... no that 30 mile trip ... think about how your life would have been without an engineer.
You would go home to a candle LOL!I hate when you people generalize and besides this the US is based on Europe's minds that fled their countries because they didn't wanted to make genocide!
And during the second world war the Americans stole all the technology from the germans and they still can't @#$\%ing build a good car!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>J\_Omega</author>
	<datestamp>1259857740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate to say the following for two reasons. 1) it is a stereotype of my own design, and 2) I am an engineer.<br> <br>

Engineers are ALWAYS right.   ALWAYS.  Even when (especially when?) something is clearly opinion based.<br> <br>
Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is, you get a simple answer.<br>
Ask an eng the same, you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors.<br> <br>
<br>
As I said, I am an engineer.  It was only after I noticed behavior like this in other engs that I noticed it in myself as well.<br>
I don't like having that trait (flaw?) and have had to make a conscious effort to be less judgmental.  (Yet remaining critical.)<br> <br>
So, yeah, as RobotRunAmok pointed out - engs tend to think/say "Right is right - AND I'M RIGHT" even when it isn't a correct/incorrect discussion, sometimes when they are clearly incorrect (they defend what they've said, clearly wrong.)<br> <br>
Also, and again this is something that I've caught myself doing, is that these personality types can and do play the Devil's Advocate rather well - up to a point.  There is a difference between seeing the other side of a discussion and being contrarian for the sake of "being right." <br> <br>
The above may not be worded all that well, but I need my morning coffee.  Besides, it hardly matters if you disagree with me, since I KNOW that I am correct.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate to say the following for two reasons .
1 ) it is a stereotype of my own design , and 2 ) I am an engineer .
Engineers are ALWAYS right .
ALWAYS. Even when ( especially when ?
) something is clearly opinion based .
Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is , you get a simple answer .
Ask an eng the same , you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors .
As I said , I am an engineer .
It was only after I noticed behavior like this in other engs that I noticed it in myself as well .
I do n't like having that trait ( flaw ?
) and have had to make a conscious effort to be less judgmental .
( Yet remaining critical .
) So , yeah , as RobotRunAmok pointed out - engs tend to think/say " Right is right - AND I 'M RIGHT " even when it is n't a correct/incorrect discussion , sometimes when they are clearly incorrect ( they defend what they 've said , clearly wrong .
) Also , and again this is something that I 've caught myself doing , is that these personality types can and do play the Devil 's Advocate rather well - up to a point .
There is a difference between seeing the other side of a discussion and being contrarian for the sake of " being right .
" The above may not be worded all that well , but I need my morning coffee .
Besides , it hardly matters if you disagree with me , since I KNOW that I am correct .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate to say the following for two reasons.
1) it is a stereotype of my own design, and 2) I am an engineer.
Engineers are ALWAYS right.
ALWAYS.  Even when (especially when?
) something is clearly opinion based.
Ask a non-eng what their favorite color is, you get a simple answer.
Ask an eng the same, you get an answer PLUS reasons why it is superior to other colors.
As I said, I am an engineer.
It was only after I noticed behavior like this in other engs that I noticed it in myself as well.
I don't like having that trait (flaw?
) and have had to make a conscious effort to be less judgmental.
(Yet remaining critical.
) 
So, yeah, as RobotRunAmok pointed out - engs tend to think/say "Right is right - AND I'M RIGHT" even when it isn't a correct/incorrect discussion, sometimes when they are clearly incorrect (they defend what they've said, clearly wrong.
) 
Also, and again this is something that I've caught myself doing, is that these personality types can and do play the Devil's Advocate rather well - up to a point.
There is a difference between seeing the other side of a discussion and being contrarian for the sake of "being right.
"  
The above may not be worded all that well, but I need my morning coffee.
Besides, it hardly matters if you disagree with me, since I KNOW that I am correct.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593586</id>
	<title>Re:Eh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>s a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiots</p></div><p>Taken out of context, that could apply to the bankers on Wall Street.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>s a result of the actions of a few idiots , a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS ( that is , the life 's work of at least a million people ) has been blown reacting to these idiotsTaken out of context , that could apply to the bankers on Wall Street .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>s a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiotsTaken out of context, that could apply to the bankers on Wall Street.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>rve</author>
	<datestamp>1259855100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Could it be that engineering degrees are a dime-a-dozen in oil-rich countries where middle-eastern terrorists usually originate? How many people in these countries <strong>don't</strong> have engineering degrees?</p></div><p>Hmm... some googling:</p><p>Khalid Sheikh Mohammed got his engineering degree in North Carolina.<br>Mohammed Atta got an engineering degree in Cairo (and studied English and German there), but his PhD in Hamburg, Germany.<br>Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab studied mechanical engineering in London, UK. It's unclear whether he graduated.</p><p>Speaking of degrees being a dime a dozen: In the United States, almost 30\% of the population has at a Bachelors degree or higher, and again that many have attended university but only have an associates degree or nothing. In other words, unless <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher\_education\_in\_the\_United\_States" title="wikipedia.org">wikipedia</a> [wikipedia.org] is wrong, two thirds of the population has attended college. According to the <a href="http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL\_ID=45964&amp;URL\_DO=DO\_TOPIC&amp;URL\_SECTION=201.html" title="unesco.org">Unesco website</a> [unesco.org], the situation is similar in Western Europe. According to that same website, "23\% attended college in the Arab States, 11\% in South and West Asia and, despite rapid growth, only 6\% in Africa"</p><p>Google is refusing to specify these statistics to engineering degrees, but the numbers above suggest that degrees are actually a dime a dozen in "the west", and not in the oil rich countries where middle eastern terrorists usually originate.</p><p>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above. Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Could it be that engineering degrees are a dime-a-dozen in oil-rich countries where middle-eastern terrorists usually originate ?
How many people in these countries do n't have engineering degrees ? Hmm... some googling : Khalid Sheikh Mohammed got his engineering degree in North Carolina.Mohammed Atta got an engineering degree in Cairo ( and studied English and German there ) , but his PhD in Hamburg , Germany.Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab studied mechanical engineering in London , UK .
It 's unclear whether he graduated.Speaking of degrees being a dime a dozen : In the United States , almost 30 \ % of the population has at a Bachelors degree or higher , and again that many have attended university but only have an associates degree or nothing .
In other words , unless wikipedia [ wikipedia.org ] is wrong , two thirds of the population has attended college .
According to the Unesco website [ unesco.org ] , the situation is similar in Western Europe .
According to that same website , " 23 \ % attended college in the Arab States , 11 \ % in South and West Asia and , despite rapid growth , only 6 \ % in Africa " Google is refusing to specify these statistics to engineering degrees , but the numbers above suggest that degrees are actually a dime a dozen in " the west " , and not in the oil rich countries where middle eastern terrorists usually originate.Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that ( counter-intuitively perhaps ) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent , learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics , homicidal maniacs , perverts , terrorists , psychopaths , all-round assholes or all of the above .
Moral outlook and intelligence do n't seem to be very strongly related at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Could it be that engineering degrees are a dime-a-dozen in oil-rich countries where middle-eastern terrorists usually originate?
How many people in these countries don't have engineering degrees?Hmm... some googling:Khalid Sheikh Mohammed got his engineering degree in North Carolina.Mohammed Atta got an engineering degree in Cairo (and studied English and German there), but his PhD in Hamburg, Germany.Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab studied mechanical engineering in London, UK.
It's unclear whether he graduated.Speaking of degrees being a dime a dozen: In the United States, almost 30\% of the population has at a Bachelors degree or higher, and again that many have attended university but only have an associates degree or nothing.
In other words, unless wikipedia [wikipedia.org] is wrong, two thirds of the population has attended college.
According to the Unesco website [unesco.org], the situation is similar in Western Europe.
According to that same website, "23\% attended college in the Arab States, 11\% in South and West Asia and, despite rapid growth, only 6\% in Africa"Google is refusing to specify these statistics to engineering degrees, but the numbers above suggest that degrees are actually a dime a dozen in "the west", and not in the oil rich countries where middle eastern terrorists usually originate.Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above.
Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593476</id>
	<title>You'd think engineers would be more rational</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1259856000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funnily enough the Aum cult used to recruit engineers too and of course Heaven's Gate was packed with web developers. It's weird because you would think that engineers would be the most immune to religion, or at least moderate it. After all engineers are taught to seek out answers, to be rational and logical and not to resort to special pleading (e.g. "it was God's will") when something doesn't work properly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funnily enough the Aum cult used to recruit engineers too and of course Heaven 's Gate was packed with web developers .
It 's weird because you would think that engineers would be the most immune to religion , or at least moderate it .
After all engineers are taught to seek out answers , to be rational and logical and not to resort to special pleading ( e.g .
" it was God 's will " ) when something does n't work properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funnily enough the Aum cult used to recruit engineers too and of course Heaven's Gate was packed with web developers.
It's weird because you would think that engineers would be the most immune to religion, or at least moderate it.
After all engineers are taught to seek out answers, to be rational and logical and not to resort to special pleading (e.g.
"it was God's will") when something doesn't work properly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596114</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>ThousandStars</author>
	<datestamp>1259864400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Funny, but once again, fails to RTFA. From said article:<blockquote><div><p>Another possible explanation would be that engineers possess technical skills and architectural know-how that makes them attractive recruits for terrorist organizations. But the recent study found that engineers are just as likely to hold leadership roles within these organizations as they are to be working hands-on with explosives. In any case, their technical expertise may not be that useful, since most of the methods employed in terrorist attacks are rudimentary. It's true that eight of the 25 hijackers on 9/11 were engineers, but it was their experience with box cutters and flight school, not fancy degrees, that counted in the end.</p></div></blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , but once again , fails to RTFA .
From said article : Another possible explanation would be that engineers possess technical skills and architectural know-how that makes them attractive recruits for terrorist organizations .
But the recent study found that engineers are just as likely to hold leadership roles within these organizations as they are to be working hands-on with explosives .
In any case , their technical expertise may not be that useful , since most of the methods employed in terrorist attacks are rudimentary .
It 's true that eight of the 25 hijackers on 9/11 were engineers , but it was their experience with box cutters and flight school , not fancy degrees , that counted in the end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, but once again, fails to RTFA.
From said article:Another possible explanation would be that engineers possess technical skills and architectural know-how that makes them attractive recruits for terrorist organizations.
But the recent study found that engineers are just as likely to hold leadership roles within these organizations as they are to be working hands-on with explosives.
In any case, their technical expertise may not be that useful, since most of the methods employed in terrorist attacks are rudimentary.
It's true that eight of the 25 hijackers on 9/11 were engineers, but it was their experience with box cutters and flight school, not fancy degrees, that counted in the end.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596354</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Sir\_Sri</author>
	<datestamp>1259865120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But in the west we regularly see 15-25\% of our engineering students as arabs and easily 50-70\% can be foreigners (india, china, middle east, south america, very rarely sub saharan africa).  If 0.001\% of them go on to become terrorists I'm not sure it means much about what we can do education wise.  But I don't think anyone, myself included, in the business of training engineers would think it odd to have 10 or 15 students complain about an exam on Eid or go to prayers right before or after class (or during a lab if they're long labs and not deeply involved).</p><p>Besides, when these guys come here it serves to further radicalize some of them.  They've been told all of the evils of the west and they get here and for some of them it's squarely in front of them.  We do nothing while gaza is turned into a giant concentration camp and Saudi is used as the puppet of the US it is to invade Yemen, all while we get fat and lazy stealing their oil.  It's not like we can somehow be alarmed some small percent of them want to kill us.  Some people in the US hate black people, therefore one should not be stunned that that group will want to kill Obama.  That doesn't make it right, sensible, a significant number of people or anything remotely moral, but it certainly shouldn't be surprising to anyone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But in the west we regularly see 15-25 \ % of our engineering students as arabs and easily 50-70 \ % can be foreigners ( india , china , middle east , south america , very rarely sub saharan africa ) .
If 0.001 \ % of them go on to become terrorists I 'm not sure it means much about what we can do education wise .
But I do n't think anyone , myself included , in the business of training engineers would think it odd to have 10 or 15 students complain about an exam on Eid or go to prayers right before or after class ( or during a lab if they 're long labs and not deeply involved ) .Besides , when these guys come here it serves to further radicalize some of them .
They 've been told all of the evils of the west and they get here and for some of them it 's squarely in front of them .
We do nothing while gaza is turned into a giant concentration camp and Saudi is used as the puppet of the US it is to invade Yemen , all while we get fat and lazy stealing their oil .
It 's not like we can somehow be alarmed some small percent of them want to kill us .
Some people in the US hate black people , therefore one should not be stunned that that group will want to kill Obama .
That does n't make it right , sensible , a significant number of people or anything remotely moral , but it certainly should n't be surprising to anyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But in the west we regularly see 15-25\% of our engineering students as arabs and easily 50-70\% can be foreigners (india, china, middle east, south america, very rarely sub saharan africa).
If 0.001\% of them go on to become terrorists I'm not sure it means much about what we can do education wise.
But I don't think anyone, myself included, in the business of training engineers would think it odd to have 10 or 15 students complain about an exam on Eid or go to prayers right before or after class (or during a lab if they're long labs and not deeply involved).Besides, when these guys come here it serves to further radicalize some of them.
They've been told all of the evils of the west and they get here and for some of them it's squarely in front of them.
We do nothing while gaza is turned into a giant concentration camp and Saudi is used as the puppet of the US it is to invade Yemen, all while we get fat and lazy stealing their oil.
It's not like we can somehow be alarmed some small percent of them want to kill us.
Some people in the US hate black people, therefore one should not be stunned that that group will want to kill Obama.
That doesn't make it right, sensible, a significant number of people or anything remotely moral, but it certainly shouldn't be surprising to anyone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597416</id>
	<title>Re:Quick responses to common /. responses</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1259869020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>American religious terrorists (the nominally Christian far-right)</p></div> </blockquote><p>First define Terrorist and Terrorist act. Then Name one "American Terrorist".</p><p>And for every "Religious" terrorist you find, I'll name a leftwing terrorist of equal or greater threat.</p><p>Unibomber, ELF, PETA, Earth First.</p><p>Sorry, but your bias is showing. But it isn't terrorism when you agree with the acts now is it?</p><p>I'm not saying there aren't any "right wing religious terrorists", far from it. What I'm saying is your view is politically skewed by your biases.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>American religious terrorists ( the nominally Christian far-right ) First define Terrorist and Terrorist act .
Then Name one " American Terrorist " .And for every " Religious " terrorist you find , I 'll name a leftwing terrorist of equal or greater threat.Unibomber , ELF , PETA , Earth First.Sorry , but your bias is showing .
But it is n't terrorism when you agree with the acts now is it ? I 'm not saying there are n't any " right wing religious terrorists " , far from it .
What I 'm saying is your view is politically skewed by your biases .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>American religious terrorists (the nominally Christian far-right) First define Terrorist and Terrorist act.
Then Name one "American Terrorist".And for every "Religious" terrorist you find, I'll name a leftwing terrorist of equal or greater threat.Unibomber, ELF, PETA, Earth First.Sorry, but your bias is showing.
But it isn't terrorism when you agree with the acts now is it?I'm not saying there aren't any "right wing religious terrorists", far from it.
What I'm saying is your view is politically skewed by your biases.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601628</id>
	<title>Re:It's a cultural thing</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1259848980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And.... I just gained a whole load of respect for Arabs.  Kol ha'kavod!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And.... I just gained a whole load of respect for Arabs .
Kol ha'kavod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And.... I just gained a whole load of respect for Arabs.
Kol ha'kavod!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593146</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>TheCarp</author>
	<datestamp>1259854560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always heard "You can have it fast, good, or cheap, pick two"</p><p>Also there is compromise "Yes we can use X material instead of Y, its not as good, but, its within tolerances" and "The project is to build a bridge, the drawing you gave me is for a boat ramp, this isn't going to meet our requirments"</p><p>-Steve</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always heard " You can have it fast , good , or cheap , pick two " Also there is compromise " Yes we can use X material instead of Y , its not as good , but , its within tolerances " and " The project is to build a bridge , the drawing you gave me is for a boat ramp , this is n't going to meet our requirments " -Steve</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always heard "You can have it fast, good, or cheap, pick two"Also there is compromise "Yes we can use X material instead of Y, its not as good, but, its within tolerances" and "The project is to build a bridge, the drawing you gave me is for a boat ramp, this isn't going to meet our requirments"-Steve</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597170</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1259868060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually find, Engineers to be the most "well rounded" of disciplines. WHY? Because they have to incorporate all sorts of other disciplines into whatever they design and build.</p><p>Additionally, they tend to always be learning. And not just about Engineering, but across a very broad scope.</p><p>You can have a conversation with an Engineer about anything from Physics, to Ecology, to religion, to even art and design. And you'll find that most of them are able to have a conversation in many many different fields.</p><p>Liberal Studies? Not so much. Any topic that ends up with any sort of REAL math or science is quickly met with fierce dogmatic statements made mostly in ignorance. Want to talk about Global Warming, its causes or even the scandal and you're met with a fierceness that matches any number of religious zealots. And the funniest thing is, they tend to claim to have "open minds".</p><p>But hey, that is just my observation in my college town. Liberal Arts = boring people who think they are enlightened, and everyone who doesn't agree with them are stupid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually find , Engineers to be the most " well rounded " of disciplines .
WHY ? Because they have to incorporate all sorts of other disciplines into whatever they design and build.Additionally , they tend to always be learning .
And not just about Engineering , but across a very broad scope.You can have a conversation with an Engineer about anything from Physics , to Ecology , to religion , to even art and design .
And you 'll find that most of them are able to have a conversation in many many different fields.Liberal Studies ?
Not so much .
Any topic that ends up with any sort of REAL math or science is quickly met with fierce dogmatic statements made mostly in ignorance .
Want to talk about Global Warming , its causes or even the scandal and you 're met with a fierceness that matches any number of religious zealots .
And the funniest thing is , they tend to claim to have " open minds " .But hey , that is just my observation in my college town .
Liberal Arts = boring people who think they are enlightened , and everyone who does n't agree with them are stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually find, Engineers to be the most "well rounded" of disciplines.
WHY? Because they have to incorporate all sorts of other disciplines into whatever they design and build.Additionally, they tend to always be learning.
And not just about Engineering, but across a very broad scope.You can have a conversation with an Engineer about anything from Physics, to Ecology, to religion, to even art and design.
And you'll find that most of them are able to have a conversation in many many different fields.Liberal Studies?
Not so much.
Any topic that ends up with any sort of REAL math or science is quickly met with fierce dogmatic statements made mostly in ignorance.
Want to talk about Global Warming, its causes or even the scandal and you're met with a fierceness that matches any number of religious zealots.
And the funniest thing is, they tend to claim to have "open minds".But hey, that is just my observation in my college town.
Liberal Arts = boring people who think they are enlightened, and everyone who doesn't agree with them are stupid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593288</id>
	<title>Whole sale Vs Retail terrorism</title>
	<author>pirhana</author>
	<datestamp>1259855340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Were all the biggest terrorists of past century Engineers ? Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Bush.... I dont think so . These were the REAL terrorists who dealt with whole sale terrorism. They have killed more people than any other terrorists anytime in the history. But most of these so called "Engineer terrorists" are involved in retail terrorism and the effect was marginal comparing to the former.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Were all the biggest terrorists of past century Engineers ?
Hitler , Mussolini , Franco , Bush.... I dont think so .
These were the REAL terrorists who dealt with whole sale terrorism .
They have killed more people than any other terrorists anytime in the history .
But most of these so called " Engineer terrorists " are involved in retail terrorism and the effect was marginal comparing to the former .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Were all the biggest terrorists of past century Engineers ?
Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Bush.... I dont think so .
These were the REAL terrorists who dealt with whole sale terrorism.
They have killed more people than any other terrorists anytime in the history.
But most of these so called "Engineer terrorists" are involved in retail terrorism and the effect was marginal comparing to the former.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1259862900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a CS grad from a liberal arts school, I got to deal with the liberal arts types that parent is referring to quite a bit.</p><p>There were generally 3 modes of thinking for the less bright liberal arts students:<br>1. "I'm right, because I'm morally right, and anyone who disagrees with me is mysogynistic / racist / classist / homophobic." This would be found most commonly in the [insert historically disadvantaged group here] Studies departments. They also tend to join up with identity-based groups on campus.<br>2. "On the other hand<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..." These folks are easy to find in the English or psychology departments, and by avoiding ever drawing any conclusions avoid having their conclusions being demonstrated incorrect. Often, they were extremely good students in high school, because their high school classes emphasized memorize-regurgitate over critical thinking.<br>3. "These 'facts' make me feel like I'm right" This is where truthiness trumps facts. You find these people in the political science and history departments. They also spend a lot of their time in on-campus activism, and are often humorously misinformed.</p><p>All of them have real trouble in fields like math and science because in those fields there are correct and incorrect answers, and incorrect answers cannot be met by "that's just, like, your opinion, man". Of course, <a href="http://xkcd.com/451/" title="xkcd.com">xkcd</a> [xkcd.com] shows it far better than I ever could.</p><p>Worth mentioning is that the smarter liberal arts types aren't like this at all. For instance, smart English majors can point out the structures of literature that make it all tick, or exactly how a sentence can be better phrased. Smart history majors can provide all the major sources for a historical event, explain what biases each source had and how that affected their description of the event, piece together what probably actually happened, and are probably some of the best BS detectors out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a CS grad from a liberal arts school , I got to deal with the liberal arts types that parent is referring to quite a bit.There were generally 3 modes of thinking for the less bright liberal arts students : 1 .
" I 'm right , because I 'm morally right , and anyone who disagrees with me is mysogynistic / racist / classist / homophobic .
" This would be found most commonly in the [ insert historically disadvantaged group here ] Studies departments .
They also tend to join up with identity-based groups on campus.2 .
" On the other hand ... " These folks are easy to find in the English or psychology departments , and by avoiding ever drawing any conclusions avoid having their conclusions being demonstrated incorrect .
Often , they were extremely good students in high school , because their high school classes emphasized memorize-regurgitate over critical thinking.3 .
" These 'facts ' make me feel like I 'm right " This is where truthiness trumps facts .
You find these people in the political science and history departments .
They also spend a lot of their time in on-campus activism , and are often humorously misinformed.All of them have real trouble in fields like math and science because in those fields there are correct and incorrect answers , and incorrect answers can not be met by " that 's just , like , your opinion , man " .
Of course , xkcd [ xkcd.com ] shows it far better than I ever could.Worth mentioning is that the smarter liberal arts types are n't like this at all .
For instance , smart English majors can point out the structures of literature that make it all tick , or exactly how a sentence can be better phrased .
Smart history majors can provide all the major sources for a historical event , explain what biases each source had and how that affected their description of the event , piece together what probably actually happened , and are probably some of the best BS detectors out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a CS grad from a liberal arts school, I got to deal with the liberal arts types that parent is referring to quite a bit.There were generally 3 modes of thinking for the less bright liberal arts students:1.
"I'm right, because I'm morally right, and anyone who disagrees with me is mysogynistic / racist / classist / homophobic.
" This would be found most commonly in the [insert historically disadvantaged group here] Studies departments.
They also tend to join up with identity-based groups on campus.2.
"On the other hand ..." These folks are easy to find in the English or psychology departments, and by avoiding ever drawing any conclusions avoid having their conclusions being demonstrated incorrect.
Often, they were extremely good students in high school, because their high school classes emphasized memorize-regurgitate over critical thinking.3.
"These 'facts' make me feel like I'm right" This is where truthiness trumps facts.
You find these people in the political science and history departments.
They also spend a lot of their time in on-campus activism, and are often humorously misinformed.All of them have real trouble in fields like math and science because in those fields there are correct and incorrect answers, and incorrect answers cannot be met by "that's just, like, your opinion, man".
Of course, xkcd [xkcd.com] shows it far better than I ever could.Worth mentioning is that the smarter liberal arts types aren't like this at all.
For instance, smart English majors can point out the structures of literature that make it all tick, or exactly how a sentence can be better phrased.
Smart history majors can provide all the major sources for a historical event, explain what biases each source had and how that affected their description of the event, piece together what probably actually happened, and are probably some of the best BS detectors out there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597986</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>An anonymous Frank</author>
	<datestamp>1259871300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they're looking for engineers with tribalistic tendencies, who may go with the flow if they get the opportunity to cause some damage (or instill some fear) onto whomever they're not quite fond of.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they 're looking for engineers with tribalistic tendencies , who may go with the flow if they get the opportunity to cause some damage ( or instill some fear ) onto whomever they 're not quite fond of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they're looking for engineers with tribalistic tendencies, who may go with the flow if they get the opportunity to cause some damage (or instill some fear) onto whomever they're not quite fond of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593238</id>
	<title>Fundamentalists of All Stripes - Not Just Islamic</title>
	<author>DreDawgie</author>
	<datestamp>1259855100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Having spent a bit of my youth as a "Born Again" Christian (I lean towards secular Buddhism now), I noticed that there are quite a few engineers who also see themselves as fundamentalist Christians. I think
that it's not so much engineering gives you good "terror skills" (although there's something to be said for that argument), but points more toward the notion of the generally conservative engineer, or at least one
that doesn't take too holistic a view of the world, thus making them ripe for all sorts of fundamentalist thought be it Islamic or Christian.
<br> <br> <br>
Frankly I think the neo-cons and Jihadists are just "brothers from another mother" to a certain degree. Fundies are fundies no matter what they believe... it's just they think they have an inside-scoop on how things ought to be, everybody else is wrong, and the world needs to be corrected to fit their views.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having spent a bit of my youth as a " Born Again " Christian ( I lean towards secular Buddhism now ) , I noticed that there are quite a few engineers who also see themselves as fundamentalist Christians .
I think that it 's not so much engineering gives you good " terror skills " ( although there 's something to be said for that argument ) , but points more toward the notion of the generally conservative engineer , or at least one that does n't take too holistic a view of the world , thus making them ripe for all sorts of fundamentalist thought be it Islamic or Christian .
Frankly I think the neo-cons and Jihadists are just " brothers from another mother " to a certain degree .
Fundies are fundies no matter what they believe... it 's just they think they have an inside-scoop on how things ought to be , everybody else is wrong , and the world needs to be corrected to fit their views .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Having spent a bit of my youth as a "Born Again" Christian (I lean towards secular Buddhism now), I noticed that there are quite a few engineers who also see themselves as fundamentalist Christians.
I think
that it's not so much engineering gives you good "terror skills" (although there's something to be said for that argument), but points more toward the notion of the generally conservative engineer, or at least one
that doesn't take too holistic a view of the world, thus making them ripe for all sorts of fundamentalist thought be it Islamic or Christian.
Frankly I think the neo-cons and Jihadists are just "brothers from another mother" to a certain degree.
Fundies are fundies no matter what they believe... it's just they think they have an inside-scoop on how things ought to be, everybody else is wrong, and the world needs to be corrected to fit their views.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594040</id>
	<title>He wore his resume</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess times are tough to find a job! How does one stand out from the crowd. We'll in this case he wore<br>his resume and got alot of attention and free publicity! Now all he has to do is wait for the job offers<br>to come in over the next 100 years (lifetime) and accept only the highest one of them all. Time is on his<br>side... After a few years he'll be recruited by the US gov as a consultant on how to detect and identify<br>these problems in the future and be a high paid civil servant! (See what happened to the high profile<br>hackers and how they attained wealth).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess times are tough to find a job !
How does one stand out from the crowd .
We 'll in this case he worehis resume and got alot of attention and free publicity !
Now all he has to do is wait for the job offersto come in over the next 100 years ( lifetime ) and accept only the highest one of them all .
Time is on hisside... After a few years he 'll be recruited by the US gov as a consultant on how to detect and identifythese problems in the future and be a high paid civil servant !
( See what happened to the high profilehackers and how they attained wealth ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess times are tough to find a job!
How does one stand out from the crowd.
We'll in this case he worehis resume and got alot of attention and free publicity!
Now all he has to do is wait for the job offersto come in over the next 100 years (lifetime) and accept only the highest one of them all.
Time is on hisside... After a few years he'll be recruited by the US gov as a consultant on how to detect and identifythese problems in the future and be a high paid civil servant!
(See what happened to the high profilehackers and how they attained wealth).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603616</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262291820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure an art student couldn't possibly help the terrorists produce some slick propaganda.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure an art student could n't possibly help the terrorists produce some slick propaganda .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure an art student couldn't possibly help the terrorists produce some slick propaganda.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594810</id>
	<title>Re:Simple answer, wrong question.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259860440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>except the part where they said they were all extremely conservative... not left wing socialists which is extremely non-conservative...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>except the part where they said they were all extremely conservative... not left wing socialists which is extremely non-conservative.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>except the part where they said they were all extremely conservative... not left wing socialists which is extremely non-conservative...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595324</id>
	<title>Re:First rule of engineering:</title>
	<author>kungfugleek</author>
	<datestamp>1259862000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't think they do.  I think the engineer-terrorists make the bombs and give them to the rookies to make *them* blow *themselves* up.<p>Disclaimer:  Totally just speculating.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think they do .
I think the engineer-terrorists make the bombs and give them to the rookies to make * them * blow * themselves * up.Disclaimer : Totally just speculating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think they do.
I think the engineer-terrorists make the bombs and give them to the rookies to make *them* blow *themselves* up.Disclaimer:  Totally just speculating.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593892</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603758</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1262252100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Worth mentioning is that the smarter liberal arts types aren't like this at all. For instance, smart English majors can point out the structures of literature that make it all tick, or exactly how a sentence can be better phrased. Smart history majors can provide all the major sources for a historical event, explain what biases each source had and how that affected their description of the event, piece together what probably actually happened, and are probably some of the best BS detectors out there.</p></div><p>Of course, a smart person with a technical degree (math, science, engineering) can reduce literary structures and historic events to numbers and explain such things, mathematically.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Seriously, though. My observation has been that the smart ones of any field are pretty good at "faking" cross discipline competence. That is, they're still as good in other fields as the mediocre types who specialize in said field. You know, the CS student who reads a lot of literature, or the English major who reads climate studies (not the abstracts, the studies). Generally, I think these people are probably just well-balanced individuals.</p><p>Of course, the mediocre people in the fields who <i>aren't</i> flipping mad are likely also cross-disciplined, just not to such great extents.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Worth mentioning is that the smarter liberal arts types are n't like this at all .
For instance , smart English majors can point out the structures of literature that make it all tick , or exactly how a sentence can be better phrased .
Smart history majors can provide all the major sources for a historical event , explain what biases each source had and how that affected their description of the event , piece together what probably actually happened , and are probably some of the best BS detectors out there.Of course , a smart person with a technical degree ( math , science , engineering ) can reduce literary structures and historic events to numbers and explain such things , mathematically .
: ) Seriously , though .
My observation has been that the smart ones of any field are pretty good at " faking " cross discipline competence .
That is , they 're still as good in other fields as the mediocre types who specialize in said field .
You know , the CS student who reads a lot of literature , or the English major who reads climate studies ( not the abstracts , the studies ) .
Generally , I think these people are probably just well-balanced individuals.Of course , the mediocre people in the fields who are n't flipping mad are likely also cross-disciplined , just not to such great extents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Worth mentioning is that the smarter liberal arts types aren't like this at all.
For instance, smart English majors can point out the structures of literature that make it all tick, or exactly how a sentence can be better phrased.
Smart history majors can provide all the major sources for a historical event, explain what biases each source had and how that affected their description of the event, piece together what probably actually happened, and are probably some of the best BS detectors out there.Of course, a smart person with a technical degree (math, science, engineering) can reduce literary structures and historic events to numbers and explain such things, mathematically.
:)Seriously, though.
My observation has been that the smart ones of any field are pretty good at "faking" cross discipline competence.
That is, they're still as good in other fields as the mediocre types who specialize in said field.
You know, the CS student who reads a lot of literature, or the English major who reads climate studies (not the abstracts, the studies).
Generally, I think these people are probably just well-balanced individuals.Of course, the mediocre people in the fields who aren't flipping mad are likely also cross-disciplined, just not to such great extents.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595398</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1259862240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So many of the Engineers I have known view "seeing both sides of the story" as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise. "Right is Right, Wrong is Wrong, I'm Right, and that's all there is to it. Period. Full Stop. Now If You'll Excuse Me, I've got to get back to My Important Thing."</p></div><p>Weird, but my experience is exactly opposite of yours. Most idiots who don't bother doubting their own righteousness and live their life with a permanent Holier Than Thou attitude are those who've never learned logic or science and, as such, lack the rational skills to see their own foolishness.</p><p>Artists specially, being submerged in an area so filled with subjectivity that they tend to believe everything, even gravity or the laws of thermodynamics, are an opinion and that 'believing differently' automatically liberates them from their consequences but yet, somehow, their own belief is always the "right" one and anything else is wrong. Don't ask me to explain their thought processes or lack thereof.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So many of the Engineers I have known view " seeing both sides of the story " as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise .
" Right is Right , Wrong is Wrong , I 'm Right , and that 's all there is to it .
Period. Full Stop .
Now If You 'll Excuse Me , I 've got to get back to My Important Thing .
" Weird , but my experience is exactly opposite of yours .
Most idiots who do n't bother doubting their own righteousness and live their life with a permanent Holier Than Thou attitude are those who 've never learned logic or science and , as such , lack the rational skills to see their own foolishness.Artists specially , being submerged in an area so filled with subjectivity that they tend to believe everything , even gravity or the laws of thermodynamics , are an opinion and that 'believing differently ' automatically liberates them from their consequences but yet , somehow , their own belief is always the " right " one and anything else is wrong .
Do n't ask me to explain their thought processes or lack thereof .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So many of the Engineers I have known view "seeing both sides of the story" as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise.
"Right is Right, Wrong is Wrong, I'm Right, and that's all there is to it.
Period. Full Stop.
Now If You'll Excuse Me, I've got to get back to My Important Thing.
"Weird, but my experience is exactly opposite of yours.
Most idiots who don't bother doubting their own righteousness and live their life with a permanent Holier Than Thou attitude are those who've never learned logic or science and, as such, lack the rational skills to see their own foolishness.Artists specially, being submerged in an area so filled with subjectivity that they tend to believe everything, even gravity or the laws of thermodynamics, are an opinion and that 'believing differently' automatically liberates them from their consequences but yet, somehow, their own belief is always the "right" one and anything else is wrong.
Don't ask me to explain their thought processes or lack thereof.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597596</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>dcollins</author>
	<datestamp>1259869920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Ask any engineer who has designed a product..."</p><p>Article summary: Those who can, do. Those who can't, become unemployed, radicalized, and possibly terrorists.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Ask any engineer who has designed a product... " Article summary : Those who can , do .
Those who ca n't , become unemployed , radicalized , and possibly terrorists .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Ask any engineer who has designed a product..."Article summary: Those who can, do.
Those who can't, become unemployed, radicalized, and possibly terrorists.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593138</id>
	<title>Unabomber?</title>
	<author>snot.dotted</author>
	<datestamp>1259854560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Theodore Kaczynski was a mathematician,
Western educated, and by all accounts a model student and young academic. Was the CIA involved in turning him into a manic individual ?
There is something about the obsessive nature that a person needs to succeed in science, engineering or maths that is part of the terrorist psyche.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Theodore Kaczynski was a mathematician , Western educated , and by all accounts a model student and young academic .
Was the CIA involved in turning him into a manic individual ?
There is something about the obsessive nature that a person needs to succeed in science , engineering or maths that is part of the terrorist psyche .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Theodore Kaczynski was a mathematician,
Western educated, and by all accounts a model student and young academic.
Was the CIA involved in turning him into a manic individual ?
There is something about the obsessive nature that a person needs to succeed in science, engineering or maths that is part of the terrorist psyche.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593184</id>
	<title>It's the idealism strain.</title>
	<author>nagarjun</author>
	<datestamp>1259854860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think all engineers/hackers have a certain amount of idealism in them. When they see something that is badly broken they want to fix it, and many are willing to give their time/money/talent generously.</p><p>Terrorists, in an admittedly warped sense, are idealists too. I'm an Iraqi, I think the US is a massive "bug", so I'm going to try to fix it at all costs. If I'm convinced the US is a massive bug in the software system that is the world, it makes it possible for me to want to obliterate 3,000 innocent Americans.</p><p>I'm no shrink and it sounds sacrilegious, but kernel hackers and Mohammad Atta's pals may have a lot in common. Each group is trying to make the world better, at least in their own minds.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think all engineers/hackers have a certain amount of idealism in them .
When they see something that is badly broken they want to fix it , and many are willing to give their time/money/talent generously.Terrorists , in an admittedly warped sense , are idealists too .
I 'm an Iraqi , I think the US is a massive " bug " , so I 'm going to try to fix it at all costs .
If I 'm convinced the US is a massive bug in the software system that is the world , it makes it possible for me to want to obliterate 3,000 innocent Americans.I 'm no shrink and it sounds sacrilegious , but kernel hackers and Mohammad Atta 's pals may have a lot in common .
Each group is trying to make the world better , at least in their own minds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think all engineers/hackers have a certain amount of idealism in them.
When they see something that is badly broken they want to fix it, and many are willing to give their time/money/talent generously.Terrorists, in an admittedly warped sense, are idealists too.
I'm an Iraqi, I think the US is a massive "bug", so I'm going to try to fix it at all costs.
If I'm convinced the US is a massive bug in the software system that is the world, it makes it possible for me to want to obliterate 3,000 innocent Americans.I'm no shrink and it sounds sacrilegious, but kernel hackers and Mohammad Atta's pals may have a lot in common.
Each group is trying to make the world better, at least in their own minds.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604970</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>docwatson223</author>
	<datestamp>1262273520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, it worked for the French in WWII!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it worked for the French in WWII !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it worked for the French in WWII!
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595972</id>
	<title>Blindly swallow authority?  That's engineer to a T</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1259863980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me? Uh oh. We're a "no-go" on that one, Houston.</i></p><p>Engineers not religious?  They are more religious than anyone, it's just that the religion is engineering and they take a ton of convincing that engineers they consider to be "above" them are wrong even when the evidence is clear.  Absolute obedience to authority comes naturally to an engineer because they spend so much time early on gathering facts from authority figures that over time they lose the ability to question what they are being told, they just accept it naturally.</p><p>I know because I'm one too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me ?
Uh oh .
We 're a " no-go " on that one , Houston.Engineers not religious ?
They are more religious than anyone , it 's just that the religion is engineering and they take a ton of convincing that engineers they consider to be " above " them are wrong even when the evidence is clear .
Absolute obedience to authority comes naturally to an engineer because they spend so much time early on gathering facts from authority figures that over time they lose the ability to question what they are being told , they just accept it naturally.I know because I 'm one too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me?
Uh oh.
We're a "no-go" on that one, Houston.Engineers not religious?
They are more religious than anyone, it's just that the religion is engineering and they take a ton of convincing that engineers they consider to be "above" them are wrong even when the evidence is clear.
Absolute obedience to authority comes naturally to an engineer because they spend so much time early on gathering facts from authority figures that over time they lose the ability to question what they are being told, they just accept it naturally.I know because I'm one too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594150</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>hamvil</author>
	<datestamp>1259858400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>your are wrong sir...


I'm an engineer and nothing in my work is a dogma or just black and white. Each time I work for a customer (i design and deploy custom wireless networks) I have to face new trade-off between time/cost etc. and i constantly challenge my skill set otherwise I would still my customers to stick with wired systems with good old diesel generators instead of designing wireless network with solar/hydro and water power.


Of course as a wise man said:


"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled."


So yes things like shannon capacity for a wireless channel are a dogma for me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>your are wrong sir.. . I 'm an engineer and nothing in my work is a dogma or just black and white .
Each time I work for a customer ( i design and deploy custom wireless networks ) I have to face new trade-off between time/cost etc .
and i constantly challenge my skill set otherwise I would still my customers to stick with wired systems with good old diesel generators instead of designing wireless network with solar/hydro and water power .
Of course as a wise man said : " For a successful technology , reality must take precedence over public relations , for nature can not be fooled .
" So yes things like shannon capacity for a wireless channel are a dogma for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your are wrong sir...


I'm an engineer and nothing in my work is a dogma or just black and white.
Each time I work for a customer (i design and deploy custom wireless networks) I have to face new trade-off between time/cost etc.
and i constantly challenge my skill set otherwise I would still my customers to stick with wired systems with good old diesel generators instead of designing wireless network with solar/hydro and water power.
Of course as a wise man said:


"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
"


So yes things like shannon capacity for a wireless channel are a dogma for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593272</id>
	<title>Overlooking something obvious...</title>
	<author>TheGreatOrangePeel</author>
	<datestamp>1259855160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's pull out Occam's razor and shave a bit...</p><p>If you wanted to blow up a bridge, wouldn't it help to know how bridges are built?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's pull out Occam 's razor and shave a bit...If you wanted to blow up a bridge , would n't it help to know how bridges are built ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's pull out Occam's razor and shave a bit...If you wanted to blow up a bridge, wouldn't it help to know how bridges are built?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592886</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1259853420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not only that, but if you're looking for someone who's also frustrated and ready to blow up the world, you could do a lot worse than to find an engineer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only that , but if you 're looking for someone who 's also frustrated and ready to blow up the world , you could do a lot worse than to find an engineer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only that, but if you're looking for someone who's also frustrated and ready to blow up the world, you could do a lot worse than to find an engineer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599986</id>
	<title>Re:We Live in an Illogical World</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259837280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your are assuming the goal was to take down the plane and not just cause mass panic that effectively shuts down the aviation industry. "Dead men tell no tales." If the plane was destroyed, we would know the plane broke up, but not why. The ensuing investigation would give us enough time to think of a more rational response.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your are assuming the goal was to take down the plane and not just cause mass panic that effectively shuts down the aviation industry .
" Dead men tell no tales .
" If the plane was destroyed , we would know the plane broke up , but not why .
The ensuing investigation would give us enough time to think of a more rational response .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your are assuming the goal was to take down the plane and not just cause mass panic that effectively shuts down the aviation industry.
"Dead men tell no tales.
" If the plane was destroyed, we would know the plane broke up, but not why.
The ensuing investigation would give us enough time to think of a more rational response.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594090</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>bwcbwc</author>
	<datestamp>1259858100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, a disdain for ambiguity can also manifest itself in over-engineering to cover all possible outcomes, rather than a frozen mind-set. Just because you want a definitive answer doesn't mean you are wedded to a particular answer. \_effective\_ engineers will do additional research to resolve ambiguities rather than just brushing people off. Unless of course, the question is so stupid (PEBCAK anyone?) that it would take weeks to bring the questioner up to speed as to what the real issues are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , a disdain for ambiguity can also manifest itself in over-engineering to cover all possible outcomes , rather than a frozen mind-set .
Just because you want a definitive answer does n't mean you are wedded to a particular answer .
\ _effective \ _ engineers will do additional research to resolve ambiguities rather than just brushing people off .
Unless of course , the question is so stupid ( PEBCAK anyone ?
) that it would take weeks to bring the questioner up to speed as to what the real issues are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, a disdain for ambiguity can also manifest itself in over-engineering to cover all possible outcomes, rather than a frozen mind-set.
Just because you want a definitive answer doesn't mean you are wedded to a particular answer.
\_effective\_ engineers will do additional research to resolve ambiguities rather than just brushing people off.
Unless of course, the question is so stupid (PEBCAK anyone?
) that it would take weeks to bring the questioner up to speed as to what the real issues are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599882</id>
	<title>Bomb building skills</title>
	<author>prefec2</author>
	<datestamp>1259836560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An artist or a lawyer normally do not have the necessary skills to switch a lightbulb so how could they probably build a bomb. Furthermore lawyers are better in targeting and destroying companies or the legal system. Artists are good in making fun of western symbols and values e.g. ($ EUR YEN). Also engineering students are more likely to be treated badly by others. Hey they are geeks so they respond "good" when they are the target of jokes. They are more likely introvert. The same persons tend to shoot of peoples heads in high schools for the same reasons.</p><p>So if someone thinks he is mistreated by all other people he most likely does not have any sympathy left for those jerks. Therefore the best way to prevent terror recruitment is to integrate geeks and even dorks back in society. Also as societies: We should not treat other societies as inferior, which is also a source of terrorism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An artist or a lawyer normally do not have the necessary skills to switch a lightbulb so how could they probably build a bomb .
Furthermore lawyers are better in targeting and destroying companies or the legal system .
Artists are good in making fun of western symbols and values e.g .
( $ EUR YEN ) .
Also engineering students are more likely to be treated badly by others .
Hey they are geeks so they respond " good " when they are the target of jokes .
They are more likely introvert .
The same persons tend to shoot of peoples heads in high schools for the same reasons.So if someone thinks he is mistreated by all other people he most likely does not have any sympathy left for those jerks .
Therefore the best way to prevent terror recruitment is to integrate geeks and even dorks back in society .
Also as societies : We should not treat other societies as inferior , which is also a source of terrorism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An artist or a lawyer normally do not have the necessary skills to switch a lightbulb so how could they probably build a bomb.
Furthermore lawyers are better in targeting and destroying companies or the legal system.
Artists are good in making fun of western symbols and values e.g.
($ EUR YEN).
Also engineering students are more likely to be treated badly by others.
Hey they are geeks so they respond "good" when they are the target of jokes.
They are more likely introvert.
The same persons tend to shoot of peoples heads in high schools for the same reasons.So if someone thinks he is mistreated by all other people he most likely does not have any sympathy left for those jerks.
Therefore the best way to prevent terror recruitment is to integrate geeks and even dorks back in society.
Also as societies: We should not treat other societies as inferior, which is also a source of terrorism.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593300</id>
	<title>Stop shoe-gazing!</title>
	<author>calderra</author>
	<datestamp>1259855400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey, everyone, stop staring at your penny-loafers for a minute. Why are engineers really chosen to be terrorists? Because they're socially awkward. It's not because they're so good at blowing stuff up (look at how many attempts fail for technical reasons). It's not because they're religious zealots (college graduates are more likely to be non-religious, or otherwise liberal). It's because a guy comes along and shows this brilliant mind a way to finally "belong" by joining a "family" that will care for him.

It's the same reason so many brilliant minds became hackers and phreakers and so forth back in the day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , everyone , stop staring at your penny-loafers for a minute .
Why are engineers really chosen to be terrorists ?
Because they 're socially awkward .
It 's not because they 're so good at blowing stuff up ( look at how many attempts fail for technical reasons ) .
It 's not because they 're religious zealots ( college graduates are more likely to be non-religious , or otherwise liberal ) .
It 's because a guy comes along and shows this brilliant mind a way to finally " belong " by joining a " family " that will care for him .
It 's the same reason so many brilliant minds became hackers and phreakers and so forth back in the day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, everyone, stop staring at your penny-loafers for a minute.
Why are engineers really chosen to be terrorists?
Because they're socially awkward.
It's not because they're so good at blowing stuff up (look at how many attempts fail for technical reasons).
It's not because they're religious zealots (college graduates are more likely to be non-religious, or otherwise liberal).
It's because a guy comes along and shows this brilliant mind a way to finally "belong" by joining a "family" that will care for him.
It's the same reason so many brilliant minds became hackers and phreakers and so forth back in the day.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594340</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>BewireNomali</author>
	<datestamp>1259858940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i think you're onto something. engineers have the skillset. so like any other employer, terrorists go looking for the best qualified candidates.
<br> <br>
also engineers tend to be introverts and introverts tend to not have a worldly social perspective which IMO makes them more susceptible to a fringish pitch.
<br> <br>
i have no source and am too lazy to google it - but I once heard Bush was reputed to say that "we'll invade and let MTV do the rest" - in regards to how to prevent terrorism in the future. conformism is an enemy to this sort of thing. you're not gonna suicide bomb when you're scraping pennies together for the latest apple product on your way to Daytona for spring break.
<br> <br>
engineers tend to not be conformists (their earning potential and value as an employee revolves around some measure of uncommon thinking) and this same skillset imo makes them vulnerable to the fringe pitch.
<br> <br>
also, it helps to be non-white, under 30, unmarried with no children, and harbor some feeling of marginalization to begin with.</htmltext>
<tokenext>i think you 're onto something .
engineers have the skillset .
so like any other employer , terrorists go looking for the best qualified candidates .
also engineers tend to be introverts and introverts tend to not have a worldly social perspective which IMO makes them more susceptible to a fringish pitch .
i have no source and am too lazy to google it - but I once heard Bush was reputed to say that " we 'll invade and let MTV do the rest " - in regards to how to prevent terrorism in the future .
conformism is an enemy to this sort of thing .
you 're not gon na suicide bomb when you 're scraping pennies together for the latest apple product on your way to Daytona for spring break .
engineers tend to not be conformists ( their earning potential and value as an employee revolves around some measure of uncommon thinking ) and this same skillset imo makes them vulnerable to the fringe pitch .
also , it helps to be non-white , under 30 , unmarried with no children , and harbor some feeling of marginalization to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i think you're onto something.
engineers have the skillset.
so like any other employer, terrorists go looking for the best qualified candidates.
also engineers tend to be introverts and introverts tend to not have a worldly social perspective which IMO makes them more susceptible to a fringish pitch.
i have no source and am too lazy to google it - but I once heard Bush was reputed to say that "we'll invade and let MTV do the rest" - in regards to how to prevent terrorism in the future.
conformism is an enemy to this sort of thing.
you're not gonna suicide bomb when you're scraping pennies together for the latest apple product on your way to Daytona for spring break.
engineers tend to not be conformists (their earning potential and value as an employee revolves around some measure of uncommon thinking) and this same skillset imo makes them vulnerable to the fringe pitch.
also, it helps to be non-white, under 30, unmarried with no children, and harbor some feeling of marginalization to begin with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593246</id>
	<title>Engineers Have More Fun</title>
	<author>oakwine</author>
	<datestamp>1259855100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the unofficial motto of various aerospace corporations used to be, "Everything we make either kills people or gives them cancer!"

When you think about it, the military industrial complex is focused on developing destructive devices. You don't see them building farm tractors or a new line of gardening tools.

So, if you are an engineer perhaps it is only a matter of choosing an employer.

I have never noticed engineers being conservative nor particularly religious neither.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the unofficial motto of various aerospace corporations used to be , " Everything we make either kills people or gives them cancer !
" When you think about it , the military industrial complex is focused on developing destructive devices .
You do n't see them building farm tractors or a new line of gardening tools .
So , if you are an engineer perhaps it is only a matter of choosing an employer .
I have never noticed engineers being conservative nor particularly religious neither .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the unofficial motto of various aerospace corporations used to be, "Everything we make either kills people or gives them cancer!
"

When you think about it, the military industrial complex is focused on developing destructive devices.
You don't see them building farm tractors or a new line of gardening tools.
So, if you are an engineer perhaps it is only a matter of choosing an employer.
I have never noticed engineers being conservative nor particularly religious neither.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595128</id>
	<title>Re:Engineers make the best soldiers</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1259861520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are an idiot.</p><p>A) You know nothing about the support costs of a combat engineer.</p><p>B) You know nothing about effective strategy and tactics.</p><p>C) You know nothing about special forces soldiers.</p><p>In the culture we are talking about everyone goes to school to be an engineer. It has a lot of cultural prestige. In fact many people who are not engineers claim to be one.</p><p>I don't think I have ever seen a 'serious' post that pointed out the posters ignorance and stupidity more then yours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are an idiot.A ) You know nothing about the support costs of a combat engineer.B ) You know nothing about effective strategy and tactics.C ) You know nothing about special forces soldiers.In the culture we are talking about everyone goes to school to be an engineer .
It has a lot of cultural prestige .
In fact many people who are not engineers claim to be one.I do n't think I have ever seen a 'serious ' post that pointed out the posters ignorance and stupidity more then yours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are an idiot.A) You know nothing about the support costs of a combat engineer.B) You know nothing about effective strategy and tactics.C) You know nothing about special forces soldiers.In the culture we are talking about everyone goes to school to be an engineer.
It has a lot of cultural prestige.
In fact many people who are not engineers claim to be one.I don't think I have ever seen a 'serious' post that pointed out the posters ignorance and stupidity more then yours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597252</id>
	<title>Could You Elaberate?</title>
	<author>LifesABeach</author>
	<datestamp>1259868420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't know there was a place to go and research the "resumes" of Terrorists.  Most Terrorists I see on CNN are either children with nothing left to lose, or someone throwing the Koran in other peoples face.  There are the short stories of folks that make bombs, but these stories are in the Obituaries.  I have yet to see any reference in the "Jobs", "Business", or "Homes" section of the L.A.Times advertising folks to get involved with someone's jihad.  Now that I think about it, maybe if a Terrorist were to put their jihad request on CraigsList.com and then got spammed for male enhancement drugs; that would be funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't know there was a place to go and research the " resumes " of Terrorists .
Most Terrorists I see on CNN are either children with nothing left to lose , or someone throwing the Koran in other peoples face .
There are the short stories of folks that make bombs , but these stories are in the Obituaries .
I have yet to see any reference in the " Jobs " , " Business " , or " Homes " section of the L.A.Times advertising folks to get involved with someone 's jihad .
Now that I think about it , maybe if a Terrorist were to put their jihad request on CraigsList.com and then got spammed for male enhancement drugs ; that would be funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't know there was a place to go and research the "resumes" of Terrorists.
Most Terrorists I see on CNN are either children with nothing left to lose, or someone throwing the Koran in other peoples face.
There are the short stories of folks that make bombs, but these stories are in the Obituaries.
I have yet to see any reference in the "Jobs", "Business", or "Homes" section of the L.A.Times advertising folks to get involved with someone's jihad.
Now that I think about it, maybe if a Terrorist were to put their jihad request on CraigsList.com and then got spammed for male enhancement drugs; that would be funny.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592934</id>
	<title>Maybe it's the other way around?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe these old clerics are putting high recruiting resources into enginering schools because those are the resources that they really need. Poor farm boys used to carry bombs into marketplaces are a dime a dozen. They need people who can make the bombs that actually do the dirty work.<br> <br>And there doesn't seem to be a lack of fundamentalism in certain areas so finding them in wide and well adopted fields such as enginering shouldn't be an issue in and of itself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe these old clerics are putting high recruiting resources into enginering schools because those are the resources that they really need .
Poor farm boys used to carry bombs into marketplaces are a dime a dozen .
They need people who can make the bombs that actually do the dirty work .
And there does n't seem to be a lack of fundamentalism in certain areas so finding them in wide and well adopted fields such as enginering should n't be an issue in and of itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe these old clerics are putting high recruiting resources into enginering schools because those are the resources that they really need.
Poor farm boys used to carry bombs into marketplaces are a dime a dozen.
They need people who can make the bombs that actually do the dirty work.
And there doesn't seem to be a lack of fundamentalism in certain areas so finding them in wide and well adopted fields such as enginering shouldn't be an issue in and of itself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592878</id>
	<title>Why are so many terrorists literate?</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1259853420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does literacy cause terrorism? If so, the solution is simple.

</p><p>Also, this was discussed here on Slashdot twice last year:

</p><p> <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/29/1614206" title="slashdot.org">Engineers Have a Terrorist Mindset?</a> [slashdot.org] (Jan 2008)

</p><p> <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/03/1943247" title="slashdot.org">Engineers Make Good Terrorists?</a> [slashdot.org] (Apr 2008)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does literacy cause terrorism ?
If so , the solution is simple .
Also , this was discussed here on Slashdot twice last year : Engineers Have a Terrorist Mindset ?
[ slashdot.org ] ( Jan 2008 ) Engineers Make Good Terrorists ?
[ slashdot.org ] ( Apr 2008 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does literacy cause terrorism?
If so, the solution is simple.
Also, this was discussed here on Slashdot twice last year:

 Engineers Have a Terrorist Mindset?
[slashdot.org] (Jan 2008)

 Engineers Make Good Terrorists?
[slashdot.org] (Apr 2008)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594206</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Oligonicella</author>
	<datestamp>1259858520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And just why aren't those engineers getting into the bucket and launching themselves at a target?  Oh, they don't have a fanatical belief to die for.  Love of project != wanting to die.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And just why are n't those engineers getting into the bucket and launching themselves at a target ?
Oh , they do n't have a fanatical belief to die for .
Love of project ! = wanting to die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And just why aren't those engineers getting into the bucket and launching themselves at a target?
Oh, they don't have a fanatical belief to die for.
Love of project != wanting to die.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595702</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>story645</author>
	<datestamp>1259863080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking, and it doesn't challenge their religious dogma</p></div><p>Knowing a lot of religious social conservatives (being a religious social liberal myself), there's a simpler reason. All the people I know want to get married, have kids, do all the normal socially conservative things, and engineering is the fastest path to all that 'cause it comes with great pay for only 4/5 years of work. The article says as much when it talks about how the countries these people are from were pushing engineering as the stable well paying route to success.</p><p>Most other professional degrees take longer for less pay, though you'll also probably find a very high percentage of religious social conservatives in jobs like accounting and the therapies (occupational therapy, speech therapy, physical therapy, social work to a lesser extent). (The therapies are where most of the orthodox Jewish girls I know end up.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking , and it does n't challenge their religious dogmaKnowing a lot of religious social conservatives ( being a religious social liberal myself ) , there 's a simpler reason .
All the people I know want to get married , have kids , do all the normal socially conservative things , and engineering is the fastest path to all that 'cause it comes with great pay for only 4/5 years of work .
The article says as much when it talks about how the countries these people are from were pushing engineering as the stable well paying route to success.Most other professional degrees take longer for less pay , though you 'll also probably find a very high percentage of religious social conservatives in jobs like accounting and the therapies ( occupational therapy , speech therapy , physical therapy , social work to a lesser extent ) .
( The therapies are where most of the orthodox Jewish girls I know end up .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking, and it doesn't challenge their religious dogmaKnowing a lot of religious social conservatives (being a religious social liberal myself), there's a simpler reason.
All the people I know want to get married, have kids, do all the normal socially conservative things, and engineering is the fastest path to all that 'cause it comes with great pay for only 4/5 years of work.
The article says as much when it talks about how the countries these people are from were pushing engineering as the stable well paying route to success.Most other professional degrees take longer for less pay, though you'll also probably find a very high percentage of religious social conservatives in jobs like accounting and the therapies (occupational therapy, speech therapy, physical therapy, social work to a lesser extent).
(The therapies are where most of the orthodox Jewish girls I know end up.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597210</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259868180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion. Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook</p></div><p>I've worked with many engineers (and brilliant ones at that) who are Young-Earth-Creationists and Christian fundamentalists. They screamed at me when I used words like "assumed", and demanded definite evidence (in our projects). That always fascinated me.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion .
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlookI 've worked with many engineers ( and brilliant ones at that ) who are Young-Earth-Creationists and Christian fundamentalists .
They screamed at me when I used words like " assumed " , and demanded definite evidence ( in our projects ) .
That always fascinated me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion.
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlookI've worked with many engineers (and brilliant ones at that) who are Young-Earth-Creationists and Christian fundamentalists.
They screamed at me when I used words like "assumed", and demanded definite evidence (in our projects).
That always fascinated me.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597462</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>MaskDeSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1259869200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I guess it really depends on the school.  I attended a prestigious Institute of Technology for my undergrad studies, and in addition to everyone taking a quantum mechanics course, everyone had to take quite a few courses in the humanities and social sciences.  It seems that a lot of people here equate engineering with black and white type thinking, but it simply is not the case.  The subtleties and nuances involved in being a good engineer... well, I guess that's it right there, isn't it?  A good engineer can see the subtleties but a mediocre one will see one right way and one wrong way.

Now mathematicians, on the other hand... but they can't do anything useful, so we should all be fine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it really depends on the school .
I attended a prestigious Institute of Technology for my undergrad studies , and in addition to everyone taking a quantum mechanics course , everyone had to take quite a few courses in the humanities and social sciences .
It seems that a lot of people here equate engineering with black and white type thinking , but it simply is not the case .
The subtleties and nuances involved in being a good engineer... well , I guess that 's it right there , is n't it ?
A good engineer can see the subtleties but a mediocre one will see one right way and one wrong way .
Now mathematicians , on the other hand... but they ca n't do anything useful , so we should all be fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it really depends on the school.
I attended a prestigious Institute of Technology for my undergrad studies, and in addition to everyone taking a quantum mechanics course, everyone had to take quite a few courses in the humanities and social sciences.
It seems that a lot of people here equate engineering with black and white type thinking, but it simply is not the case.
The subtleties and nuances involved in being a good engineer... well, I guess that's it right there, isn't it?
A good engineer can see the subtleties but a mediocre one will see one right way and one wrong way.
Now mathematicians, on the other hand... but they can't do anything useful, so we should all be fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594998</id>
	<title>Engineering Schools?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259861040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been curious about what kind of education you get in a "Prestigious" University that doesn't emphasize knowing your tools and testing your procedures.  Why didn't the bomb go off?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been curious about what kind of education you get in a " Prestigious " University that does n't emphasize knowing your tools and testing your procedures .
Why did n't the bomb go off ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been curious about what kind of education you get in a "Prestigious" University that doesn't emphasize knowing your tools and testing your procedures.
Why didn't the bomb go off?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593892</id>
	<title>First rule of engineering:</title>
	<author>nate nice</author>
	<datestamp>1259857500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Never blow yourself up!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Never blow yourself up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Never blow yourself up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593296</id>
	<title>What difference does it make?</title>
	<author>assertation</author>
	<datestamp>1259855340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would agree that engineers, as a group, ( networking types too ), tend to have those traits.</p><p>So what?</p><p>Every profession and grouping of humans has a set of traits that are dominant in that group.   All of those traits are dominant in that group for reasons, some good and some not so flattering.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would agree that engineers , as a group , ( networking types too ) , tend to have those traits.So what ? Every profession and grouping of humans has a set of traits that are dominant in that group .
All of those traits are dominant in that group for reasons , some good and some not so flattering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would agree that engineers, as a group, ( networking types too ), tend to have those traits.So what?Every profession and grouping of humans has a set of traits that are dominant in that group.
All of those traits are dominant in that group for reasons, some good and some not so flattering.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593836</id>
	<title>Re:Engineering vs science?</title>
	<author>malp</author>
	<datestamp>1259857260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This would be in contrast to science, where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why").</p></div><p>Really? I thought the goal of engineering was to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why") and then do something useful with this knowledge. After all, would you rather hire the engineer who knew the rules or who knew and understood them? Or would you rather hire the string theorist, whose theories haven't yielded any testable predictions that were not already predicted by older theories.</p><p>BTW, you could substitute any number of common occupations into Timothy's post. Take out the bit about building codes and you could substitute in cook, artist, writer, scientist, businessman, citizen etc all while keeping the post sensible.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be in contrast to science , where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ( " find out what the constraints are , and why " ) .Really ?
I thought the goal of engineering was to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ( " find out what the constraints are , and why " ) and then do something useful with this knowledge .
After all , would you rather hire the engineer who knew the rules or who knew and understood them ?
Or would you rather hire the string theorist , whose theories have n't yielded any testable predictions that were not already predicted by older theories.BTW , you could substitute any number of common occupations into Timothy 's post .
Take out the bit about building codes and you could substitute in cook , artist , writer , scientist , businessman , citizen etc all while keeping the post sensible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be in contrast to science, where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why").Really?
I thought the goal of engineering was to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why") and then do something useful with this knowledge.
After all, would you rather hire the engineer who knew the rules or who knew and understood them?
Or would you rather hire the string theorist, whose theories haven't yielded any testable predictions that were not already predicted by older theories.BTW, you could substitute any number of common occupations into Timothy's post.
Take out the bit about building codes and you could substitute in cook, artist, writer, scientist, businessman, citizen etc all while keeping the post sensible.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602236</id>
	<title>Re:Ease of travel?</title>
	<author>Mathmagician</author>
	<datestamp>1259854740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yea this is correct I think.  They can't get into the US or Europe without studying a high tech field like Engineering.  Now why it's Engineering over Math or CS or Physics I don't know.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yea this is correct I think .
They ca n't get into the US or Europe without studying a high tech field like Engineering .
Now why it 's Engineering over Math or CS or Physics I do n't know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yea this is correct I think.
They can't get into the US or Europe without studying a high tech field like Engineering.
Now why it's Engineering over Math or CS or Physics I don't know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594564</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>radtea</author>
	<datestamp>1259859600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Not all terrorists are religious.</i></p><p>No, but all Islamic, Catholic, Protestant, Hindu and Sikh terrorists are.</p><p>The three guys left over aren't, but are you really worried about them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all terrorists are religious.No , but all Islamic , Catholic , Protestant , Hindu and Sikh terrorists are.The three guys left over are n't , but are you really worried about them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all terrorists are religious.No, but all Islamic, Catholic, Protestant, Hindu and Sikh terrorists are.The three guys left over aren't, but are you really worried about them?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595606</id>
	<title>Women.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1259862780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>based on the observations of religious and/or extremist groups in turkey, i can assure you the most fertile places they prefer are wherever there are few women. for whatever reason, women quite dampen extremism wherever they are. even in religious schools that allow females and males to study together, you cant find that many extremists. but, in schools or departments which have a very low percentage of females, i have came upon more extremists during my education life. actually, some of my family acquaintances also fell into such brainwashing, even though they were from thoroughly secular and modernist families.</p><p>as a result, religious and extremist circles try to separate females and males as much as possible, wherever they can pass their will.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>based on the observations of religious and/or extremist groups in turkey , i can assure you the most fertile places they prefer are wherever there are few women .
for whatever reason , women quite dampen extremism wherever they are .
even in religious schools that allow females and males to study together , you cant find that many extremists .
but , in schools or departments which have a very low percentage of females , i have came upon more extremists during my education life .
actually , some of my family acquaintances also fell into such brainwashing , even though they were from thoroughly secular and modernist families.as a result , religious and extremist circles try to separate females and males as much as possible , wherever they can pass their will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>based on the observations of religious and/or extremist groups in turkey, i can assure you the most fertile places they prefer are wherever there are few women.
for whatever reason, women quite dampen extremism wherever they are.
even in religious schools that allow females and males to study together, you cant find that many extremists.
but, in schools or departments which have a very low percentage of females, i have came upon more extremists during my education life.
actually, some of my family acquaintances also fell into such brainwashing, even though they were from thoroughly secular and modernist families.as a result, religious and extremist circles try to separate females and males as much as possible, wherever they can pass their will.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595014</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>mehrotra.akash</author>
	<datestamp>1259861040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...</p><p>why?</p><p>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking, and it doesn't challenge their religious dogma like the other departments with their more rounded gen ed requirements do.  Let alone the departments in Arts and Sciences like Geology, Biology, Paleontology, etc that the findings of openly challenge their dogma.</p></div><p>No, its because engg. students pray more to pass</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...why ? because engineering is a world of black and white thinking , and it does n't challenge their religious dogma like the other departments with their more rounded gen ed requirements do .
Let alone the departments in Arts and Sciences like Geology , Biology , Paleontology , etc that the findings of openly challenge their dogma.No , its because engg .
students pray more to pass</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...why?because engineering is a world of black and white thinking, and it doesn't challenge their religious dogma like the other departments with their more rounded gen ed requirements do.
Let alone the departments in Arts and Sciences like Geology, Biology, Paleontology, etc that the findings of openly challenge their dogma.No, its because engg.
students pray more to pass
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597866</id>
	<title>Missing the importance of social status</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259870820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Social status plays a large part in who is a terrorist, and a leader with technical skills and leadership qualities can command a cell. Leaders can even have suspect technical skills if they have good technicians, and the leadership charisma and power to sway the masses. History is filled with revolutionaries from elite families. Many of them disdain the family wealth! Yummy dreamy virgins versus those boring clan bakes with a rigid hierarchical structure is a no-brainer! A terrorist without leadership skills is the dead goose sprouting a firecracker in his shorts and riding tourist class, or the pimple-puss in the trenchcoat sporting a rifle and a hard-on for bullies!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Social status plays a large part in who is a terrorist , and a leader with technical skills and leadership qualities can command a cell .
Leaders can even have suspect technical skills if they have good technicians , and the leadership charisma and power to sway the masses .
History is filled with revolutionaries from elite families .
Many of them disdain the family wealth !
Yummy dreamy virgins versus those boring clan bakes with a rigid hierarchical structure is a no-brainer !
A terrorist without leadership skills is the dead goose sprouting a firecracker in his shorts and riding tourist class , or the pimple-puss in the trenchcoat sporting a rifle and a hard-on for bullies !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Social status plays a large part in who is a terrorist, and a leader with technical skills and leadership qualities can command a cell.
Leaders can even have suspect technical skills if they have good technicians, and the leadership charisma and power to sway the masses.
History is filled with revolutionaries from elite families.
Many of them disdain the family wealth!
Yummy dreamy virgins versus those boring clan bakes with a rigid hierarchical structure is a no-brainer!
A terrorist without leadership skills is the dead goose sprouting a firecracker in his shorts and riding tourist class, or the pimple-puss in the trenchcoat sporting a rifle and a hard-on for bullies!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596840</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>ukyoCE</author>
	<datestamp>1259866800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you need to distinguish between good engineering and bad engineering.  Engineers disdain compromise, and this is what makes the engineers who do not even more valuable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you need to distinguish between good engineering and bad engineering .
Engineers disdain compromise , and this is what makes the engineers who do not even more valuable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you need to distinguish between good engineering and bad engineering.
Engineers disdain compromise, and this is what makes the engineers who do not even more valuable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598766</id>
	<title>Horseshit</title>
	<author>rahvin112</author>
	<datestamp>1259831100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.</p></div></blockquote><p>And all black people are criminals, Hispanics are Lazy, Jews are greedy and Arabs are terrorists. Do you generalize much? Your attitude that all of one group are similar is no different than racism. And what's your basis for this pearl of wisdom? That Bin Ladin and Christmas NW bomber are both engineers? How about the 4 doctors that tried to blow up Heathrow? How about Bin Ladin's second in command is a doctor? In fact much of the leadership of Al Queda has medical degrees. Should we also single out doctors as potential terrorists as well?</p><p>I can't believe this made the front page, its blatant hate speech.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Further , engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.And all black people are criminals , Hispanics are Lazy , Jews are greedy and Arabs are terrorists .
Do you generalize much ?
Your attitude that all of one group are similar is no different than racism .
And what 's your basis for this pearl of wisdom ?
That Bin Ladin and Christmas NW bomber are both engineers ?
How about the 4 doctors that tried to blow up Heathrow ?
How about Bin Ladin 's second in command is a doctor ?
In fact much of the leadership of Al Queda has medical degrees .
Should we also single out doctors as potential terrorists as well ? I ca n't believe this made the front page , its blatant hate speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.And all black people are criminals, Hispanics are Lazy, Jews are greedy and Arabs are terrorists.
Do you generalize much?
Your attitude that all of one group are similar is no different than racism.
And what's your basis for this pearl of wisdom?
That Bin Ladin and Christmas NW bomber are both engineers?
How about the 4 doctors that tried to blow up Heathrow?
How about Bin Ladin's second in command is a doctor?
In fact much of the leadership of Al Queda has medical degrees.
Should we also single out doctors as potential terrorists as well?I can't believe this made the front page, its blatant hate speech.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593742</id>
	<title>Re:Why are so many terrorists literate?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Furthermore, the Times later found a striking correlation between breathing and being a terrorist. A reporter found that an incredible 100\% of the test subjects were breathing while committing acts of terrorism. After the explosion, it was found that <b>all</b> the subjects who stopped breathing were unwilling to terrorize again. I'm told the Congress has, at the moment, refused to address the problem posed by respirable gases, which likely are inciting our youth to perpetrate acts of terrorism and delinquency.</p><p>I wish I could tell you my sources. I've found a remarkable proof of this fact, but sadly there's not enough space in this margin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Furthermore , the Times later found a striking correlation between breathing and being a terrorist .
A reporter found that an incredible 100 \ % of the test subjects were breathing while committing acts of terrorism .
After the explosion , it was found that all the subjects who stopped breathing were unwilling to terrorize again .
I 'm told the Congress has , at the moment , refused to address the problem posed by respirable gases , which likely are inciting our youth to perpetrate acts of terrorism and delinquency.I wish I could tell you my sources .
I 've found a remarkable proof of this fact , but sadly there 's not enough space in this margin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Furthermore, the Times later found a striking correlation between breathing and being a terrorist.
A reporter found that an incredible 100\% of the test subjects were breathing while committing acts of terrorism.
After the explosion, it was found that all the subjects who stopped breathing were unwilling to terrorize again.
I'm told the Congress has, at the moment, refused to address the problem posed by respirable gases, which likely are inciting our youth to perpetrate acts of terrorism and delinquency.I wish I could tell you my sources.
I've found a remarkable proof of this fact, but sadly there's not enough space in this margin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592878</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982</id>
	<title>Engineering vs science?</title>
	<author>Timothy Brownawell</author>
	<datestamp>1259853840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Engineering is about carefully following an existing set of rules, like building codes and the laws of physics. It can require cleverness, but only in how to best achieve your goals while staying within the rules ("solve this problem, within these constraints"). Maybe there's a mindset where it just doesn't really matter where the rules come from, and religious rules are just as good as physical or legal rules? This would be in contrast to science, where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why").</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineering is about carefully following an existing set of rules , like building codes and the laws of physics .
It can require cleverness , but only in how to best achieve your goals while staying within the rules ( " solve this problem , within these constraints " ) .
Maybe there 's a mindset where it just does n't really matter where the rules come from , and religious rules are just as good as physical or legal rules ?
This would be in contrast to science , where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ( " find out what the constraints are , and why " ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineering is about carefully following an existing set of rules, like building codes and the laws of physics.
It can require cleverness, but only in how to best achieve your goals while staying within the rules ("solve this problem, within these constraints").
Maybe there's a mindset where it just doesn't really matter where the rules come from, and religious rules are just as good as physical or legal rules?
This would be in contrast to science, where the goal is to find the rules and poke at them until you understand them ("find out what the constraints are, and why").</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593958</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have seen more dogma in the Liberal Arts Dept. than in Enginering.</p><p>At least an engineer will accept a proof that s/he is wrong. If every person's opinion cares the same value (tradition motif of Liberal Arts education), there is no challenging of views and little concern to change one's views (except to align your beliefs with the instructor to obtain a higher grade).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have seen more dogma in the Liberal Arts Dept .
than in Enginering.At least an engineer will accept a proof that s/he is wrong .
If every person 's opinion cares the same value ( tradition motif of Liberal Arts education ) , there is no challenging of views and little concern to change one 's views ( except to align your beliefs with the instructor to obtain a higher grade ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have seen more dogma in the Liberal Arts Dept.
than in Enginering.At least an engineer will accept a proof that s/he is wrong.
If every person's opinion cares the same value (tradition motif of Liberal Arts education), there is no challenging of views and little concern to change one's views (except to align your beliefs with the instructor to obtain a higher grade).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593982</id>
	<title>Where are the....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hindu Engineer terrorists?<br>Buddhist Engineer terrorists?<br>Atheist Engineer terrorists?<br>etc.<br>You slashdotters are genius at falling for the moral equivalency B.S. and being duped into arguing about red herrings.</p><p>I especially enjoy the deep (armchair) psych 101 babbling on about logical thought being too rigid blah blah blah.<br>Yet none of you draw any conclusions about a religion that has a duty to blow themselves up; to go in front of their god with no scars from killing infidels is shameful.</p><p>Brah-vo!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hindu Engineer terrorists ? Buddhist Engineer terrorists ? Atheist Engineer terrorists ? etc.You slashdotters are genius at falling for the moral equivalency B.S .
and being duped into arguing about red herrings.I especially enjoy the deep ( armchair ) psych 101 babbling on about logical thought being too rigid blah blah blah.Yet none of you draw any conclusions about a religion that has a duty to blow themselves up ; to go in front of their god with no scars from killing infidels is shameful.Brah-vo !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hindu Engineer terrorists?Buddhist Engineer terrorists?Atheist Engineer terrorists?etc.You slashdotters are genius at falling for the moral equivalency B.S.
and being duped into arguing about red herrings.I especially enjoy the deep (armchair) psych 101 babbling on about logical thought being too rigid blah blah blah.Yet none of you draw any conclusions about a religion that has a duty to blow themselves up; to go in front of their god with no scars from killing infidels is shameful.Brah-vo!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594402</id>
	<title>Security Measures are Transparent to Engineers</title>
	<author>srobert</author>
	<datestamp>1259859120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm an engineer. (Civil PE, with a BS in Mechanical Engineering). I think the primary reason that terrorists recruit from engineers is because so many of the security measures (in airports for example) are transparent to us. Many of the TSA's measures are for the purpose of making the general public <i>feel</i> safe. Not that that's a bad thing, because there is no such thing perfectly safe in reality. The only way air travel can be perfectly safe is for it not to exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm an engineer .
( Civil PE , with a BS in Mechanical Engineering ) .
I think the primary reason that terrorists recruit from engineers is because so many of the security measures ( in airports for example ) are transparent to us .
Many of the TSA 's measures are for the purpose of making the general public feel safe .
Not that that 's a bad thing , because there is no such thing perfectly safe in reality .
The only way air travel can be perfectly safe is for it not to exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm an engineer.
(Civil PE, with a BS in Mechanical Engineering).
I think the primary reason that terrorists recruit from engineers is because so many of the security measures (in airports for example) are transparent to us.
Many of the TSA's measures are for the purpose of making the general public feel safe.
Not that that's a bad thing, because there is no such thing perfectly safe in reality.
The only way air travel can be perfectly safe is for it not to exist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596266</id>
	<title>Freakonomics</title>
	<author>medv4380</author>
	<datestamp>1259864820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Super Freakonomics it highlighted this trend a little better then just pinning it on Engineering Students. <p><div class="quote"><p>In General, Krueger found, "terrorists tend to be drawn from well-educated, middle-class or high-income families." Despite a few exceptions</p></div><p>  I don't believe it has anything to do with technology rather I buy what the book was pointing out that terrorism takes political motivation and College students tend to have plenty of strong and forming political opinions that the poor and uneducated just don't care about.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Super Freakonomics it highlighted this trend a little better then just pinning it on Engineering Students .
In General , Krueger found , " terrorists tend to be drawn from well-educated , middle-class or high-income families .
" Despite a few exceptions I do n't believe it has anything to do with technology rather I buy what the book was pointing out that terrorism takes political motivation and College students tend to have plenty of strong and forming political opinions that the poor and uneducated just do n't care about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Super Freakonomics it highlighted this trend a little better then just pinning it on Engineering Students.
In General, Krueger found, "terrorists tend to be drawn from well-educated, middle-class or high-income families.
" Despite a few exceptions  I don't believe it has anything to do with technology rather I buy what the book was pointing out that terrorism takes political motivation and College students tend to have plenty of strong and forming political opinions that the poor and uneducated just don't care about.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599012</id>
	<title>You forgot the fourth category:</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1259832300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"other".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" other " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"other".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601834</id>
	<title>Re:Because engineering education is dogmatic..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259850660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unlike proper scientists, Engineers are trained to accept a certain subset of physics/chemistry/biology, and use that to build stuff</p></div></blockquote><p>There is a difference between abstraction and ignorance.  A proper engineering education doesn't tell you to just accept things, it teaches principles of how something works and how it's derived from other building blocks.  Engineering does introduce practical approximations to facilitate easier problem solving, however, a good engineer like a good chemist or other scientist, will be able to "look under the hood" at the details when they need to.<br>Science and engineering while different, really are close enough that people can move back and forth between roles.  Sometimes a scientist will act like an engineer solving a specific problem, sometimes an engineer will work like a scientist doing fundamental research.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike proper scientists , Engineers are trained to accept a certain subset of physics/chemistry/biology , and use that to build stuffThere is a difference between abstraction and ignorance .
A proper engineering education does n't tell you to just accept things , it teaches principles of how something works and how it 's derived from other building blocks .
Engineering does introduce practical approximations to facilitate easier problem solving , however , a good engineer like a good chemist or other scientist , will be able to " look under the hood " at the details when they need to.Science and engineering while different , really are close enough that people can move back and forth between roles .
Sometimes a scientist will act like an engineer solving a specific problem , sometimes an engineer will work like a scientist doing fundamental research .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike proper scientists, Engineers are trained to accept a certain subset of physics/chemistry/biology, and use that to build stuffThere is a difference between abstraction and ignorance.
A proper engineering education doesn't tell you to just accept things, it teaches principles of how something works and how it's derived from other building blocks.
Engineering does introduce practical approximations to facilitate easier problem solving, however, a good engineer like a good chemist or other scientist, will be able to "look under the hood" at the details when they need to.Science and engineering while different, really are close enough that people can move back and forth between roles.
Sometimes a scientist will act like an engineer solving a specific problem, sometimes an engineer will work like a scientist doing fundamental research.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595078</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594972</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1259860920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion</p></div><p>If they've been properly indoctrinated at an early age, their belief will be irrational as it predates the development of rationality in their brain, and therefore the rational stack will provide, or make is easy to swallow, whatever rationalization they require on top of that existing belief.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religionIf they 've been properly indoctrinated at an early age , their belief will be irrational as it predates the development of rationality in their brain , and therefore the rational stack will provide , or make is easy to swallow , whatever rationalization they require on top of that existing belief .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religionIf they've been properly indoctrinated at an early age, their belief will be irrational as it predates the development of rationality in their brain, and therefore the rational stack will provide, or make is easy to swallow, whatever rationalization they require on top of that existing belief.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598352</id>
	<title>Re:Parent's Stats Are Not Accurate</title>
	<author>Anubis350</author>
	<datestamp>1259872620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who the hell modded this informative?

<i>"The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree, 7.4 percent held an associate's degree, 17.1 percent held a bachelor's degree, and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree."</i>

7.4+17.1+9.9=34.4, actually *over* 30\% - if anything the gp underestimated the number with advanced degrees. The quote you used also indicates that another nearly 20\% of the US population have had at least some college, bringing the number of people with some university time up over 50\%. I'd say this does, in fact, support the GPs point.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who the hell modded this informative ?
" The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree , 7.4 percent held an associate 's degree , 17.1 percent held a bachelor 's degree , and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree .
" 7.4 + 17.1 + 9.9 = 34.4 , actually * over * 30 \ % - if anything the gp underestimated the number with advanced degrees .
The quote you used also indicates that another nearly 20 \ % of the US population have had at least some college , bringing the number of people with some university time up over 50 \ % .
I 'd say this does , in fact , support the GPs point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who the hell modded this informative?
"The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree, 7.4 percent held an associate's degree, 17.1 percent held a bachelor's degree, and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree.
"

7.4+17.1+9.9=34.4, actually *over* 30\% - if anything the gp underestimated the number with advanced degrees.
The quote you used also indicates that another nearly 20\% of the US population have had at least some college, bringing the number of people with some university time up over 50\%.
I'd say this does, in fact, support the GPs point.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603710</id>
	<title>Re:Whole sale Vs Retail terrorism</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1262250720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hitler was a a homeless painter who had more natural ability in architecture... He was also up on his philosophy, so he might be better described as a liberal arts type who (illogically) followed his dreams instead of ability.</p><p>Mussolini was a journalist.</p><p>Stalin was a, for lacking a better term, marxist revolutionary. He was an anti-religious college dropout.</p><p>Lenin was a terrorist (technically, at the time) and kicked out of law school, but ultimately became a lawyer.</p><p>You are correct in that these douchbags weren't engineers; they were all most certainly megalomaniacs.</p><p>(And you group Bush with these fiends? That's either your ignorance or dogma speaking, because no logical assessment could reach this conclusion.)</p><p>It's also a lack of understanding of what "terrorism" is. Namely, international war, genocide of one's own people, and establishment/enforcement of a totalitarian regime are not terrorism. (They might be the culminative result of terrorism - see: most Muslim countries - but they are not, themselves, terrorism.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hitler was a a homeless painter who had more natural ability in architecture... He was also up on his philosophy , so he might be better described as a liberal arts type who ( illogically ) followed his dreams instead of ability.Mussolini was a journalist.Stalin was a , for lacking a better term , marxist revolutionary .
He was an anti-religious college dropout.Lenin was a terrorist ( technically , at the time ) and kicked out of law school , but ultimately became a lawyer.You are correct in that these douchbags were n't engineers ; they were all most certainly megalomaniacs .
( And you group Bush with these fiends ?
That 's either your ignorance or dogma speaking , because no logical assessment could reach this conclusion .
) It 's also a lack of understanding of what " terrorism " is .
Namely , international war , genocide of one 's own people , and establishment/enforcement of a totalitarian regime are not terrorism .
( They might be the culminative result of terrorism - see : most Muslim countries - but they are not , themselves , terrorism .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hitler was a a homeless painter who had more natural ability in architecture... He was also up on his philosophy, so he might be better described as a liberal arts type who (illogically) followed his dreams instead of ability.Mussolini was a journalist.Stalin was a, for lacking a better term, marxist revolutionary.
He was an anti-religious college dropout.Lenin was a terrorist (technically, at the time) and kicked out of law school, but ultimately became a lawyer.You are correct in that these douchbags weren't engineers; they were all most certainly megalomaniacs.
(And you group Bush with these fiends?
That's either your ignorance or dogma speaking, because no logical assessment could reach this conclusion.
)It's also a lack of understanding of what "terrorism" is.
Namely, international war, genocide of one's own people, and establishment/enforcement of a totalitarian regime are not terrorism.
(They might be the culminative result of terrorism - see: most Muslim countries - but they are not, themselves, terrorism.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595966</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259863980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I've noticed that. In the U.S., engineers tend to become Rand-spouting Objectivist douchebags. I guess in the middle east, they become bomb-building Radical Islamist douchebags.</p><p>My theory has always been that engineers often have a sort of weakness in their bullshit detectors due to studying in an environment where there's usually one best answer, maybe a few not so good answers, and the wrong answers.  Any time there's a difference of opinion, it's generally about priorites, not that someone's flat-out bullshitting you.</p><p>Thus you get engineers believing stolidly in Rand's "philosophy", which wouldn't hold up 10 minutes in an actual philosophy class, before the discussion would proceed from pointing out flaws, to open mockery and ridicule. (In philosophy class, you are likely surrounded by bullshit artists who think a basic grounding in philosophy will get them laid at parties, and you're studying old books which are often 50\% or more bullshit in themselves. If you're not dumb, and honestly interested in the subject, your bullshit detectors will get trained to be very sensitive there.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I 've noticed that .
In the U.S. , engineers tend to become Rand-spouting Objectivist douchebags .
I guess in the middle east , they become bomb-building Radical Islamist douchebags.My theory has always been that engineers often have a sort of weakness in their bullshit detectors due to studying in an environment where there 's usually one best answer , maybe a few not so good answers , and the wrong answers .
Any time there 's a difference of opinion , it 's generally about priorites , not that someone 's flat-out bullshitting you.Thus you get engineers believing stolidly in Rand 's " philosophy " , which would n't hold up 10 minutes in an actual philosophy class , before the discussion would proceed from pointing out flaws , to open mockery and ridicule .
( In philosophy class , you are likely surrounded by bullshit artists who think a basic grounding in philosophy will get them laid at parties , and you 're studying old books which are often 50 \ % or more bullshit in themselves .
If you 're not dumb , and honestly interested in the subject , your bullshit detectors will get trained to be very sensitive there .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I've noticed that.
In the U.S., engineers tend to become Rand-spouting Objectivist douchebags.
I guess in the middle east, they become bomb-building Radical Islamist douchebags.My theory has always been that engineers often have a sort of weakness in their bullshit detectors due to studying in an environment where there's usually one best answer, maybe a few not so good answers, and the wrong answers.
Any time there's a difference of opinion, it's generally about priorites, not that someone's flat-out bullshitting you.Thus you get engineers believing stolidly in Rand's "philosophy", which wouldn't hold up 10 minutes in an actual philosophy class, before the discussion would proceed from pointing out flaws, to open mockery and ridicule.
(In philosophy class, you are likely surrounded by bullshit artists who think a basic grounding in philosophy will get them laid at parties, and you're studying old books which are often 50\% or more bullshit in themselves.
If you're not dumb, and honestly interested in the subject, your bullshit detectors will get trained to be very sensitive there.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595418</id>
	<title>Why are so many fireman arsons?</title>
	<author>PerfectionLost</author>
	<datestamp>1259862240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you like to watch buildings burn, being a fireman is a good fit.</p><p>If you like watching towers fall, building them first is a good fit.</p><p>How many of you were kids who built towers only to knock them down?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you like to watch buildings burn , being a fireman is a good fit.If you like watching towers fall , building them first is a good fit.How many of you were kids who built towers only to knock them down ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you like to watch buildings burn, being a fireman is a good fit.If you like watching towers fall, building them first is a good fit.How many of you were kids who built towers only to knock them down?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599096</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1259832660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion.</p></div><p>Why not? We often enough have blind faith in methodologies, so why not *mythologies*?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion.Why not ?
We often enough have blind faith in methodologies , so why not * mythologies * ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion.Why not?
We often enough have blind faith in methodologies, so why not *mythologies*?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595792</id>
	<title>Fact check perhaps?</title>
	<author>jarocho</author>
	<datestamp>1259863380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the United States, almost 30\% of the population has at a Bachelors degree or higher, and again that many have attended university but only have an associates degree or nothing...</p></div><p>
Nowhere in the links provided is "almost 30\%" a number. From the above wikipedia source, "The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree, 7.4 percent held an associate's degree, 17.1 percent held a bachelor's degree, and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree." Even if you decide to sum bachelor's degrees and graduate or professional degrees (since it's entirely feasible that the Census Bureau considers the latter to be a subset of the former), you still come away with 27\%. If the country had 300 million people as of 2006, you just overestimated by 9 million residents. And 23\% (Arab states) versus 27\% (US?) is a mere 4\% difference.
<br>
<br>
I'm not entirely sure what the poster's point was in comparing somewhat inflated/rounded-up numbers of US college graduates with other global regions, and how that makes them dime-a-dozen or whatever, but the actual percentages sourced appear to be closer than they were editorialized to be, in any event.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the United States , almost 30 \ % of the population has at a Bachelors degree or higher , and again that many have attended university but only have an associates degree or nothing.. . Nowhere in the links provided is " almost 30 \ % " a number .
From the above wikipedia source , " The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree , 7.4 percent held an associate 's degree , 17.1 percent held a bachelor 's degree , and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree .
" Even if you decide to sum bachelor 's degrees and graduate or professional degrees ( since it 's entirely feasible that the Census Bureau considers the latter to be a subset of the former ) , you still come away with 27 \ % .
If the country had 300 million people as of 2006 , you just overestimated by 9 million residents .
And 23 \ % ( Arab states ) versus 27 \ % ( US ?
) is a mere 4 \ % difference .
I 'm not entirely sure what the poster 's point was in comparing somewhat inflated/rounded-up numbers of US college graduates with other global regions , and how that makes them dime-a-dozen or whatever , but the actual percentages sourced appear to be closer than they were editorialized to be , in any event .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the United States, almost 30\% of the population has at a Bachelors degree or higher, and again that many have attended university but only have an associates degree or nothing...
Nowhere in the links provided is "almost 30\%" a number.
From the above wikipedia source, "The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree, 7.4 percent held an associate's degree, 17.1 percent held a bachelor's degree, and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree.
" Even if you decide to sum bachelor's degrees and graduate or professional degrees (since it's entirely feasible that the Census Bureau considers the latter to be a subset of the former), you still come away with 27\%.
If the country had 300 million people as of 2006, you just overestimated by 9 million residents.
And 23\% (Arab states) versus 27\% (US?
) is a mere 4\% difference.
I'm not entirely sure what the poster's point was in comparing somewhat inflated/rounded-up numbers of US college graduates with other global regions, and how that makes them dime-a-dozen or whatever, but the actual percentages sourced appear to be closer than they were editorialized to be, in any event.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595370</id>
	<title>Re:You'd think engineers would be more rational</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1259862120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing is for all that talk you discounted the obvious and very likely reason that someone comes in a wheelchair and leaves walking - because they weren't completely immobile to start with. Lots of people in wheelchairs can walk to some degree and with some encouragement (such as sticking them on stage in front of hundreds of people and commanding them to), may be able to walk. It may even be this person was (conveniently) offered a wheelchair when they turned up for the event.
<p>
Read a book like The Faith Healers by James Randi and you will see how these "miracles" and more are performed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is for all that talk you discounted the obvious and very likely reason that someone comes in a wheelchair and leaves walking - because they were n't completely immobile to start with .
Lots of people in wheelchairs can walk to some degree and with some encouragement ( such as sticking them on stage in front of hundreds of people and commanding them to ) , may be able to walk .
It may even be this person was ( conveniently ) offered a wheelchair when they turned up for the event .
Read a book like The Faith Healers by James Randi and you will see how these " miracles " and more are performed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is for all that talk you discounted the obvious and very likely reason that someone comes in a wheelchair and leaves walking - because they weren't completely immobile to start with.
Lots of people in wheelchairs can walk to some degree and with some encouragement (such as sticking them on stage in front of hundreds of people and commanding them to), may be able to walk.
It may even be this person was (conveniently) offered a wheelchair when they turned up for the event.
Read a book like The Faith Healers by James Randi and you will see how these "miracles" and more are performed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602728</id>
	<title>obviously</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Engineers aren't busy watching "Dancing with the Stars" or popping out kid after kid, so they see what's really happening in the world to the point they have feel they have nothing left to loose.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineers are n't busy watching " Dancing with the Stars " or popping out kid after kid , so they see what 's really happening in the world to the point they have feel they have nothing left to loose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineers aren't busy watching "Dancing with the Stars" or popping out kid after kid, so they see what's really happening in the world to the point they have feel they have nothing left to loose.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593662</id>
	<title>Does this make engineers terrorists?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uh oh, I can see it now.</p><p>Terrorists recruit engineers, therefore if you're an engineer, chances are that you are a terrorist (maybe you just don't know it yet)</p><p>I'll have to come up with something else to put on my I-94W's so that I don't get red-flag'd by DHS/TSA when I enter the USA for being a potential sleeper terrorist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh oh , I can see it now.Terrorists recruit engineers , therefore if you 're an engineer , chances are that you are a terrorist ( maybe you just do n't know it yet ) I 'll have to come up with something else to put on my I-94W 's so that I do n't get red-flag 'd by DHS/TSA when I enter the USA for being a potential sleeper terrorist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh oh, I can see it now.Terrorists recruit engineers, therefore if you're an engineer, chances are that you are a terrorist (maybe you just don't know it yet)I'll have to come up with something else to put on my I-94W's so that I don't get red-flag'd by DHS/TSA when I enter the USA for being a potential sleeper terrorist.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>LordKazan</author>
	<datestamp>1259855820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...</p><p>why?</p><p>because engineering is a world of black and white thinking, and it doesn't challenge their religious dogma like the other departments with their more rounded gen ed requirements do.  Let alone the departments in Arts and Sciences like Geology, Biology, Paleontology, etc that the findings of openly challenge their dogma.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...why ? because engineering is a world of black and white thinking , and it does n't challenge their religious dogma like the other departments with their more rounded gen ed requirements do .
Let alone the departments in Arts and Sciences like Geology , Biology , Paleontology , etc that the findings of openly challenge their dogma .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...why?because engineering is a world of black and white thinking, and it doesn't challenge their religious dogma like the other departments with their more rounded gen ed requirements do.
Let alone the departments in Arts and Sciences like Geology, Biology, Paleontology, etc that the findings of openly challenge their dogma.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595434</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259862300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if I'm capable of contemplating and balancing multiple (more than two) sides to an issue while also recognizing when one argument is complete crap not worth considering, what does that make me?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if I 'm capable of contemplating and balancing multiple ( more than two ) sides to an issue while also recognizing when one argument is complete crap not worth considering , what does that make me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if I'm capable of contemplating and balancing multiple (more than two) sides to an issue while also recognizing when one argument is complete crap not worth considering, what does that make me?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592976</id>
	<title>Engineers are better at dodging bullets</title>
	<author>Banekartr</author>
	<datestamp>1259853780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do a search for "Taliban terrorists killed" and you will find hundreds of results of our boys doing a great job.  I'm willing to bet 99\% of these idiots who were killed had no degrees at all.  It seams the real observation here is that there are more engineering terrorists who figure out a way to avoid being killed.

So, the real title of this should be:
How do so many terrorists with engineering degrees avoid our bullets?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do a search for " Taliban terrorists killed " and you will find hundreds of results of our boys doing a great job .
I 'm willing to bet 99 \ % of these idiots who were killed had no degrees at all .
It seams the real observation here is that there are more engineering terrorists who figure out a way to avoid being killed .
So , the real title of this should be : How do so many terrorists with engineering degrees avoid our bullets ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do a search for "Taliban terrorists killed" and you will find hundreds of results of our boys doing a great job.
I'm willing to bet 99\% of these idiots who were killed had no degrees at all.
It seams the real observation here is that there are more engineering terrorists who figure out a way to avoid being killed.
So, the real title of this should be:
How do so many terrorists with engineering degrees avoid our bullets?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846</id>
	<title>Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From my engineering degree</p><p>Chemical explosives - check<br>
Electronic devices - check<br>
Radio communications - check<br>
Problem solving techniques - check<br>
Analyzing systems for failure modes/exploitation - check</p><p>Nah<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. can't see why an engineering degree would be useful to a terrorist at all</p><p>What was really fun was that the US Green card application specifically asks you if have had training in a lot of the above techniques.  and I had no idea what sort of red flags sent up by me truthfully answering the questions</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From my engineering degreeChemical explosives - check Electronic devices - check Radio communications - check Problem solving techniques - check Analyzing systems for failure modes/exploitation - checkNah .. ca n't see why an engineering degree would be useful to a terrorist at allWhat was really fun was that the US Green card application specifically asks you if have had training in a lot of the above techniques .
and I had no idea what sort of red flags sent up by me truthfully answering the questions</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From my engineering degreeChemical explosives - check
Electronic devices - check
Radio communications - check
Problem solving techniques - check
Analyzing systems for failure modes/exploitation - checkNah .. can't see why an engineering degree would be useful to a terrorist at allWhat was really fun was that the US Green card application specifically asks you if have had training in a lot of the above techniques.
and I had no idea what sort of red flags sent up by me truthfully answering the questions</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593076</id>
	<title>Nothing wrong with being resolute...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You train them to put things together -they know how to take them apart.</p><p>This is the next subtext battle between (marketing/sales) and (engineering/science).  When the you are train for engineering, ambiguity and compromise are not core values.  It reflects in the way they see the world, so they take world views more seriously as well.   Engineers struggle for truth, and stick up for what's true (hopefully - there are exceptions in the east)?</p><p>They might even think that a radical reset is a path forward.  It might be, but I prefer other ways.   How about we lesson the tension and not all take a big swing toward ambiguity.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You train them to put things together -they know how to take them apart.This is the next subtext battle between ( marketing/sales ) and ( engineering/science ) .
When the you are train for engineering , ambiguity and compromise are not core values .
It reflects in the way they see the world , so they take world views more seriously as well .
Engineers struggle for truth , and stick up for what 's true ( hopefully - there are exceptions in the east ) ? They might even think that a radical reset is a path forward .
It might be , but I prefer other ways .
How about we lesson the tension and not all take a big swing toward ambiguity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You train them to put things together -they know how to take them apart.This is the next subtext battle between (marketing/sales) and (engineering/science).
When the you are train for engineering, ambiguity and compromise are not core values.
It reflects in the way they see the world, so they take world views more seriously as well.
Engineers struggle for truth, and stick up for what's true (hopefully - there are exceptions in the east)?They might even think that a radical reset is a path forward.
It might be, but I prefer other ways.
How about we lesson the tension and not all take a big swing toward ambiguity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603016</id>
	<title>Clients and Management</title>
	<author>softegg</author>
	<datestamp>1259863980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>After a few months of dealing with clients and management, I think most engineers feel like blowing something up...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After a few months of dealing with clients and management , I think most engineers feel like blowing something up... ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After a few months of dealing with clients and management, I think most engineers feel like blowing something up... ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596670</id>
	<title>Re:It's a cultural thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259866140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an Arab, I can confirm that, being an engineer means that you are among the class-A brains.<br>Opposed to other highly praised jobs, like doctors. A doctor is respectable and brilliant and all that, but he can't compete with an engineer when it comes to creativity, analytic skills, problem solving,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>When a student is in high school, he aims for med, pharmacology,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... if he can study more volumes that don't require a lot of analysis, just know what's in those books, and digest it and be ready to respond to questions in them, and also if he can study 10+ hours a day to memorize every letter in his books, then he is a perfect candidate.<br>If that student find it hard to study so many volumes, but he enjoys solving riddles, problems,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... he doesn't study a lot and no body can make him do so and yet he gets high grades, then he will make a good engineering student.<br>That's how engineers are viewed opposed to others, and that's why many people love to claim the title, if he is a mechanic, he would praise himself to be an engineer, and he might put that on his shop.<br>I've been in high school, and I was in that situation, and I'm a fanatic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an Arab , I can confirm that , being an engineer means that you are among the class-A brains.Opposed to other highly praised jobs , like doctors .
A doctor is respectable and brilliant and all that , but he ca n't compete with an engineer when it comes to creativity , analytic skills , problem solving , ...When a student is in high school , he aims for med , pharmacology , ... if he can study more volumes that do n't require a lot of analysis , just know what 's in those books , and digest it and be ready to respond to questions in them , and also if he can study 10 + hours a day to memorize every letter in his books , then he is a perfect candidate.If that student find it hard to study so many volumes , but he enjoys solving riddles , problems , ... he does n't study a lot and no body can make him do so and yet he gets high grades , then he will make a good engineering student.That 's how engineers are viewed opposed to others , and that 's why many people love to claim the title , if he is a mechanic , he would praise himself to be an engineer , and he might put that on his shop.I 've been in high school , and I was in that situation , and I 'm a fanatic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an Arab, I can confirm that, being an engineer means that you are among the class-A brains.Opposed to other highly praised jobs, like doctors.
A doctor is respectable and brilliant and all that, but he can't compete with an engineer when it comes to creativity, analytic skills, problem solving, ...When a student is in high school, he aims for med, pharmacology, ... if he can study more volumes that don't require a lot of analysis, just know what's in those books, and digest it and be ready to respond to questions in them, and also if he can study 10+ hours a day to memorize every letter in his books, then he is a perfect candidate.If that student find it hard to study so many volumes, but he enjoys solving riddles, problems, ... he doesn't study a lot and no body can make him do so and yet he gets high grades, then he will make a good engineering student.That's how engineers are viewed opposed to others, and that's why many people love to claim the title, if he is a mechanic, he would praise himself to be an engineer, and he might put that on his shop.I've been in high school, and I was in that situation, and I'm a fanatic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595080</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Nathrael</author>
	<datestamp>1259861280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, there are also communist terrorists (and I assume there are quite a few nonreligious right-wing terrorists out there, too) - but they just replace their blind faith in a religion with an equally blind faith into a certain ideology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , there are also communist terrorists ( and I assume there are quite a few nonreligious right-wing terrorists out there , too ) - but they just replace their blind faith in a religion with an equally blind faith into a certain ideology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, there are also communist terrorists (and I assume there are quite a few nonreligious right-wing terrorists out there, too) - but they just replace their blind faith in a religion with an equally blind faith into a certain ideology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593060</id>
	<title>Hypothesis Validation</title>
	<author>LtCol Burrito</author>
	<datestamp>1259854200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It certainly is an interesting hypothesis.  However, their sample is now limited to terrorist:engineers.  A test of this theory would be to check the engineers of other religious groups for similar traits.  It might be the combination of these personality traits coupled with the radical teachings that inspire those individuals to act.  However,  the tendency might manifest itself in some other way in different religions that don't promote violent martyrdom.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It certainly is an interesting hypothesis .
However , their sample is now limited to terrorist : engineers .
A test of this theory would be to check the engineers of other religious groups for similar traits .
It might be the combination of these personality traits coupled with the radical teachings that inspire those individuals to act .
However , the tendency might manifest itself in some other way in different religions that do n't promote violent martyrdom .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It certainly is an interesting hypothesis.
However, their sample is now limited to terrorist:engineers.
A test of this theory would be to check the engineers of other religious groups for similar traits.
It might be the combination of these personality traits coupled with the radical teachings that inspire those individuals to act.
However,  the tendency might manifest itself in some other way in different religions that don't promote violent martyrdom.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594350</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But what is the breakdown within those percentages of engineering degrees.  I suspect as a whole, that Europe's percentage will be higher than in the US and the Arab and Asian nations even higher still.  The reason the numbers are so inflated in the west is all the liberal arts degrees that people take so that they can "get a degree".</p><p>This speaks as much to the issues in our nations education and social priorities as anything else, but those numbers don't really tell the story of whether engineers are more prevalent in Arab states.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But what is the breakdown within those percentages of engineering degrees .
I suspect as a whole , that Europe 's percentage will be higher than in the US and the Arab and Asian nations even higher still .
The reason the numbers are so inflated in the west is all the liberal arts degrees that people take so that they can " get a degree " .This speaks as much to the issues in our nations education and social priorities as anything else , but those numbers do n't really tell the story of whether engineers are more prevalent in Arab states .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But what is the breakdown within those percentages of engineering degrees.
I suspect as a whole, that Europe's percentage will be higher than in the US and the Arab and Asian nations even higher still.
The reason the numbers are so inflated in the west is all the liberal arts degrees that people take so that they can "get a degree".This speaks as much to the issues in our nations education and social priorities as anything else, but those numbers don't really tell the story of whether engineers are more prevalent in Arab states.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604344</id>
	<title>Absolutely.</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1262266920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hiding sharpies in a plane requires mad Engineering skillz....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hiding sharpies in a plane requires mad Engineering skillz... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hiding sharpies in a plane requires mad Engineering skillz....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592888</id>
	<title>They wouldn't be targeting engineers because...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They wouldn't be targeting engineers because they have skills of getting things done and paying attention to details.</p><p>Engineering isn't science. Engineering is using what is known of science to create results.  It is one of the few degrees that have that focus.  Most of the other disciplines if recruited will spend their time researching and analyzing the problems and probably coming up with the idea it is a bad idea.  But an engineer will just go ahead and make it go.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They would n't be targeting engineers because they have skills of getting things done and paying attention to details.Engineering is n't science .
Engineering is using what is known of science to create results .
It is one of the few degrees that have that focus .
Most of the other disciplines if recruited will spend their time researching and analyzing the problems and probably coming up with the idea it is a bad idea .
But an engineer will just go ahead and make it go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They wouldn't be targeting engineers because they have skills of getting things done and paying attention to details.Engineering isn't science.
Engineering is using what is known of science to create results.
It is one of the few degrees that have that focus.
Most of the other disciplines if recruited will spend their time researching and analyzing the problems and probably coming up with the idea it is a bad idea.
But an engineer will just go ahead and make it go.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594488</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Comparative Lit major bombs something other than the GRE, more at 10"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Comparative Lit major bombs something other than the GRE , more at 10 "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Comparative Lit major bombs something other than the GRE, more at 10"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598122</id>
	<title>Two traits the sample population shares</title>
	<author>lildogie</author>
	<datestamp>1259871840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your sample has two traits: you know them, and they are engineers.

How do you know which trait to attribute your observations to?

Maybe the real correlation is not with their education, but their willingness to share some of their views with you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your sample has two traits : you know them , and they are engineers .
How do you know which trait to attribute your observations to ?
Maybe the real correlation is not with their education , but their willingness to share some of their views with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your sample has two traits: you know them, and they are engineers.
How do you know which trait to attribute your observations to?
Maybe the real correlation is not with their education, but their willingness to share some of their views with you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595854</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Maniacal</author>
	<datestamp>1259863560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I consider myself agnostic which really annoys my wife.  We got a good laugh from the show Community when they did their Christmas show.  The characters were saying what religon they are one guys says he's agnostic which brought groans from the others with one saying "That's the lazy mans athiest".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I consider myself agnostic which really annoys my wife .
We got a good laugh from the show Community when they did their Christmas show .
The characters were saying what religon they are one guys says he 's agnostic which brought groans from the others with one saying " That 's the lazy mans athiest " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I consider myself agnostic which really annoys my wife.
We got a good laugh from the show Community when they did their Christmas show.
The characters were saying what religon they are one guys says he's agnostic which brought groans from the others with one saying "That's the lazy mans athiest".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597938</id>
	<title>Re:What about rich kids becoming terrorists?</title>
	<author>steelfood</author>
	<datestamp>1259871120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The difference is, one is telling other people to blow themselves up, the other is blowing himself up. Rich smart people don't usually blow themselves up. They let the dumber people do. The dynamics are a little different in a cell (the self-destruct bit sometimes gets lost in transmission), but this guy acted alone in the end.</p><p>In this situation, the wealthy background is merely a coincidence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The difference is , one is telling other people to blow themselves up , the other is blowing himself up .
Rich smart people do n't usually blow themselves up .
They let the dumber people do .
The dynamics are a little different in a cell ( the self-destruct bit sometimes gets lost in transmission ) , but this guy acted alone in the end.In this situation , the wealthy background is merely a coincidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The difference is, one is telling other people to blow themselves up, the other is blowing himself up.
Rich smart people don't usually blow themselves up.
They let the dumber people do.
The dynamics are a little different in a cell (the self-destruct bit sometimes gets lost in transmission), but this guy acted alone in the end.In this situation, the wealthy background is merely a coincidence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593214</id>
	<title>I would suspect they get recruited</title>
	<author>NotSoHeavyD3</author>
	<datestamp>1259854980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I mean if you run one of these organizations engineers are way too valuable not to take a shot and recruit.(As others have said aboe.) So I would think they actively recruit them. Plus on top of it one of the stereotypes about engineering students is that alot of them are reclusive and don't engage in society. So basically that means they don't have the societal safety net that would keep them from doing crazy shit. (I mean it always seems like the loner is the guy that ends up going nuts, not the guy with 100 friends and parties every night like the kids at Columbine.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean if you run one of these organizations engineers are way too valuable not to take a shot and recruit .
( As others have said aboe .
) So I would think they actively recruit them .
Plus on top of it one of the stereotypes about engineering students is that alot of them are reclusive and do n't engage in society .
So basically that means they do n't have the societal safety net that would keep them from doing crazy shit .
( I mean it always seems like the loner is the guy that ends up going nuts , not the guy with 100 friends and parties every night like the kids at Columbine .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean if you run one of these organizations engineers are way too valuable not to take a shot and recruit.
(As others have said aboe.
) So I would think they actively recruit them.
Plus on top of it one of the stereotypes about engineering students is that alot of them are reclusive and don't engage in society.
So basically that means they don't have the societal safety net that would keep them from doing crazy shit.
(I mean it always seems like the loner is the guy that ends up going nuts, not the guy with 100 friends and parties every night like the kids at Columbine.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594682</id>
	<title>Engineers are better at everything!</title>
	<author>Sentrion</author>
	<datestamp>1259860080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course engineers make better terrorists.  Generally, engineers are better at just about everything.  I know this is an offense to liberal arts and under-grad business majors.  While there is a definite sub-population of engineers with social deficiencies, most REAL LIFE engineers don't fit the stereotype.  25\% of all MBA graduates have engineering backgrounds, and engineers dominate many MBA programs.  You will find engineering graduates pursuing careers as lawyers, surgeons, investment bankers, Fortune 500 executives, heads of state, FBI agents, rock stars (yes, I said "rock stars"), and so on.  The executives running the company where I work all started as engineers.  Our sales and marketing team consists mostly of engineers as well, and they are definitely not the shy nerdy type.

I even have friends from college who dropped out of our engineering program and excelled to the top of their class with business degrees.  We're just better at what we do!  I never met anyone who washed out from a liberal arts program and had to major in engineering as their second choice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course engineers make better terrorists .
Generally , engineers are better at just about everything .
I know this is an offense to liberal arts and under-grad business majors .
While there is a definite sub-population of engineers with social deficiencies , most REAL LIFE engineers do n't fit the stereotype .
25 \ % of all MBA graduates have engineering backgrounds , and engineers dominate many MBA programs .
You will find engineering graduates pursuing careers as lawyers , surgeons , investment bankers , Fortune 500 executives , heads of state , FBI agents , rock stars ( yes , I said " rock stars " ) , and so on .
The executives running the company where I work all started as engineers .
Our sales and marketing team consists mostly of engineers as well , and they are definitely not the shy nerdy type .
I even have friends from college who dropped out of our engineering program and excelled to the top of their class with business degrees .
We 're just better at what we do !
I never met anyone who washed out from a liberal arts program and had to major in engineering as their second choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course engineers make better terrorists.
Generally, engineers are better at just about everything.
I know this is an offense to liberal arts and under-grad business majors.
While there is a definite sub-population of engineers with social deficiencies, most REAL LIFE engineers don't fit the stereotype.
25\% of all MBA graduates have engineering backgrounds, and engineers dominate many MBA programs.
You will find engineering graduates pursuing careers as lawyers, surgeons, investment bankers, Fortune 500 executives, heads of state, FBI agents, rock stars (yes, I said "rock stars"), and so on.
The executives running the company where I work all started as engineers.
Our sales and marketing team consists mostly of engineers as well, and they are definitely not the shy nerdy type.
I even have friends from college who dropped out of our engineering program and excelled to the top of their class with business degrees.
We're just better at what we do!
I never met anyone who washed out from a liberal arts program and had to major in engineering as their second choice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595144</id>
	<title>Re:Quick responses to common /. responses</title>
	<author>stewbacca</author>
	<datestamp>1259861580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... the unusual tendency of engineers towards right-wing radicalism seems universal.</p></div><p>That is an interesting finding. Seems that the far-right doesn't really value science and intellect -- prerequisites for being a good engineer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... the unusual tendency of engineers towards right-wing radicalism seems universal.That is an interesting finding .
Seems that the far-right does n't really value science and intellect -- prerequisites for being a good engineer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... the unusual tendency of engineers towards right-wing radicalism seems universal.That is an interesting finding.
Seems that the far-right doesn't really value science and intellect -- prerequisites for being a good engineer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601798</id>
	<title>Re:BULLSHIT, here's why. . .</title>
	<author>Eli Gottlieb</author>
	<datestamp>1259850420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And a sample of 404 people, (nearly all taken from internet sources, I might add), for such a squishy study is, while interesting, hardly damning proof of anything. --I mean, just the definition, 'terrorist' is a bullshit one these days. Every time a military bomb wipes out a village, it is usually reported that most of the people killed were conveniently, "Terrorists". I had no idea the world had so many engineers! And frankly, based on everything I've read, (and I've read a truckload on this), I happen to believe that a lot of high-profile 'terrorism' is performed for false-flag purposes by mind-control patsies of one sort or another. Heck, the kid who set his pants on fire just a few days ago aboard an international flight, when you dig into that highly suspicious story, appears to have been in zombie-mode and to have had several handlers who put him on the flight, by-passing security.</p><p>I would be VERY cautious about taking a study like this one at face value. I mean, yes, engineers do tend to carry certain social characteristics, and as I've always said, they are one of the most powerful groups on the planet because they make everything work. They define reality. And as such, the military industrial complex has a vested interest in making damned sure all the Pavlovian programming has well and truly taken hold in that group, with regular inoculations, so that they are easily controlled. Top priority slaves, as it were, making slavery as a way of life possible.</p></div><p>You do realize how crazy you sound, right?  You sound like you're supposing that the Dollhouse sends out incompetent terrorists to scare the public into supporting restrictive government policies and persecuting "geeks", "misfits" and engineers.  Note that this requires presupposing the existence of a Dollhouse or similar organization.</p><p>Do you have any idea how many engineers, scientists, and other "geeks" are just normal people with some more intelligence and curiosity added on?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Geeks have been punished and programmed and used by society their whole lives exactly because of their social traits. But that doesn't make them prone to becoming systematic killers.</p></div><p>If your bizzaro worldview was correct, I'd have to ask why the bloody hell geeks aren't systematic killers.  In your world we've certainly got the right to liberation and retribution for the "Pavlovian programming" and "mind-control patsies".</p><p><div class="quote"><p>What I am saying is this: be VERY careful with this kind of thing. Everybody can look suspicious when state paranoia turns its many cameras inward upon its own population. This is actually the typical trend with fascism; first its the evil out there, then it's the evil within. Next thing you know, engineers will be encouraged to self-police their ranks and inform on their friends. Fuck. That.</p></div><p>Except that we're not dealing with a fascist system.  It was in danger of going fascist for a while, but now society has managed to get itself back onto track: a technologically-advanced material-rich capitalist society collapsing into corporate feudalism.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I know several engineers, as I'm sure many of you do as well. Seriously; how many of them would ever go out of their way to harm somebody?</p></div><p>Do computer science majors count as engineers?  Every time I read another stupid rant someone so profoundly ignorant of people and of good sense as you, I get the urge to punish the offender with several broken ribs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And a sample of 404 people , ( nearly all taken from internet sources , I might add ) , for such a squishy study is , while interesting , hardly damning proof of anything .
--I mean , just the definition , 'terrorist ' is a bullshit one these days .
Every time a military bomb wipes out a village , it is usually reported that most of the people killed were conveniently , " Terrorists " .
I had no idea the world had so many engineers !
And frankly , based on everything I 've read , ( and I 've read a truckload on this ) , I happen to believe that a lot of high-profile 'terrorism ' is performed for false-flag purposes by mind-control patsies of one sort or another .
Heck , the kid who set his pants on fire just a few days ago aboard an international flight , when you dig into that highly suspicious story , appears to have been in zombie-mode and to have had several handlers who put him on the flight , by-passing security.I would be VERY cautious about taking a study like this one at face value .
I mean , yes , engineers do tend to carry certain social characteristics , and as I 've always said , they are one of the most powerful groups on the planet because they make everything work .
They define reality .
And as such , the military industrial complex has a vested interest in making damned sure all the Pavlovian programming has well and truly taken hold in that group , with regular inoculations , so that they are easily controlled .
Top priority slaves , as it were , making slavery as a way of life possible.You do realize how crazy you sound , right ?
You sound like you 're supposing that the Dollhouse sends out incompetent terrorists to scare the public into supporting restrictive government policies and persecuting " geeks " , " misfits " and engineers .
Note that this requires presupposing the existence of a Dollhouse or similar organization.Do you have any idea how many engineers , scientists , and other " geeks " are just normal people with some more intelligence and curiosity added on ? Geeks have been punished and programmed and used by society their whole lives exactly because of their social traits .
But that does n't make them prone to becoming systematic killers.If your bizzaro worldview was correct , I 'd have to ask why the bloody hell geeks are n't systematic killers .
In your world we 've certainly got the right to liberation and retribution for the " Pavlovian programming " and " mind-control patsies " .What I am saying is this : be VERY careful with this kind of thing .
Everybody can look suspicious when state paranoia turns its many cameras inward upon its own population .
This is actually the typical trend with fascism ; first its the evil out there , then it 's the evil within .
Next thing you know , engineers will be encouraged to self-police their ranks and inform on their friends .
Fuck. That.Except that we 're not dealing with a fascist system .
It was in danger of going fascist for a while , but now society has managed to get itself back onto track : a technologically-advanced material-rich capitalist society collapsing into corporate feudalism.I know several engineers , as I 'm sure many of you do as well .
Seriously ; how many of them would ever go out of their way to harm somebody ? Do computer science majors count as engineers ?
Every time I read another stupid rant someone so profoundly ignorant of people and of good sense as you , I get the urge to punish the offender with several broken ribs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And a sample of 404 people, (nearly all taken from internet sources, I might add), for such a squishy study is, while interesting, hardly damning proof of anything.
--I mean, just the definition, 'terrorist' is a bullshit one these days.
Every time a military bomb wipes out a village, it is usually reported that most of the people killed were conveniently, "Terrorists".
I had no idea the world had so many engineers!
And frankly, based on everything I've read, (and I've read a truckload on this), I happen to believe that a lot of high-profile 'terrorism' is performed for false-flag purposes by mind-control patsies of one sort or another.
Heck, the kid who set his pants on fire just a few days ago aboard an international flight, when you dig into that highly suspicious story, appears to have been in zombie-mode and to have had several handlers who put him on the flight, by-passing security.I would be VERY cautious about taking a study like this one at face value.
I mean, yes, engineers do tend to carry certain social characteristics, and as I've always said, they are one of the most powerful groups on the planet because they make everything work.
They define reality.
And as such, the military industrial complex has a vested interest in making damned sure all the Pavlovian programming has well and truly taken hold in that group, with regular inoculations, so that they are easily controlled.
Top priority slaves, as it were, making slavery as a way of life possible.You do realize how crazy you sound, right?
You sound like you're supposing that the Dollhouse sends out incompetent terrorists to scare the public into supporting restrictive government policies and persecuting "geeks", "misfits" and engineers.
Note that this requires presupposing the existence of a Dollhouse or similar organization.Do you have any idea how many engineers, scientists, and other "geeks" are just normal people with some more intelligence and curiosity added on?Geeks have been punished and programmed and used by society their whole lives exactly because of their social traits.
But that doesn't make them prone to becoming systematic killers.If your bizzaro worldview was correct, I'd have to ask why the bloody hell geeks aren't systematic killers.
In your world we've certainly got the right to liberation and retribution for the "Pavlovian programming" and "mind-control patsies".What I am saying is this: be VERY careful with this kind of thing.
Everybody can look suspicious when state paranoia turns its many cameras inward upon its own population.
This is actually the typical trend with fascism; first its the evil out there, then it's the evil within.
Next thing you know, engineers will be encouraged to self-police their ranks and inform on their friends.
Fuck. That.Except that we're not dealing with a fascist system.
It was in danger of going fascist for a while, but now society has managed to get itself back onto track: a technologically-advanced material-rich capitalist society collapsing into corporate feudalism.I know several engineers, as I'm sure many of you do as well.
Seriously; how many of them would ever go out of their way to harm somebody?Do computer science majors count as engineers?
Every time I read another stupid rant someone so profoundly ignorant of people and of good sense as you, I get the urge to punish the offender with several broken ribs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595420</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592950</id>
	<title>Engineers are more effective at destroying things</title>
	<author>twisting\_department</author>
	<datestamp>1259853720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"engineers and engineering students are much more likely to hold strong conservative and religious views than a general cross section of the public"

Nonsense, I've been hanging around with scientists and engineers most of my life. My observation is that few of them hold hard and fast convictions about anything they cannot measure or mathematically derive. Except possibly when it comes to debates about beer of the best editor to use.

I think the reason to try and recruit terrorists from the engineering population is because they are far more likely to know how to destroy things effectively. Much like the way we build our military industry in the west.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" engineers and engineering students are much more likely to hold strong conservative and religious views than a general cross section of the public " Nonsense , I 've been hanging around with scientists and engineers most of my life .
My observation is that few of them hold hard and fast convictions about anything they can not measure or mathematically derive .
Except possibly when it comes to debates about beer of the best editor to use .
I think the reason to try and recruit terrorists from the engineering population is because they are far more likely to know how to destroy things effectively .
Much like the way we build our military industry in the west .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"engineers and engineering students are much more likely to hold strong conservative and religious views than a general cross section of the public"

Nonsense, I've been hanging around with scientists and engineers most of my life.
My observation is that few of them hold hard and fast convictions about anything they cannot measure or mathematically derive.
Except possibly when it comes to debates about beer of the best editor to use.
I think the reason to try and recruit terrorists from the engineering population is because they are far more likely to know how to destroy things effectively.
Much like the way we build our military industry in the west.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596070</id>
	<title>Parent's Stats Are Not Accurate</title>
	<author>dcw3</author>
	<datestamp>1259864220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "Insightful" parent's stats are not reflected in the link that he provided.  Here's quoting directly from Wiki:</p><p><i>"The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree, 7.4 percent held an associate's degree, 17.1 percent held a bachelor's degree, and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree."</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " Insightful " parent 's stats are not reflected in the link that he provided .
Here 's quoting directly from Wiki : " The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree , 7.4 percent held an associate 's degree , 17.1 percent held a bachelor 's degree , and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "Insightful" parent's stats are not reflected in the link that he provided.
Here's quoting directly from Wiki:"The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree, 7.4 percent held an associate's degree, 17.1 percent held a bachelor's degree, and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595666</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>mrdoogee</author>
	<datestamp>1259862960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To attack a perfect scale replica of his neighbor's house?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To attack a perfect scale replica of his neighbor 's house ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To attack a perfect scale replica of his neighbor's house?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599440</id>
	<title>Re:Engineers don't need to know how to talk to gir</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259834220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The joys of accepting the bear minimum life hands you</htmltext>
<tokenext>The joys of accepting the bear minimum life hands you</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The joys of accepting the bear minimum life hands you</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593950</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593290</id>
	<title>Salem Hypothesis</title>
	<author>Epeeist</author>
	<datestamp>1259855340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not quite the same thing, but Bruce Salem spotted this some while back - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem\_hypothesis</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not quite the same thing , but Bruce Salem spotted this some while back - http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem \ _hypothesis</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not quite the same thing, but Bruce Salem spotted this some while back - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem\_hypothesis</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595334</id>
	<title>Poetry</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1259862060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as Abdula the Terrorist cell leader wants to have an argument with some philosophy major prior to an OP, it could be that an engineer is just plain more useful to the cause with advanced science training.</p><p>Also, I am not sure what college everyone went to, however it has been my experience that many people from many parts of the world, if they make it to University will take one of the hardcore sciences. That is to say to eventually become a Doctor or say an Engineer of some sort (or their parents will be pissed!). I am guessing that those on the doctor path may have a predisposition to be against blowing people up, but that could just be me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as Abdula the Terrorist cell leader wants to have an argument with some philosophy major prior to an OP , it could be that an engineer is just plain more useful to the cause with advanced science training.Also , I am not sure what college everyone went to , however it has been my experience that many people from many parts of the world , if they make it to University will take one of the hardcore sciences .
That is to say to eventually become a Doctor or say an Engineer of some sort ( or their parents will be pissed ! ) .
I am guessing that those on the doctor path may have a predisposition to be against blowing people up , but that could just be me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as Abdula the Terrorist cell leader wants to have an argument with some philosophy major prior to an OP, it could be that an engineer is just plain more useful to the cause with advanced science training.Also, I am not sure what college everyone went to, however it has been my experience that many people from many parts of the world, if they make it to University will take one of the hardcore sciences.
That is to say to eventually become a Doctor or say an Engineer of some sort (or their parents will be pissed!).
I am guessing that those on the doctor path may have a predisposition to be against blowing people up, but that could just be me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594508</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>radtea</author>
	<datestamp>1259859420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>So many of the Engineers I have known view "seeing both sides of the story" as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise.</i></p><p>You've clearly never been in a graduate seminar in sociology or a related discipline if you think this kind of rigid close-mindedness is at all specific to engineers.</p><p>My g/f is in grad school right now and had the temerity to bring up "men's issues" in one of her seminars, and was summarily told there were no such thing:  men's higher death rate, young men's vastly higher suicide rate and murder rate, etc were all non-issues because they were being experienced by men.  And white middle class men at that.</p><p>This kind of ignorant stereotyping of engineers is just part of the same phenomena:  some people's problems need understanding and explanation, other people's just need condemnation.  Right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So many of the Engineers I have known view " seeing both sides of the story " as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise.You 've clearly never been in a graduate seminar in sociology or a related discipline if you think this kind of rigid close-mindedness is at all specific to engineers.My g/f is in grad school right now and had the temerity to bring up " men 's issues " in one of her seminars , and was summarily told there were no such thing : men 's higher death rate , young men 's vastly higher suicide rate and murder rate , etc were all non-issues because they were being experienced by men .
And white middle class men at that.This kind of ignorant stereotyping of engineers is just part of the same phenomena : some people 's problems need understanding and explanation , other people 's just need condemnation .
Right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So many of the Engineers I have known view "seeing both sides of the story" as some kind of weakness or soft-spined compromise.You've clearly never been in a graduate seminar in sociology or a related discipline if you think this kind of rigid close-mindedness is at all specific to engineers.My g/f is in grad school right now and had the temerity to bring up "men's issues" in one of her seminars, and was summarily told there were no such thing:  men's higher death rate, young men's vastly higher suicide rate and murder rate, etc were all non-issues because they were being experienced by men.
And white middle class men at that.This kind of ignorant stereotyping of engineers is just part of the same phenomena:  some people's problems need understanding and explanation, other people's just need condemnation.
Right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595820</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1259863440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More to the point, not all members of religiously based terrorist groups are motivated primarily by religion either.</p><p>For instance, in Northern Ireland, "Catholic" and "Protestant" had a lot more to do with who represented the sort-of native Irish versus the remnant of the English takeover of Ireland. The religious differences had very little to do with it: the real problem was political.</p><p>Similarly, in Israel, the biggest motivator for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah is not so much the religious stuff as it is the fact that the British gave Israel to the Israelis without consulting the people who lived there. The religious differences exacerbated the problem (as they have in that region for at least 2 millennia), but the fundamental problem was a bunch of people moving in and taking over land that had been occupied by a different group for centuries. (On the flip side, one could argue that the diaspora Jews who were moving in had fallen victim to much the same thing several centuries before Palestine ever existed.) Again, the real problem is politics and economics, and religious differences are more a stand-in for which group you belong to than the real source of the problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More to the point , not all members of religiously based terrorist groups are motivated primarily by religion either.For instance , in Northern Ireland , " Catholic " and " Protestant " had a lot more to do with who represented the sort-of native Irish versus the remnant of the English takeover of Ireland .
The religious differences had very little to do with it : the real problem was political.Similarly , in Israel , the biggest motivator for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah is not so much the religious stuff as it is the fact that the British gave Israel to the Israelis without consulting the people who lived there .
The religious differences exacerbated the problem ( as they have in that region for at least 2 millennia ) , but the fundamental problem was a bunch of people moving in and taking over land that had been occupied by a different group for centuries .
( On the flip side , one could argue that the diaspora Jews who were moving in had fallen victim to much the same thing several centuries before Palestine ever existed .
) Again , the real problem is politics and economics , and religious differences are more a stand-in for which group you belong to than the real source of the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More to the point, not all members of religiously based terrorist groups are motivated primarily by religion either.For instance, in Northern Ireland, "Catholic" and "Protestant" had a lot more to do with who represented the sort-of native Irish versus the remnant of the English takeover of Ireland.
The religious differences had very little to do with it: the real problem was political.Similarly, in Israel, the biggest motivator for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah is not so much the religious stuff as it is the fact that the British gave Israel to the Israelis without consulting the people who lived there.
The religious differences exacerbated the problem (as they have in that region for at least 2 millennia), but the fundamental problem was a bunch of people moving in and taking over land that had been occupied by a different group for centuries.
(On the flip side, one could argue that the diaspora Jews who were moving in had fallen victim to much the same thing several centuries before Palestine ever existed.
) Again, the real problem is politics and economics, and religious differences are more a stand-in for which group you belong to than the real source of the problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not all terrorists are religious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not all terrorists are religious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not all terrorists are religious.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30610756</id>
	<title>Guys it's not that hard.Guys it's not that hard</title>
	<author>hunmaster</author>
	<datestamp>1262260860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Engineering = time consuming + Lack of women = pent up sexual frustration.
Religion = relief of such frustration.

Before you know it, your blowing up a plane.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineering = time consuming + Lack of women = pent up sexual frustration .
Religion = relief of such frustration .
Before you know it , your blowing up a plane .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineering = time consuming + Lack of women = pent up sexual frustration.
Religion = relief of such frustration.
Before you know it, your blowing up a plane.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598308</id>
	<title>Hey what can I say</title>
	<author>Beelzebud</author>
	<datestamp>1259872440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They just really like trains over there!</htmltext>
<tokenext>They just really like trains over there !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They just really like trains over there!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597354</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>grolaw</author>
	<datestamp>1259868840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above. Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.</p></div><p>You got that one right.  The intrinsic frailty of human minds means that you can be a high-performing, socially-accepted individual who secretly plans and executes mass murders.  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_mass\_murderers\_and\_spree\_killers\_by\_number\_of\_victims" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_mass\_murderers\_and\_spree\_killers\_by\_number\_of\_victims</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that ( counter-intuitively perhaps ) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent , learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics , homicidal maniacs , perverts , terrorists , psychopaths , all-round assholes or all of the above .
Moral outlook and intelligence do n't seem to be very strongly related at all.You got that one right .
The intrinsic frailty of human minds means that you can be a high-performing , socially-accepted individual who secretly plans and executes mass murders .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List \ _of \ _mass \ _murderers \ _and \ _spree \ _killers \ _by \ _number \ _of \ _victims [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Over the years it has gotten more and more clear to me that (counter-intuitively perhaps) it is entirelty possible for very intelligent, learned and hard working men to be religious fanatics, homicidal maniacs, perverts, terrorists, psychopaths, all-round assholes or all of the above.
Moral outlook and intelligence don't seem to be very strongly related at all.You got that one right.
The intrinsic frailty of human minds means that you can be a high-performing, socially-accepted individual who secretly plans and executes mass murders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_mass\_murderers\_and\_spree\_killers\_by\_number\_of\_victims [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594266</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259858760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You just pointed out the difference between intelligence and wisdom. It's possible to have heaping handfuls of one or the other and not both; being intelligent (book-smart) but un-wise is what leads to the morons you mention.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You just pointed out the difference between intelligence and wisdom .
It 's possible to have heaping handfuls of one or the other and not both ; being intelligent ( book-smart ) but un-wise is what leads to the morons you mention .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You just pointed out the difference between intelligence and wisdom.
It's possible to have heaping handfuls of one or the other and not both; being intelligent (book-smart) but un-wise is what leads to the morons you mention.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592862</id>
	<title>Well, that...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and the fact that engineering students can plan for something more complicated than a keg party.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and the fact that engineering students can plan for something more complicated than a keg party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and the fact that engineering students can plan for something more complicated than a keg party.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Chemical explosives - check<br>
<br>
Electronic devices - check<br>
<br>
Radio communications - check<br>
<br>
Problem solving techniques - check<br>
<br>
Analyzing systems for failure modes/exploitation - check</p></div><p>
Same here, but:<br>
<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me?  <b>Uh oh.</b> We're a "no-go" on that one, Houston.<br>
<br>
It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion. Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook (until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof, which goes against what most of them say about faith.)<br>
<br>
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If I were to claim to have a device that could solve any problem in linear time, or that produced more energy than it consumed, or that nullified gravity, any engineer worth the title would be highly skeptical and would demand to see hard data before believing such a claim.<br>
<br>
It doesn't make sense to me that most people with this sort of engineering mindset could blindly accept extraordinary claims (made by whichever religion.) I'm not saying they're necessarily wrong -- just that they are very difficult to believe without strong evidence.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Chemical explosives - check Electronic devices - check Radio communications - check Problem solving techniques - check Analyzing systems for failure modes/exploitation - check Same here , but : ...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me ?
Uh oh .
We 're a " no-go " on that one , Houston .
It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion .
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook ( until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof , which goes against what most of them say about faith .
) Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof .
If I were to claim to have a device that could solve any problem in linear time , or that produced more energy than it consumed , or that nullified gravity , any engineer worth the title would be highly skeptical and would demand to see hard data before believing such a claim .
It does n't make sense to me that most people with this sort of engineering mindset could blindly accept extraordinary claims ( made by whichever religion .
) I 'm not saying they 're necessarily wrong -- just that they are very difficult to believe without strong evidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chemical explosives - check

Electronic devices - check

Radio communications - check

Problem solving techniques - check

Analyzing systems for failure modes/exploitation - check
Same here, but:
 ...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me?
Uh oh.
We're a "no-go" on that one, Houston.
It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion.
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook (until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof, which goes against what most of them say about faith.
)

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
If I were to claim to have a device that could solve any problem in linear time, or that produced more energy than it consumed, or that nullified gravity, any engineer worth the title would be highly skeptical and would demand to see hard data before believing such a claim.
It doesn't make sense to me that most people with this sort of engineering mindset could blindly accept extraordinary claims (made by whichever religion.
) I'm not saying they're necessarily wrong -- just that they are very difficult to believe without strong evidence.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593194</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>JamesP</author>
	<datestamp>1259854920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's probably to do with the following:</p><p>In math, 2+2 = 4 and that's it. There's no compromise to be done, no flexibility, etc</p><p>Now: how do you paint a picture?! How to make a DVD player menu look nice?! And, curiously enough: how to stop global terrorism?!</p><p>Also, lots of people in math/engineering etc do have some kind of mental disease. I know asperger's the 'fashionale' one but even in the past: think about Goedel, Cantor, etc, etc, etc...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's probably to do with the following : In math , 2 + 2 = 4 and that 's it .
There 's no compromise to be done , no flexibility , etcNow : how do you paint a picture ? !
How to make a DVD player menu look nice ? !
And , curiously enough : how to stop global terrorism ?
! Also , lots of people in math/engineering etc do have some kind of mental disease .
I know asperger 's the 'fashionale ' one but even in the past : think about Goedel , Cantor , etc , etc , etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's probably to do with the following:In math, 2+2 = 4 and that's it.
There's no compromise to be done, no flexibility, etcNow: how do you paint a picture?!
How to make a DVD player menu look nice?!
And, curiously enough: how to stop global terrorism?
!Also, lots of people in math/engineering etc do have some kind of mental disease.
I know asperger's the 'fashionale' one but even in the past: think about Goedel, Cantor, etc, etc, etc...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603630</id>
	<title>Surprise! Competent people get things done!</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1262292180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The fact that they were "engineers" is not surprising. Look throughout history at the people who may have gotten engineering degrees, if such things had existed then:</p><p>* Thomas Jefferson (who was something like a surveyor's assistant, and a botanist of sorts)<br>* Michelangelo (who was a tinkerer and inventor, making new things)<br>* Edison (of the lightbulb)<br>* Ford (of the automobile, was known as a self-taught watch repairman as a youth, and once even held the title 'engineer')</p><p>Problem is, in today's society, an "engineer" is a really wide definition. If you're getting a useful 4-year technical degree, it's an engineering degree or a technology degree. Getting a "civil engineering" or "mechanical engineering" degree would be the most likely means to gainful employment, regardless of where you live.</p><p>And in reality, many men are well suited for the role of "engineer". They're tinkerers, problem solvers, and fixers. If a man is generally competent, he's more likely to make a decent engineer - and by association, is more likely to go into that field.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>As for the implications of the article, I am keenly aware of the disturbing social implications resulting from widespread dispersal of this "study". I can easily see security theater like the TSA moving to profile against, say, "religious technical people", making sure to adjust their procedure to not "unjustly discriminate against Islamic engineers with one-way tickets and no luggage.</p><p>The only thing this study really tells me is that men who are of a regimented mindset and/or an engineering background are more likely to become successful terrorists when coming from an Islamic culture. To read anything more into that is foolish, but we should at least heed that correlation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The fact that they were " engineers " is not surprising .
Look throughout history at the people who may have gotten engineering degrees , if such things had existed then : * Thomas Jefferson ( who was something like a surveyor 's assistant , and a botanist of sorts ) * Michelangelo ( who was a tinkerer and inventor , making new things ) * Edison ( of the lightbulb ) * Ford ( of the automobile , was known as a self-taught watch repairman as a youth , and once even held the title 'engineer ' ) Problem is , in today 's society , an " engineer " is a really wide definition .
If you 're getting a useful 4-year technical degree , it 's an engineering degree or a technology degree .
Getting a " civil engineering " or " mechanical engineering " degree would be the most likely means to gainful employment , regardless of where you live.And in reality , many men are well suited for the role of " engineer " .
They 're tinkerers , problem solvers , and fixers .
If a man is generally competent , he 's more likely to make a decent engineer - and by association , is more likely to go into that field .
...As for the implications of the article , I am keenly aware of the disturbing social implications resulting from widespread dispersal of this " study " .
I can easily see security theater like the TSA moving to profile against , say , " religious technical people " , making sure to adjust their procedure to not " unjustly discriminate against Islamic engineers with one-way tickets and no luggage.The only thing this study really tells me is that men who are of a regimented mindset and/or an engineering background are more likely to become successful terrorists when coming from an Islamic culture .
To read anything more into that is foolish , but we should at least heed that correlation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The fact that they were "engineers" is not surprising.
Look throughout history at the people who may have gotten engineering degrees, if such things had existed then:* Thomas Jefferson (who was something like a surveyor's assistant, and a botanist of sorts)* Michelangelo (who was a tinkerer and inventor, making new things)* Edison (of the lightbulb)* Ford (of the automobile, was known as a self-taught watch repairman as a youth, and once even held the title 'engineer')Problem is, in today's society, an "engineer" is a really wide definition.
If you're getting a useful 4-year technical degree, it's an engineering degree or a technology degree.
Getting a "civil engineering" or "mechanical engineering" degree would be the most likely means to gainful employment, regardless of where you live.And in reality, many men are well suited for the role of "engineer".
They're tinkerers, problem solvers, and fixers.
If a man is generally competent, he's more likely to make a decent engineer - and by association, is more likely to go into that field.
...As for the implications of the article, I am keenly aware of the disturbing social implications resulting from widespread dispersal of this "study".
I can easily see security theater like the TSA moving to profile against, say, "religious technical people", making sure to adjust their procedure to not "unjustly discriminate against Islamic engineers with one-way tickets and no luggage.The only thing this study really tells me is that men who are of a regimented mindset and/or an engineering background are more likely to become successful terrorists when coming from an Islamic culture.
To read anything more into that is foolish, but we should at least heed that correlation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599294</id>
	<title>Re:Necessary skills</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259833500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bad guess. Art students need quite a few nerdy skills. Printmakers and painters need to know a little chemistry, sculptors need engineering and often mettalurgy skills, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bad guess .
Art students need quite a few nerdy skills .
Printmakers and painters need to know a little chemistry , sculptors need engineering and often mettalurgy skills , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bad guess.
Art students need quite a few nerdy skills.
Printmakers and painters need to know a little chemistry, sculptors need engineering and often mettalurgy skills, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600918</id>
	<title>Perhaps...</title>
	<author>Therilith</author>
	<datestamp>1259843400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://miscellanea.wellingtongrey.net/2008/02/18/enginneers-vs-sociologists/" title="wellingtongrey.net" rel="nofollow">http://miscellanea.wellingtongrey.net/2008/02/18/enginneers-vs-sociologists/</a> [wellingtongrey.net]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //miscellanea.wellingtongrey.net/2008/02/18/enginneers-vs-sociologists/ [ wellingtongrey.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://miscellanea.wellingtongrey.net/2008/02/18/enginneers-vs-sociologists/ [wellingtongrey.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592896</id>
	<title>The 72 virgin angle</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259853480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let's face it, engineers are not known for being sucessful with the ladies. I guess the 72 virgin thing works better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's face it , engineers are not known for being sucessful with the ladies .
I guess the 72 virgin thing works better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's face it, engineers are not known for being sucessful with the ladies.
I guess the 72 virgin thing works better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594156</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Oligonicella</author>
	<datestamp>1259858400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You say that as if it were true rather than an opinion of yours.  You do understand the fundamentalist Muslims are the primary killers and mass-killers of and in the Muslim world, right?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You say that as if it were true rather than an opinion of yours .
You do understand the fundamentalist Muslims are the primary killers and mass-killers of and in the Muslim world , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say that as if it were true rather than an opinion of yours.
You do understand the fundamentalist Muslims are the primary killers and mass-killers of and in the Muslim world, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596260</id>
	<title>Sounds like you aren't thinking</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1259864820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Evidently, the "engineers" who plotted those attacks didn't think that maybe they should build a foolproof electronic detonator for their bomb </i></p><p>And just how do you walk through a metal detector with a "foolproof electronic detonator".  Remember the constraints are that you have to fit all components on your person to walk through a metal detector AND pass a pat-down.  You can't have anything in the carryon because that's too easily discovered.</p><p>The issue was not coming up with a "better" detonator, the issue was that he did not practice the technique for the approach they took.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Evidently , the " engineers " who plotted those attacks did n't think that maybe they should build a foolproof electronic detonator for their bomb And just how do you walk through a metal detector with a " foolproof electronic detonator " .
Remember the constraints are that you have to fit all components on your person to walk through a metal detector AND pass a pat-down .
You ca n't have anything in the carryon because that 's too easily discovered.The issue was not coming up with a " better " detonator , the issue was that he did not practice the technique for the approach they took .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Evidently, the "engineers" who plotted those attacks didn't think that maybe they should build a foolproof electronic detonator for their bomb And just how do you walk through a metal detector with a "foolproof electronic detonator".
Remember the constraints are that you have to fit all components on your person to walk through a metal detector AND pass a pat-down.
You can't have anything in the carryon because that's too easily discovered.The issue was not coming up with a "better" detonator, the issue was that he did not practice the technique for the approach they took.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594026</id>
	<title>Real reason is future prospect</title>
	<author>sciencewatcher</author>
	<datestamp>1259857920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People with a degree and taste of freedom available in the Western countries find themselves locked out of every possibility to develop themselves in countries in the Middle-East like Saudi-Arabia, Egypt, etc. etc. if they are not part of the ruling few. If they blame only their own government they flee to the West. If they believe there is a conspiracy between the local rulers at home and the infidels that rule the West they go support violent groups like Al-Qaida that fight the West and their own governments. People without a degree tend to live happy within the constraints of dictatorships. The only long term strategy that can make an end to the wars between countries in the Middle East among themselves and against Western countries is a shift of power from those who have access to the natural resources to those that participate in the workforce. The problem however is that the Industrial Revolution does not take place in those parts of the world where there are abundant natural resources. That has to do with policies set by those who control the access to the resources who do not want changes in the economic order.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People with a degree and taste of freedom available in the Western countries find themselves locked out of every possibility to develop themselves in countries in the Middle-East like Saudi-Arabia , Egypt , etc .
etc. if they are not part of the ruling few .
If they blame only their own government they flee to the West .
If they believe there is a conspiracy between the local rulers at home and the infidels that rule the West they go support violent groups like Al-Qaida that fight the West and their own governments .
People without a degree tend to live happy within the constraints of dictatorships .
The only long term strategy that can make an end to the wars between countries in the Middle East among themselves and against Western countries is a shift of power from those who have access to the natural resources to those that participate in the workforce .
The problem however is that the Industrial Revolution does not take place in those parts of the world where there are abundant natural resources .
That has to do with policies set by those who control the access to the resources who do not want changes in the economic order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People with a degree and taste of freedom available in the Western countries find themselves locked out of every possibility to develop themselves in countries in the Middle-East like Saudi-Arabia, Egypt, etc.
etc. if they are not part of the ruling few.
If they blame only their own government they flee to the West.
If they believe there is a conspiracy between the local rulers at home and the infidels that rule the West they go support violent groups like Al-Qaida that fight the West and their own governments.
People without a degree tend to live happy within the constraints of dictatorships.
The only long term strategy that can make an end to the wars between countries in the Middle East among themselves and against Western countries is a shift of power from those who have access to the natural resources to those that participate in the workforce.
The problem however is that the Industrial Revolution does not take place in those parts of the world where there are abundant natural resources.
That has to do with policies set by those who control the access to the resources who do not want changes in the economic order.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600108</id>
	<title>Thank you Evangelicals &amp; Dubya</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259838120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This happened in part because George W. Bush and the Republicans were able to do well in the 2002 mid term elections by pushing a terrorist threat really hard. They did well of course.<br>In the 2004 presidential elections, there were people that realized this was a big waste of money. Half the people that voted for Kerry wanted Bush out of office. Turnout rate was the highest in 20? years. Unfortunately, Bush heavily pursued the Evangelicals and got many gay marriage issues on the same ballot. The Evangelicals voted for Bush at a 75 percent rate, and there are quite a few of them.</p><p>Quite frankly, the evangelicals should pay.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This happened in part because George W. Bush and the Republicans were able to do well in the 2002 mid term elections by pushing a terrorist threat really hard .
They did well of course.In the 2004 presidential elections , there were people that realized this was a big waste of money .
Half the people that voted for Kerry wanted Bush out of office .
Turnout rate was the highest in 20 ?
years. Unfortunately , Bush heavily pursued the Evangelicals and got many gay marriage issues on the same ballot .
The Evangelicals voted for Bush at a 75 percent rate , and there are quite a few of them.Quite frankly , the evangelicals should pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This happened in part because George W. Bush and the Republicans were able to do well in the 2002 mid term elections by pushing a terrorist threat really hard.
They did well of course.In the 2004 presidential elections, there were people that realized this was a big waste of money.
Half the people that voted for Kerry wanted Bush out of office.
Turnout rate was the highest in 20?
years. Unfortunately, Bush heavily pursued the Evangelicals and got many gay marriage issues on the same ballot.
The Evangelicals voted for Bush at a 75 percent rate, and there are quite a few of them.Quite frankly, the evangelicals should pay.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593744</id>
	<title>The Best and The Brightest</title>
	<author>anorlunda</author>
	<datestamp>1259857020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, can you think of any recruiter in any field and any country who isn't out to snag the best and the brightest?</p><p>Wouldn't it be recruiting malpractice so not do so?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , can you think of any recruiter in any field and any country who is n't out to snag the best and the brightest ? Would n't it be recruiting malpractice so not do so ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, can you think of any recruiter in any field and any country who isn't out to snag the best and the brightest?Wouldn't it be recruiting malpractice so not do so?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593984</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>bwcbwc</author>
	<datestamp>1259857800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion. Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook (until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof, which goes against what most of them say about faith.)</i></p><p>And yet there are many (non-biologist) scientists who are also creationists in the fundamentalist Christian sense. All you need is the Islamic equivalent.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion .
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook ( until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof , which goes against what most of them say about faith .
) And yet there are many ( non-biologist ) scientists who are also creationists in the fundamentalist Christian sense .
All you need is the Islamic equivalent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion.
Agnosticism seems to me to be the viewpoint most consistent with an Engineering outlook (until a religion provides some kind of tangible proof, which goes against what most of them say about faith.
)And yet there are many (non-biologist) scientists who are also creationists in the fundamentalist Christian sense.
All you need is the Islamic equivalent.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593854</id>
	<title>Insecure personality</title>
	<author>mdsolar</author>
	<datestamp>1259857380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Engineering is a means for people who feel insecure to gain power.  Personality flaws are not a real obstacle  to getting a degree.  I used to tutor premeds in physics and would find some pretty obsessive people, people who did not care at all about the subject, found no joy in learning it, but who covered it to get to their medical goal.  But the funny thing was that I met engineering students who had just the same attitude.  But physics is much more foundational to engineering that to medicine.  What these students seemed most interested in were the sports cars that came along with their coop programs.  I'm pretty sure that premeds who did not like medicine itself would not make it through their program while engineering students who did not like engineering would.<br> <br>
My experience with people who claim to be nuclear engineers here on slashdot is that they are obsessive to the point of being completely blind to reality.  More than once I've said that I hoped the commenter had nothing to do with the running of a nuclear power plant because they were plainly security risks.  That is on slashdot.  Who know who those people really were.  But there is at least an association between threats of violence and claims to be engineers.  Insecure personalities could explain that association.<br> <br>
I've also worked with mechanical and electrical engineers who are really great people.  Engineering is not a ticket to personality disorder, it just seems to attract and pass through some of that sort.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineering is a means for people who feel insecure to gain power .
Personality flaws are not a real obstacle to getting a degree .
I used to tutor premeds in physics and would find some pretty obsessive people , people who did not care at all about the subject , found no joy in learning it , but who covered it to get to their medical goal .
But the funny thing was that I met engineering students who had just the same attitude .
But physics is much more foundational to engineering that to medicine .
What these students seemed most interested in were the sports cars that came along with their coop programs .
I 'm pretty sure that premeds who did not like medicine itself would not make it through their program while engineering students who did not like engineering would .
My experience with people who claim to be nuclear engineers here on slashdot is that they are obsessive to the point of being completely blind to reality .
More than once I 've said that I hoped the commenter had nothing to do with the running of a nuclear power plant because they were plainly security risks .
That is on slashdot .
Who know who those people really were .
But there is at least an association between threats of violence and claims to be engineers .
Insecure personalities could explain that association .
I 've also worked with mechanical and electrical engineers who are really great people .
Engineering is not a ticket to personality disorder , it just seems to attract and pass through some of that sort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineering is a means for people who feel insecure to gain power.
Personality flaws are not a real obstacle  to getting a degree.
I used to tutor premeds in physics and would find some pretty obsessive people, people who did not care at all about the subject, found no joy in learning it, but who covered it to get to their medical goal.
But the funny thing was that I met engineering students who had just the same attitude.
But physics is much more foundational to engineering that to medicine.
What these students seemed most interested in were the sports cars that came along with their coop programs.
I'm pretty sure that premeds who did not like medicine itself would not make it through their program while engineering students who did not like engineering would.
My experience with people who claim to be nuclear engineers here on slashdot is that they are obsessive to the point of being completely blind to reality.
More than once I've said that I hoped the commenter had nothing to do with the running of a nuclear power plant because they were plainly security risks.
That is on slashdot.
Who know who those people really were.
But there is at least an association between threats of violence and claims to be engineers.
Insecure personalities could explain that association.
I've also worked with mechanical and electrical engineers who are really great people.
Engineering is not a ticket to personality disorder, it just seems to attract and pass through some of that sort.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</id>
	<title>Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>LaughingCoder</author>
	<datestamp>1259853300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.</p></div></blockquote><p>
While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity, I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromise. Im my mind, engineering is the art of compromise, and that is what separates us from "scientists". We crave efficiency, which in turn *requires* compromises. We constantly make tradeoffs between costs, quality and schedule, with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally. Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it (choose 1): better, sooner, cheaper. Instead, compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Further , engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise .
While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity , I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromise .
Im my mind , engineering is the art of compromise , and that is what separates us from " scientists " .
We crave efficiency , which in turn * requires * compromises .
We constantly make tradeoffs between costs , quality and schedule , with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally .
Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it ( choose 1 ) : better , sooner , cheaper .
Instead , compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Further, engineers tend to hold a particular mind-set that disdains ambiguity and compromise.
While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity, I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromise.
Im my mind, engineering is the art of compromise, and that is what separates us from "scientists".
We crave efficiency, which in turn *requires* compromises.
We constantly make tradeoffs between costs, quality and schedule, with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally.
Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it (choose 1): better, sooner, cheaper.
Instead, compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604400</id>
	<title>Re:Quick responses to common /. responses</title>
	<author>Raedwald</author>
	<datestamp>1262268120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In this context, "terrorist" means "fundamentalist Islamic terrorist", so we might well ask "why are disproportionately many engineers fundamentalist Muslims"? And hence "why is anyone a religious fundamentalist at all"?

I've seen it suggested that fundamentalism, despite its apparent traditionalism, is actually a very modern phenomena. It is actually a religions reaction against characteristics of the modern world. Islamic fundamentalism is therefore more prevalent among people who have been exposed to the (undesired) characteristics of western culture and capitalism. Perhaps Muslim engineers have more contact with western culture and capitalism that other Muslim students?</htmltext>
<tokenext>In this context , " terrorist " means " fundamentalist Islamic terrorist " , so we might well ask " why are disproportionately many engineers fundamentalist Muslims " ?
And hence " why is anyone a religious fundamentalist at all " ?
I 've seen it suggested that fundamentalism , despite its apparent traditionalism , is actually a very modern phenomena .
It is actually a religions reaction against characteristics of the modern world .
Islamic fundamentalism is therefore more prevalent among people who have been exposed to the ( undesired ) characteristics of western culture and capitalism .
Perhaps Muslim engineers have more contact with western culture and capitalism that other Muslim students ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In this context, "terrorist" means "fundamentalist Islamic terrorist", so we might well ask "why are disproportionately many engineers fundamentalist Muslims"?
And hence "why is anyone a religious fundamentalist at all"?
I've seen it suggested that fundamentalism, despite its apparent traditionalism, is actually a very modern phenomena.
It is actually a religions reaction against characteristics of the modern world.
Islamic fundamentalism is therefore more prevalent among people who have been exposed to the (undesired) characteristics of western culture and capitalism.
Perhaps Muslim engineers have more contact with western culture and capitalism that other Muslim students?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</id>
	<title>Eh</title>
	<author>ShooterNeo</author>
	<datestamp>1259853960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Must have been bottom of the class engineers who barely passed at all.  All of the terrorist attacks carried out (all 5-10 of them over two decades) against the U.S. were poorly planned and poorly executed.  Even the September 11 attacks could have been 10 fold more deadly had they been timed and executed better.</p><p>And don't get me started on the shoe and underwear bombers.  Evidently, the "engineers" who plotted those attacks didn't think that maybe they should build a foolproof electronic detonator for their bomb rather than rely on the skillz of someone who is willing to blow himself up.</p><p>Why am I harping on this?  It pisses me off that as a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiots.  The terrorists have WON.  They've caused grievous damaged to the United States thanks to the response of the U.S. government and it's sheeple.</p><p>Had we done NOTHING at all in response to the attacks (except for maybe giving the FBI a billion dollar budget increase or something cheap like that) it would have cost us far less treasure and lifetimes of labor.  Those freaking towers were only insured for a couple of billion, tops.</p><p>If we're going to spend a trillion dollars fighting a few evil individuals, they better be a Lex Luther...not Cletus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Must have been bottom of the class engineers who barely passed at all .
All of the terrorist attacks carried out ( all 5-10 of them over two decades ) against the U.S. were poorly planned and poorly executed .
Even the September 11 attacks could have been 10 fold more deadly had they been timed and executed better.And do n't get me started on the shoe and underwear bombers .
Evidently , the " engineers " who plotted those attacks did n't think that maybe they should build a foolproof electronic detonator for their bomb rather than rely on the skillz of someone who is willing to blow himself up.Why am I harping on this ?
It pisses me off that as a result of the actions of a few idiots , a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS ( that is , the life 's work of at least a million people ) has been blown reacting to these idiots .
The terrorists have WON .
They 've caused grievous damaged to the United States thanks to the response of the U.S. government and it 's sheeple.Had we done NOTHING at all in response to the attacks ( except for maybe giving the FBI a billion dollar budget increase or something cheap like that ) it would have cost us far less treasure and lifetimes of labor .
Those freaking towers were only insured for a couple of billion , tops.If we 're going to spend a trillion dollars fighting a few evil individuals , they better be a Lex Luther...not Cletus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Must have been bottom of the class engineers who barely passed at all.
All of the terrorist attacks carried out (all 5-10 of them over two decades) against the U.S. were poorly planned and poorly executed.
Even the September 11 attacks could have been 10 fold more deadly had they been timed and executed better.And don't get me started on the shoe and underwear bombers.
Evidently, the "engineers" who plotted those attacks didn't think that maybe they should build a foolproof electronic detonator for their bomb rather than rely on the skillz of someone who is willing to blow himself up.Why am I harping on this?
It pisses me off that as a result of the actions of a few idiots, a TRILLION FUCKING DOLLARS (that is, the life's work of at least a million people) has been blown reacting to these idiots.
The terrorists have WON.
They've caused grievous damaged to the United States thanks to the response of the U.S. government and it's sheeple.Had we done NOTHING at all in response to the attacks (except for maybe giving the FBI a billion dollar budget increase or something cheap like that) it would have cost us far less treasure and lifetimes of labor.
Those freaking towers were only insured for a couple of billion, tops.If we're going to spend a trillion dollars fighting a few evil individuals, they better be a Lex Luther...not Cletus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596268</id>
	<title>WTF?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259864880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Accountants are the ones that "disdain ambiguity"<br>An Engineer thrives in ambiguity as it allows him/her more freedom to design a solution to the problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Accountants are the ones that " disdain ambiguity " An Engineer thrives in ambiguity as it allows him/her more freedom to design a solution to the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Accountants are the ones that "disdain ambiguity"An Engineer thrives in ambiguity as it allows him/her more freedom to design a solution to the problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594404</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259859120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is why they call it a "leap of faith". Once you've made the leap of taking one of the religious postulates as an axiom, all that's been built on top of it begins to make sense.<br>As a person with some faith, I think the reason is, one becomes convinced that faith would benefit him in some way. You don't accept everything blindly, just one postulate and move on from there.<br>I've had countless arguments with religious people, and they always gave a very coherent, clear view of the world. Until I realized that as a prerequisite of having the discussion, I was taking their "suppose god exists" as a fact, just for the sake of the argument. Everything on top of that had ready answers.</p><p>Btw, it's not as though an engineering mindset haven''t been prone to following one mistaken postulate and building grandiose theories on top of it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is why they call it a " leap of faith " .
Once you 've made the leap of taking one of the religious postulates as an axiom , all that 's been built on top of it begins to make sense.As a person with some faith , I think the reason is , one becomes convinced that faith would benefit him in some way .
You do n't accept everything blindly , just one postulate and move on from there.I 've had countless arguments with religious people , and they always gave a very coherent , clear view of the world .
Until I realized that as a prerequisite of having the discussion , I was taking their " suppose god exists " as a fact , just for the sake of the argument .
Everything on top of that had ready answers.Btw , it 's not as though an engineering mindset haven''t been prone to following one mistaken postulate and building grandiose theories on top of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is why they call it a "leap of faith".
Once you've made the leap of taking one of the religious postulates as an axiom, all that's been built on top of it begins to make sense.As a person with some faith, I think the reason is, one becomes convinced that faith would benefit him in some way.
You don't accept everything blindly, just one postulate and move on from there.I've had countless arguments with religious people, and they always gave a very coherent, clear view of the world.
Until I realized that as a prerequisite of having the discussion, I was taking their "suppose god exists" as a fact, just for the sake of the argument.
Everything on top of that had ready answers.Btw, it's not as though an engineering mindset haven''t been prone to following one mistaken postulate and building grandiose theories on top of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593778</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me? Uh oh. We're a "no-go" on that one, Houston.</p><p>It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E. without tangible proof) faith in any religion."</p><p>The peculiar thing is, the statistics don't bear that out.  What you describe compared to the average population is probably true, but compared to other scientists, engineers have a much higher proportion of religious belief.  Furthermore, a surprising number of the "big name" <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem\_hypothesis" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">antievolutionary creationists happen to have their training in engineering</a> [wikipedia.org].  It's a really weird observation.</p><p>I think what you're missing out on is the situation when engineers happen to *become* the "religious authority", at which point they don't have to "blindly swallow" anything.  They're the authority making and feeding the claims to others, and they can specify it with all the strict rigor and jargon that an engineer is typically good at in other contexts.  You should hear these guys at a creationist seminar/sermon.  The theology *sounds* like an engineering analysis, and it sounds much more authoritative to anyone listening, especially if it is packed with technical-sounding jargon that (to an untrained ear) sounds just as impressive as the "nonsense" that conventional scientists talk about.  Also, what if they were indoctrinated with religion from a very young age, and only subsequently received their engineering training?  Why question what they have always accepted?  It's certainly harder to apply that kind of critical thinking to something that is deeply ingrained.</p><p>Obviously this isn't the norm.  We're looking at the far distal tail of the distribution.  But it is weird how many engineers are down there.  As you say, you would expect that the normal training would tend to negate such an outcome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me ?
Uh oh .
We 're a " no-go " on that one , Houston.It 's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind ( I.E .
without tangible proof ) faith in any religion .
" The peculiar thing is , the statistics do n't bear that out .
What you describe compared to the average population is probably true , but compared to other scientists , engineers have a much higher proportion of religious belief .
Furthermore , a surprising number of the " big name " antievolutionary creationists happen to have their training in engineering [ wikipedia.org ] .
It 's a really weird observation.I think what you 're missing out on is the situation when engineers happen to * become * the " religious authority " , at which point they do n't have to " blindly swallow " anything .
They 're the authority making and feeding the claims to others , and they can specify it with all the strict rigor and jargon that an engineer is typically good at in other contexts .
You should hear these guys at a creationist seminar/sermon .
The theology * sounds * like an engineering analysis , and it sounds much more authoritative to anyone listening , especially if it is packed with technical-sounding jargon that ( to an untrained ear ) sounds just as impressive as the " nonsense " that conventional scientists talk about .
Also , what if they were indoctrinated with religion from a very young age , and only subsequently received their engineering training ?
Why question what they have always accepted ?
It 's certainly harder to apply that kind of critical thinking to something that is deeply ingrained.Obviously this is n't the norm .
We 're looking at the far distal tail of the distribution .
But it is weird how many engineers are down there .
As you say , you would expect that the normal training would tend to negate such an outcome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...Ability to blindly swallow what religious authorities tell me?
Uh oh.
We're a "no-go" on that one, Houston.It's amazing to me that anyone with an engineering background could have blind (I.E.
without tangible proof) faith in any religion.
"The peculiar thing is, the statistics don't bear that out.
What you describe compared to the average population is probably true, but compared to other scientists, engineers have a much higher proportion of religious belief.
Furthermore, a surprising number of the "big name" antievolutionary creationists happen to have their training in engineering [wikipedia.org].
It's a really weird observation.I think what you're missing out on is the situation when engineers happen to *become* the "religious authority", at which point they don't have to "blindly swallow" anything.
They're the authority making and feeding the claims to others, and they can specify it with all the strict rigor and jargon that an engineer is typically good at in other contexts.
You should hear these guys at a creationist seminar/sermon.
The theology *sounds* like an engineering analysis, and it sounds much more authoritative to anyone listening, especially if it is packed with technical-sounding jargon that (to an untrained ear) sounds just as impressive as the "nonsense" that conventional scientists talk about.
Also, what if they were indoctrinated with religion from a very young age, and only subsequently received their engineering training?
Why question what they have always accepted?
It's certainly harder to apply that kind of critical thinking to something that is deeply ingrained.Obviously this isn't the norm.
We're looking at the far distal tail of the distribution.
But it is weird how many engineers are down there.
As you say, you would expect that the normal training would tend to negate such an outcome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597182</id>
	<title>Free Healthcare</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1259868060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh great, now being a geek will get us on the airport list to have a <b>free prostate exam</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh great , now being a geek will get us on the airport list to have a free prostate exam .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh great, now being a geek will get us on the airport list to have a free prostate exam.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346</id>
	<title>It's a cultural thing</title>
	<author>stewbacca</author>
	<datestamp>1259859000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I studied Arabic in the Army's immersion program and I can tell you that most Arab males claim to be engineers (even if they aren't). It's one of the highest achievements in their culture. Ana Muhandis (I'm an engineer) is a common phrase and one of the first you learn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I studied Arabic in the Army 's immersion program and I can tell you that most Arab males claim to be engineers ( even if they are n't ) .
It 's one of the highest achievements in their culture .
Ana Muhandis ( I 'm an engineer ) is a common phrase and one of the first you learn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I studied Arabic in the Army's immersion program and I can tell you that most Arab males claim to be engineers (even if they aren't).
It's one of the highest achievements in their culture.
Ana Muhandis (I'm an engineer) is a common phrase and one of the first you learn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698</id>
	<title>Engineers make the best soldiers</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1259856840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every serious military fan boy (or whatever) knows that combat engineers are, overall, the most economically effective soldiers.</p><p>Take everything you'd want in a grunt, but invest a little more education so they can use more technology, and that is basically a combat engineer.  A super-grunt, the grunt of the future<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... today.</p><p>Per dollar invested by society, per person, per pound, per whatever, combat engineers are simply the most effective soldiers on the planet.  There are other groups with "more battlefield power", tac nuke artillery, attack copter pilot, etc, but they invariably require a million to trillion dollar rear echelon and military industrial complex back home, and lack the sustained long term fighting power of a combat engineering group.  Anything that can crush ten combat engineering units, has an overall societal cost maybe 1e6 higher than a CE unit, so assuming enough smart enlistees, your overall military power is the highest when you maximize your combat engineers.</p><p>The only reason more combat engineers aren't used, is the quantity of enlistees with the required superior brain power is limited.</p><p>In the 70s/80s there was kind of a "revenge of the jocks" doctrinal move toward special forces, etc, but that has pretty much failed, fizzled out, and the combat engineers reign supreme on the battlefield once again...</p><p>Non-military folks can pretend to be surprised that a military force would try to recruit engineers for pageviews or whatever, but for those in the business, its no surprise at all.</p><p>(And, yes, I was in the Army in the early 90s, and no, I was in Ordnance not combat engineering, and as a supplier we were well aware that the combat engineers have by far the most effective armaments)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every serious military fan boy ( or whatever ) knows that combat engineers are , overall , the most economically effective soldiers.Take everything you 'd want in a grunt , but invest a little more education so they can use more technology , and that is basically a combat engineer .
A super-grunt , the grunt of the future ... today.Per dollar invested by society , per person , per pound , per whatever , combat engineers are simply the most effective soldiers on the planet .
There are other groups with " more battlefield power " , tac nuke artillery , attack copter pilot , etc , but they invariably require a million to trillion dollar rear echelon and military industrial complex back home , and lack the sustained long term fighting power of a combat engineering group .
Anything that can crush ten combat engineering units , has an overall societal cost maybe 1e6 higher than a CE unit , so assuming enough smart enlistees , your overall military power is the highest when you maximize your combat engineers.The only reason more combat engineers are n't used , is the quantity of enlistees with the required superior brain power is limited.In the 70s/80s there was kind of a " revenge of the jocks " doctrinal move toward special forces , etc , but that has pretty much failed , fizzled out , and the combat engineers reign supreme on the battlefield once again...Non-military folks can pretend to be surprised that a military force would try to recruit engineers for pageviews or whatever , but for those in the business , its no surprise at all .
( And , yes , I was in the Army in the early 90s , and no , I was in Ordnance not combat engineering , and as a supplier we were well aware that the combat engineers have by far the most effective armaments )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every serious military fan boy (or whatever) knows that combat engineers are, overall, the most economically effective soldiers.Take everything you'd want in a grunt, but invest a little more education so they can use more technology, and that is basically a combat engineer.
A super-grunt, the grunt of the future ... today.Per dollar invested by society, per person, per pound, per whatever, combat engineers are simply the most effective soldiers on the planet.
There are other groups with "more battlefield power", tac nuke artillery, attack copter pilot, etc, but they invariably require a million to trillion dollar rear echelon and military industrial complex back home, and lack the sustained long term fighting power of a combat engineering group.
Anything that can crush ten combat engineering units, has an overall societal cost maybe 1e6 higher than a CE unit, so assuming enough smart enlistees, your overall military power is the highest when you maximize your combat engineers.The only reason more combat engineers aren't used, is the quantity of enlistees with the required superior brain power is limited.In the 70s/80s there was kind of a "revenge of the jocks" doctrinal move toward special forces, etc, but that has pretty much failed, fizzled out, and the combat engineers reign supreme on the battlefield once again...Non-military folks can pretend to be surprised that a military force would try to recruit engineers for pageviews or whatever, but for those in the business, its no surprise at all.
(And, yes, I was in the Army in the early 90s, and no, I was in Ordnance not combat engineering, and as a supplier we were well aware that the combat engineers have by far the most effective armaments)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597128</id>
	<title>Highly Conflicted People</title>
	<author>RalphSouth</author>
	<datestamp>1259867880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Imagine having to belive something on faith and work in a career based on facts and logic.  Maybe that produces unbearable tension in some people, leading to total breakdown and insate activities.</p><p>Engineering on is own is tension filled, building sturdy bridges that are cheap, fast programs that don't use a lot of storage, and all the other contradictory requirments that must be meshed, questioned, implemented, or ignored.  I suspect the pressure may be just too much for some people when you add cultural pressure to "just believe".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine having to belive something on faith and work in a career based on facts and logic .
Maybe that produces unbearable tension in some people , leading to total breakdown and insate activities.Engineering on is own is tension filled , building sturdy bridges that are cheap , fast programs that do n't use a lot of storage , and all the other contradictory requirments that must be meshed , questioned , implemented , or ignored .
I suspect the pressure may be just too much for some people when you add cultural pressure to " just believe " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine having to belive something on faith and work in a career based on facts and logic.
Maybe that produces unbearable tension in some people, leading to total breakdown and insate activities.Engineering on is own is tension filled, building sturdy bridges that are cheap, fast programs that don't use a lot of storage, and all the other contradictory requirments that must be meshed, questioned, implemented, or ignored.
I suspect the pressure may be just too much for some people when you add cultural pressure to "just believe".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597768</id>
	<title>Re:What about rich kids becoming terrorists?</title>
	<author>frank\_adrian314159</author>
	<datestamp>1259870520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>As with Marxism, Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.</i> </p><p>Positive or negative, changes are almost never from the poor, who are busy trying to survive, or the rich, who are busy enjoying the "fruits of their labors" and preventing change that might remove the same.  Dynamism - political, social, or technological - usually comes from the middle class.  And usually the upper middle-class, as they have the most in the way of resources to achieve their ends.</p><p>The fact that you lump Marxism and Islamic terrorism together, without noticing that this is, in fact, the way of change in most things, exhibits that you value your ideology more than insight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As with Marxism , Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors .
Positive or negative , changes are almost never from the poor , who are busy trying to survive , or the rich , who are busy enjoying the " fruits of their labors " and preventing change that might remove the same .
Dynamism - political , social , or technological - usually comes from the middle class .
And usually the upper middle-class , as they have the most in the way of resources to achieve their ends.The fact that you lump Marxism and Islamic terrorism together , without noticing that this is , in fact , the way of change in most things , exhibits that you value your ideology more than insight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As with Marxism, Islamic terrorism is not about the poor rising up against oppressors.
Positive or negative, changes are almost never from the poor, who are busy trying to survive, or the rich, who are busy enjoying the "fruits of their labors" and preventing change that might remove the same.
Dynamism - political, social, or technological - usually comes from the middle class.
And usually the upper middle-class, as they have the most in the way of resources to achieve their ends.The fact that you lump Marxism and Islamic terrorism together, without noticing that this is, in fact, the way of change in most things, exhibits that you value your ideology more than insight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597270</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Cruxus</author>
	<datestamp>1259868540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, the right/wrong dichotomy just doesn't work in complicated social and political issues because it comes to things other than a simple empirical test. It's about values, priorities, cost/benefit, and incomplete knowledge of facts. For example, a historian cannot go back in time and see the events unfold in front of them or read the people's minds to know all their intentions, and again, with the very complex chain of cause and effect that is history, it's not always straightforward what caused what to happen. Various trends may have put an almost inevitability on some event (or something like it) happening, or a world leader may have had a hidden agenda. In politics, choices come down to what <b>kind</b> of society a person would like to live in and what policies would get us closer to it; people disagree here, and arguments that prove or disprove a position do so within the framework of assumptions/axioms/values they make (maximal economic efficiency is to an extent in conflict with living in a fair and just society, for example).</p><p>Even in the sciences, knowledge is not absolute. Scientists have to be open to revising their theories as new data comes in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , the right/wrong dichotomy just does n't work in complicated social and political issues because it comes to things other than a simple empirical test .
It 's about values , priorities , cost/benefit , and incomplete knowledge of facts .
For example , a historian can not go back in time and see the events unfold in front of them or read the people 's minds to know all their intentions , and again , with the very complex chain of cause and effect that is history , it 's not always straightforward what caused what to happen .
Various trends may have put an almost inevitability on some event ( or something like it ) happening , or a world leader may have had a hidden agenda .
In politics , choices come down to what kind of society a person would like to live in and what policies would get us closer to it ; people disagree here , and arguments that prove or disprove a position do so within the framework of assumptions/axioms/values they make ( maximal economic efficiency is to an extent in conflict with living in a fair and just society , for example ) .Even in the sciences , knowledge is not absolute .
Scientists have to be open to revising their theories as new data comes in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, the right/wrong dichotomy just doesn't work in complicated social and political issues because it comes to things other than a simple empirical test.
It's about values, priorities, cost/benefit, and incomplete knowledge of facts.
For example, a historian cannot go back in time and see the events unfold in front of them or read the people's minds to know all their intentions, and again, with the very complex chain of cause and effect that is history, it's not always straightforward what caused what to happen.
Various trends may have put an almost inevitability on some event (or something like it) happening, or a world leader may have had a hidden agenda.
In politics, choices come down to what kind of society a person would like to live in and what policies would get us closer to it; people disagree here, and arguments that prove or disprove a position do so within the framework of assumptions/axioms/values they make (maximal economic efficiency is to an extent in conflict with living in a fair and just society, for example).Even in the sciences, knowledge is not absolute.
Scientists have to be open to revising their theories as new data comes in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593902</id>
	<title>Cause we know how to get things done?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously....</p><p>Artsmen can spend their time thinking about a problem, come to a declaration and think they've changed the world.</p><p>Engineers belive in concrete (in terms of solid and real) actions. Cause and effect. Besides, we tend to think things through in a logical manner, regarding the order that tasks have to happen in order to achieve a desired goal.</p><p>Lets just say that the successful terrorists tend to be engineers, cause we tend to be able to plan things through fully, and have the technical expertise to analyse problems and derive solutions / countermeasures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously....Artsmen can spend their time thinking about a problem , come to a declaration and think they 've changed the world.Engineers belive in concrete ( in terms of solid and real ) actions .
Cause and effect .
Besides , we tend to think things through in a logical manner , regarding the order that tasks have to happen in order to achieve a desired goal.Lets just say that the successful terrorists tend to be engineers , cause we tend to be able to plan things through fully , and have the technical expertise to analyse problems and derive solutions / countermeasures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously....Artsmen can spend their time thinking about a problem, come to a declaration and think they've changed the world.Engineers belive in concrete (in terms of solid and real) actions.
Cause and effect.
Besides, we tend to think things through in a logical manner, regarding the order that tasks have to happen in order to achieve a desired goal.Lets just say that the successful terrorists tend to be engineers, cause we tend to be able to plan things through fully, and have the technical expertise to analyse problems and derive solutions / countermeasures.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593388</id>
	<title>Re:Engineering vs science?</title>
	<author>robot256</author>
	<datestamp>1259855760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The most important thing for a successful engineer is the ability to <b>question</b> rules and specifications.  Like, "Why do you want me to only use bricks to build this house? Oh, you want it fireproof? Then I will alter your spec and use steel."  If the client refuses, the engineer gets frustrated and leaves.  Any good engineer knows there better be a damn good reason for the specifications, otherwise you get a suboptimal solution.  This has a tendency to drive them away from arbitrary religious beliefs, etc., and results in agnosticism in idealistic engineers.
</p><p>However, there are many engineers who are not so idealistic, not so critical of their specifications, and more likely to make (invalid) assumptions.  These people are more likely to hold conservative religious beliefs, and possibly absorb the beliefs of others, especially when in school.  Granted, these are also the least competent engineers, which might explain why so many attacks have been flubbed.
</p><p>For the sake of argument, it is easy to see how an idealistic engineer could be disillusioned by all the arbitrary and f***ing retarded rules in politics and business, eventually leading to extremism against the "broken system".  But the same idealist would also be able to see that terrorism would not change the system, thus I believe most recruited engineer terrorists fall into the "incompetent" category.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The most important thing for a successful engineer is the ability to question rules and specifications .
Like , " Why do you want me to only use bricks to build this house ?
Oh , you want it fireproof ?
Then I will alter your spec and use steel .
" If the client refuses , the engineer gets frustrated and leaves .
Any good engineer knows there better be a damn good reason for the specifications , otherwise you get a suboptimal solution .
This has a tendency to drive them away from arbitrary religious beliefs , etc. , and results in agnosticism in idealistic engineers .
However , there are many engineers who are not so idealistic , not so critical of their specifications , and more likely to make ( invalid ) assumptions .
These people are more likely to hold conservative religious beliefs , and possibly absorb the beliefs of others , especially when in school .
Granted , these are also the least competent engineers , which might explain why so many attacks have been flubbed .
For the sake of argument , it is easy to see how an idealistic engineer could be disillusioned by all the arbitrary and f * * * ing retarded rules in politics and business , eventually leading to extremism against the " broken system " .
But the same idealist would also be able to see that terrorism would not change the system , thus I believe most recruited engineer terrorists fall into the " incompetent " category .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most important thing for a successful engineer is the ability to question rules and specifications.
Like, "Why do you want me to only use bricks to build this house?
Oh, you want it fireproof?
Then I will alter your spec and use steel.
"  If the client refuses, the engineer gets frustrated and leaves.
Any good engineer knows there better be a damn good reason for the specifications, otherwise you get a suboptimal solution.
This has a tendency to drive them away from arbitrary religious beliefs, etc., and results in agnosticism in idealistic engineers.
However, there are many engineers who are not so idealistic, not so critical of their specifications, and more likely to make (invalid) assumptions.
These people are more likely to hold conservative religious beliefs, and possibly absorb the beliefs of others, especially when in school.
Granted, these are also the least competent engineers, which might explain why so many attacks have been flubbed.
For the sake of argument, it is easy to see how an idealistic engineer could be disillusioned by all the arbitrary and f***ing retarded rules in politics and business, eventually leading to extremism against the "broken system".
But the same idealist would also be able to see that terrorism would not change the system, thus I believe most recruited engineer terrorists fall into the "incompetent" category.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592870</id>
	<title>Or</title>
	<author>truthsearch</author>
	<datestamp>1259853420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or engineers are good at planning, organizing, and building stuff.  While in college they're probably most impressionable to joining causes.  Every organization on the planet wants eager, smart people working for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or engineers are good at planning , organizing , and building stuff .
While in college they 're probably most impressionable to joining causes .
Every organization on the planet wants eager , smart people working for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or engineers are good at planning, organizing, and building stuff.
While in college they're probably most impressionable to joining causes.
Every organization on the planet wants eager, smart people working for them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593002</id>
	<title>Ease of travel?</title>
	<author>wcrowe</author>
	<datestamp>1259853960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps another reason engineers predominate is because it is easier to get a visa, or otherwise travel, to Western countries if one is an engineer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps another reason engineers predominate is because it is easier to get a visa , or otherwise travel , to Western countries if one is an engineer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps another reason engineers predominate is because it is easier to get a visa, or otherwise travel, to Western countries if one is an engineer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601558</id>
	<title>Re:It's a cultural thing</title>
	<author>Macrat</author>
	<datestamp>1259848320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I studied Arabic in the Army's immersion program and I can tell you...</p></div><p>you really shouldn't be bragging about an Army education supplied by the lowest bidder.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I studied Arabic in the Army 's immersion program and I can tell you...you really should n't be bragging about an Army education supplied by the lowest bidder .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I studied Arabic in the Army's immersion program and I can tell you...you really shouldn't be bragging about an Army education supplied by the lowest bidder.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597174</id>
	<title>Salem hypothesis</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259868060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This sounds similar to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem\_hypothesis" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Salem hypothesis</a> [wikipedia.org], which states that ". .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.there is a correlation between subscribing to creationism and working in an engineering discipline."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This sounds similar to the Salem hypothesis [ wikipedia.org ] , which states that " .
. .there is a correlation between subscribing to creationism and working in an engineering discipline .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This sounds similar to the Salem hypothesis [wikipedia.org], which states that ".
. .there is a correlation between subscribing to creationism and working in an engineering discipline.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious answer?</title>
	<author>Z00L00K</author>
	<datestamp>1259854920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another issue is that engineering students are more likely to have enough skills to really pull off a terrorist act.</p><p>Many terrorist acts today involves a certain level of technology - everything from flying an aircraft to connecting two wires.</p><p>So there is no wonder that the terrorist organizations are targeting engineering students as a first choice. Just imagine how well another type of student would be able to rig an explosive or cause problems.</p><p>And there is also something behind the idea that many other societies are pushing hard in the engineering sector. It's only in the western world today that engineers are seen as some kind of low level creep that creates atomic bombs, weapons and biohazards - and that the best and highest rated people are instead working as actors, participate in reality shows like "Big Brother" or focus on essentially non-productive stuff like sociology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another issue is that engineering students are more likely to have enough skills to really pull off a terrorist act.Many terrorist acts today involves a certain level of technology - everything from flying an aircraft to connecting two wires.So there is no wonder that the terrorist organizations are targeting engineering students as a first choice .
Just imagine how well another type of student would be able to rig an explosive or cause problems.And there is also something behind the idea that many other societies are pushing hard in the engineering sector .
It 's only in the western world today that engineers are seen as some kind of low level creep that creates atomic bombs , weapons and biohazards - and that the best and highest rated people are instead working as actors , participate in reality shows like " Big Brother " or focus on essentially non-productive stuff like sociology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another issue is that engineering students are more likely to have enough skills to really pull off a terrorist act.Many terrorist acts today involves a certain level of technology - everything from flying an aircraft to connecting two wires.So there is no wonder that the terrorist organizations are targeting engineering students as a first choice.
Just imagine how well another type of student would be able to rig an explosive or cause problems.And there is also something behind the idea that many other societies are pushing hard in the engineering sector.
It's only in the western world today that engineers are seen as some kind of low level creep that creates atomic bombs, weapons and biohazards - and that the best and highest rated people are instead working as actors, participate in reality shows like "Big Brother" or focus on essentially non-productive stuff like sociology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595934</id>
	<title>Re:Quick responses to common /. responses</title>
	<author>flabbergast</author>
	<datestamp>1259863860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't read the paper (which I can't find in a peer reviewed journal either, but I'm not a sociologist).  But from the article:
<br> <br>"Gambetta and Hertog propose that a lack of appropriate jobs in their home countries may have radicalized some engineers in Arab countries....But the promises of modernization and development were often stymied by repression and corruption, and many young engineers in the 1980s were left jobless and frustrated."
<br> <br>Its economics, not 'style of thinking', that the authors propose as the problem.  If you slogged through 4 years of undergrad plus 2-7 years graduate work only to discover that the jobs you were promised weren't there, wouldn't that leave you disillusioned and susceptible to someone whispering in your ear "Hey, you know whose fault this is?"  The authors even point out a Middle Eastern country where engineers were not disproportionately represented in the radical movement:  Saudi Arabia, "where engineers had little trouble finding work in an ever-expanding economy."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't read the paper ( which I ca n't find in a peer reviewed journal either , but I 'm not a sociologist ) .
But from the article : " Gambetta and Hertog propose that a lack of appropriate jobs in their home countries may have radicalized some engineers in Arab countries....But the promises of modernization and development were often stymied by repression and corruption , and many young engineers in the 1980s were left jobless and frustrated .
" Its economics , not 'style of thinking ' , that the authors propose as the problem .
If you slogged through 4 years of undergrad plus 2-7 years graduate work only to discover that the jobs you were promised were n't there , would n't that leave you disillusioned and susceptible to someone whispering in your ear " Hey , you know whose fault this is ?
" The authors even point out a Middle Eastern country where engineers were not disproportionately represented in the radical movement : Saudi Arabia , " where engineers had little trouble finding work in an ever-expanding economy .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't read the paper (which I can't find in a peer reviewed journal either, but I'm not a sociologist).
But from the article:
 "Gambetta and Hertog propose that a lack of appropriate jobs in their home countries may have radicalized some engineers in Arab countries....But the promises of modernization and development were often stymied by repression and corruption, and many young engineers in the 1980s were left jobless and frustrated.
"
 Its economics, not 'style of thinking', that the authors propose as the problem.
If you slogged through 4 years of undergrad plus 2-7 years graduate work only to discover that the jobs you were promised weren't there, wouldn't that leave you disillusioned and susceptible to someone whispering in your ear "Hey, you know whose fault this is?
"  The authors even point out a Middle Eastern country where engineers were not disproportionately represented in the radical movement:  Saudi Arabia, "where engineers had little trouble finding work in an ever-expanding economy.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664</id>
	<title>Quick responses to common /. responses</title>
	<author>dnwq</author>
	<datestamp>1259856720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Okay, I know nobody RTFAs. But the original paper is <a href="http://www.nuff.ox.ac.uk/users/gambetta/Engineers\%20of\%20Jihad.pdf" title="ox.ac.uk">here</a> [ox.ac.uk], and it makes the following points:<br> <br>

1) It has nothing to do with technical abilities. Terrorists don't attempt to recruit people by technical ability, they just take whoever they can get.<br> <br>

2) It has nothing to do with ease of immigration as a skilled migrant. The paper cites studies on American religious terrorists (the nominally Christian far-right) and concludes that the unusual tendency of engineers towards right-wing radicalism seems universal.<br> <br>

3) The paper argues that the 'styles of thinking' that predispose people towards engineering, also predispose them towards right-wing radicalism. Engineers are more reliably right-wing than even economists! (who are the second-most reliably right-wing academic group). Likewise, a liberal arts education is correlated with left-wing radicalism (e.g., <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red\_Army\_Faction" title="wikipedia.org">communist bombing campaigns</a> [wikipedia.org] in postwar Western Europe). But there have been relatively few left-wing bombing terrorist acts after the end of the Soviet Union, while right-wing radicalism is on the rise. Hence mad engineers rather than mad Marx-spewing liberal arts graduates.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , I know nobody RTFAs .
But the original paper is here [ ox.ac.uk ] , and it makes the following points : 1 ) It has nothing to do with technical abilities .
Terrorists do n't attempt to recruit people by technical ability , they just take whoever they can get .
2 ) It has nothing to do with ease of immigration as a skilled migrant .
The paper cites studies on American religious terrorists ( the nominally Christian far-right ) and concludes that the unusual tendency of engineers towards right-wing radicalism seems universal .
3 ) The paper argues that the 'styles of thinking ' that predispose people towards engineering , also predispose them towards right-wing radicalism .
Engineers are more reliably right-wing than even economists !
( who are the second-most reliably right-wing academic group ) .
Likewise , a liberal arts education is correlated with left-wing radicalism ( e.g. , communist bombing campaigns [ wikipedia.org ] in postwar Western Europe ) .
But there have been relatively few left-wing bombing terrorist acts after the end of the Soviet Union , while right-wing radicalism is on the rise .
Hence mad engineers rather than mad Marx-spewing liberal arts graduates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, I know nobody RTFAs.
But the original paper is here [ox.ac.uk], and it makes the following points: 

1) It has nothing to do with technical abilities.
Terrorists don't attempt to recruit people by technical ability, they just take whoever they can get.
2) It has nothing to do with ease of immigration as a skilled migrant.
The paper cites studies on American religious terrorists (the nominally Christian far-right) and concludes that the unusual tendency of engineers towards right-wing radicalism seems universal.
3) The paper argues that the 'styles of thinking' that predispose people towards engineering, also predispose them towards right-wing radicalism.
Engineers are more reliably right-wing than even economists!
(who are the second-most reliably right-wing academic group).
Likewise, a liberal arts education is correlated with left-wing radicalism (e.g., communist bombing campaigns [wikipedia.org] in postwar Western Europe).
But there have been relatively few left-wing bombing terrorist acts after the end of the Soviet Union, while right-wing radicalism is on the rise.
Hence mad engineers rather than mad Marx-spewing liberal arts graduates.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595190</id>
	<title>Re:You'd think engineers would be more rational</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1259861640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...web developers"<br>HAHAHAHAHahaha. I thought we were talking about engineers and people who think for a living~</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...web developers " HAHAHAHAHahaha .
I thought we were talking about engineers and people who think for a living ~</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...web developers"HAHAHAHAHahaha.
I thought we were talking about engineers and people who think for a living~</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600790</id>
	<title>Re:Parent's Stats Are Not Accurate</title>
	<author>sn00ker</author>
	<datestamp>1259842560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>umm, what? 19.5\%+7.4\%=26.4\%. 17.1\%+9.9\%=27\%. A bit shy of 30\%, but not enormously. Your comprehension skills are pretty shocking.</htmltext>
<tokenext>umm , what ?
19.5 \ % + 7.4 \ % = 26.4 \ % . 17.1 \ % + 9.9 \ % = 27 \ % .
A bit shy of 30 \ % , but not enormously .
Your comprehension skills are pretty shocking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>umm, what?
19.5\%+7.4\%=26.4\%. 17.1\%+9.9\%=27\%.
A bit shy of 30\%, but not enormously.
Your comprehension skills are pretty shocking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597132</id>
	<title>Re:The Best and The Brightest</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259867940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right, and best and brightest go where the money is.  They get MBAs and enter middle management and those with some skill and/or luck enter upper management.  Basically best people in the developed Western world create new ways to move money around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , and best and brightest go where the money is .
They get MBAs and enter middle management and those with some skill and/or luck enter upper management .
Basically best people in the developed Western world create new ways to move money around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, and best and brightest go where the money is.
They get MBAs and enter middle management and those with some skill and/or luck enter upper management.
Basically best people in the developed Western world create new ways to move money around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Nitage</author>
	<datestamp>1259857860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>By contrast, Liberal Arts grads. are trained to see both sides of the story and to offer a 'balanced' perspective. But they're unable to cope with issues that aren't a template of 'there are two sides to every story and they're both equally valid' - which is a problem because most situations do not have two valid 'sides' and because the media, and news in paticular, is dominated by Liberal Arts grads.<br> <br>

Which is why science reporting is so crap - no, saying that the LHC will create a black hole the will destroy the earth is not an 'equally valid viewpoint' that the BBC should report in the interest of balance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By contrast , Liberal Arts grads .
are trained to see both sides of the story and to offer a 'balanced ' perspective .
But they 're unable to cope with issues that are n't a template of 'there are two sides to every story and they 're both equally valid ' - which is a problem because most situations do not have two valid 'sides ' and because the media , and news in paticular , is dominated by Liberal Arts grads .
Which is why science reporting is so crap - no , saying that the LHC will create a black hole the will destroy the earth is not an 'equally valid viewpoint ' that the BBC should report in the interest of balance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By contrast, Liberal Arts grads.
are trained to see both sides of the story and to offer a 'balanced' perspective.
But they're unable to cope with issues that aren't a template of 'there are two sides to every story and they're both equally valid' - which is a problem because most situations do not have two valid 'sides' and because the media, and news in paticular, is dominated by Liberal Arts grads.
Which is why science reporting is so crap - no, saying that the LHC will create a black hole the will destroy the earth is not an 'equally valid viewpoint' that the BBC should report in the interest of balance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594706</id>
	<title>Taking beliefs seriously</title>
	<author>Efreet</author>
	<datestamp>1259860140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Engineering, at its root, is the practice of taking abstract reasoning into physical form.  Nobody might have ever seen a certain kind of widget before, but if you know the right equations and do the math right you can make that widget and know what it will do.  This leads to a tendency to take beliefs seriously and to apply them consistently that can be dangerous when mixed with the wrong kinds of beliefs.</p><p>People are good at wearing beliefs like clothing to impress others and not really acting on them.  Christians might believe "Its good to give all your money to the poor" without actually believing that they should give all their money to the poor.  We're taught one thing explicitly, but by watching how other people act we learn to do something else implicitly.  Its non-trivial to learn to be an engineer and take explicit ideas seriously in your professional life while not doing so in your religious life, but we as a culture have generally learned how this is possible and Christian engineering students grow up with lots of good role models showing them how to compartmentalize their beliefs.  Sometimes it doesn't work, though, and the student becomes Bible literalists.</p><p>Muslims studying engineering in other countries, however, don't have the advantage of role models in how to continue believing-but-not-believing and so its far easier than it would be in the West for someone to come along and persuade them that they have to take their religion seriously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineering , at its root , is the practice of taking abstract reasoning into physical form .
Nobody might have ever seen a certain kind of widget before , but if you know the right equations and do the math right you can make that widget and know what it will do .
This leads to a tendency to take beliefs seriously and to apply them consistently that can be dangerous when mixed with the wrong kinds of beliefs.People are good at wearing beliefs like clothing to impress others and not really acting on them .
Christians might believe " Its good to give all your money to the poor " without actually believing that they should give all their money to the poor .
We 're taught one thing explicitly , but by watching how other people act we learn to do something else implicitly .
Its non-trivial to learn to be an engineer and take explicit ideas seriously in your professional life while not doing so in your religious life , but we as a culture have generally learned how this is possible and Christian engineering students grow up with lots of good role models showing them how to compartmentalize their beliefs .
Sometimes it does n't work , though , and the student becomes Bible literalists.Muslims studying engineering in other countries , however , do n't have the advantage of role models in how to continue believing-but-not-believing and so its far easier than it would be in the West for someone to come along and persuade them that they have to take their religion seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineering, at its root, is the practice of taking abstract reasoning into physical form.
Nobody might have ever seen a certain kind of widget before, but if you know the right equations and do the math right you can make that widget and know what it will do.
This leads to a tendency to take beliefs seriously and to apply them consistently that can be dangerous when mixed with the wrong kinds of beliefs.People are good at wearing beliefs like clothing to impress others and not really acting on them.
Christians might believe "Its good to give all your money to the poor" without actually believing that they should give all their money to the poor.
We're taught one thing explicitly, but by watching how other people act we learn to do something else implicitly.
Its non-trivial to learn to be an engineer and take explicit ideas seriously in your professional life while not doing so in your religious life, but we as a culture have generally learned how this is possible and Christian engineering students grow up with lots of good role models showing them how to compartmentalize their beliefs.
Sometimes it doesn't work, though, and the student becomes Bible literalists.Muslims studying engineering in other countries, however, don't have the advantage of role models in how to continue believing-but-not-believing and so its far easier than it would be in the West for someone to come along and persuade them that they have to take their religion seriously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599218</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Failed Physicist</author>
	<datestamp>1259833200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've actually found a mantra which is quite useful for this exact purpose. Whenever I'm talking/thinking and I'm about to say/think "I'm right", I automatically replace it with the more elaborate construction "I dare hope that I'm right" and then mentally append a list of reasons why I think that's the case (to be revised according to further information).<br>Helps me remain critical yet non-judgmental. YMMV, but I dare hope it works<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've actually found a mantra which is quite useful for this exact purpose .
Whenever I 'm talking/thinking and I 'm about to say/think " I 'm right " , I automatically replace it with the more elaborate construction " I dare hope that I 'm right " and then mentally append a list of reasons why I think that 's the case ( to be revised according to further information ) .Helps me remain critical yet non-judgmental .
YMMV , but I dare hope it works : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've actually found a mantra which is quite useful for this exact purpose.
Whenever I'm talking/thinking and I'm about to say/think "I'm right", I automatically replace it with the more elaborate construction "I dare hope that I'm right" and then mentally append a list of reasons why I think that's the case (to be revised according to further information).Helps me remain critical yet non-judgmental.
YMMV, but I dare hope it works :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593950</id>
	<title>Engineers don't need to know how to talk to girls.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259857680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When we're done studying, we don't have to bother with girls in order to relax. We can just curl up with a good book and a bottle or two of good beer. Smart engineers know that girls are like cats: you don't have to go after them, eventually one will simply insinuate herself into your life. If you're lucky, you won't want to get rid of her by the time you realize what she's done.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When we 're done studying , we do n't have to bother with girls in order to relax .
We can just curl up with a good book and a bottle or two of good beer .
Smart engineers know that girls are like cats : you do n't have to go after them , eventually one will simply insinuate herself into your life .
If you 're lucky , you wo n't want to get rid of her by the time you realize what she 's done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When we're done studying, we don't have to bother with girls in order to relax.
We can just curl up with a good book and a bottle or two of good beer.
Smart engineers know that girls are like cats: you don't have to go after them, eventually one will simply insinuate herself into your life.
If you're lucky, you won't want to get rid of her by the time you realize what she's done.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599072</id>
	<title>Truly great engineering moves beyond compromises</title>
	<author>Paul Fernhout</author>
	<datestamp>1259832600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While most day-to-day engineering is, as you say, a compromise between multiple priorities, I've been told by an IBM Research "Master Inventor" that really excellent engineering figures out a way to meet all the priorities without major compromise through some new insight (but such conceptual breakthroughs are rare).</p><p>Of course, a deeper issue is, what are our priorities, values, and assumptions, and how are we choosing them?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>I hope we go into future technological singularities with humane values at the front of our priorities, because otherwise, building things like military robots to enforce economic dogmas (usually linked to not letting people eat unless they work) is totally ironic.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://educationanddemocracy.org/FSCfiles/C\_CC2a\_TripleRevolution.htm" title="educationa...ocracy.org">http://educationanddemocracy.org/FSCfiles/C\_CC2a\_TripleRevolution.htm</a> [educationa...ocracy.org]<br>Why not just build robots to do the work instead? The major challenge of the 21st century is overcoming the irony of the tools of abundance being used to create artificial scarcity (because the people directing the engineers are still preoccupied with perceived scarcity). A parody I wrote related to that:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; "A post-scarcity "Downfall" parody remix of the bunker scene"<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/32e8fc32c89c96bd?hl=en" title="google.com">http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/32e8fc32c89c96bd?hl=en</a> [google.com]</p><p>I think many engineers spend too much time indoors with too little sunlight. They should be taking vitamin D to help ward of disease and mental illness:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml" title="vitamindcouncil.org">http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml</a> [vitamindcouncil.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While most day-to-day engineering is , as you say , a compromise between multiple priorities , I 've been told by an IBM Research " Master Inventor " that really excellent engineering figures out a way to meet all the priorities without major compromise through some new insight ( but such conceptual breakthroughs are rare ) .Of course , a deeper issue is , what are our priorities , values , and assumptions , and how are we choosing them ?
: - ) I hope we go into future technological singularities with humane values at the front of our priorities , because otherwise , building things like military robots to enforce economic dogmas ( usually linked to not letting people eat unless they work ) is totally ironic .
    http : //educationanddemocracy.org/FSCfiles/C \ _CC2a \ _TripleRevolution.htm [ educationa...ocracy.org ] Why not just build robots to do the work instead ?
The major challenge of the 21st century is overcoming the irony of the tools of abundance being used to create artificial scarcity ( because the people directing the engineers are still preoccupied with perceived scarcity ) .
A parody I wrote related to that :     " A post-scarcity " Downfall " parody remix of the bunker scene "     http : //groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/32e8fc32c89c96bd ? hl = en [ google.com ] I think many engineers spend too much time indoors with too little sunlight .
They should be taking vitamin D to help ward of disease and mental illness :     http : //www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml [ vitamindcouncil.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While most day-to-day engineering is, as you say, a compromise between multiple priorities, I've been told by an IBM Research "Master Inventor" that really excellent engineering figures out a way to meet all the priorities without major compromise through some new insight (but such conceptual breakthroughs are rare).Of course, a deeper issue is, what are our priorities, values, and assumptions, and how are we choosing them?
:-)I hope we go into future technological singularities with humane values at the front of our priorities, because otherwise, building things like military robots to enforce economic dogmas (usually linked to not letting people eat unless they work) is totally ironic.
    http://educationanddemocracy.org/FSCfiles/C\_CC2a\_TripleRevolution.htm [educationa...ocracy.org]Why not just build robots to do the work instead?
The major challenge of the 21st century is overcoming the irony of the tools of abundance being used to create artificial scarcity (because the people directing the engineers are still preoccupied with perceived scarcity).
A parody I wrote related to that:
    "A post-scarcity "Downfall" parody remix of the bunker scene"
    http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/32e8fc32c89c96bd?hl=en [google.com]I think many engineers spend too much time indoors with too little sunlight.
They should be taking vitamin D to help ward of disease and mental illness:
    http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/treatment.shtml [vitamindcouncil.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599310</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Corporate Troll</author>
	<datestamp>1259833620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Engineers are ALWAYS right. ALWAYS.</p></div></blockquote><p>Hmmmm.... That explains why me and the wife disagree so often.  I know I'm right because I have the numbers to show and she knows she's right because, she's right and no exceptions allowed....  A bit like fundamentalist theists.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineers are ALWAYS right .
ALWAYS.Hmmmm.... That explains why me and the wife disagree so often .
I know I 'm right because I have the numbers to show and she knows she 's right because , she 's right and no exceptions allowed.... A bit like fundamentalist theists .
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineers are ALWAYS right.
ALWAYS.Hmmmm.... That explains why me and the wife disagree so often.
I know I'm right because I have the numbers to show and she knows she's right because, she's right and no exceptions allowed....  A bit like fundamentalist theists.
;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593404</id>
	<title>And how good were they at engineering...</title>
	<author>oscarwumpus</author>
	<datestamp>1259855760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> Frankly, these were poor attempts at sabotage. Unless they sabotaged their sabotaging purposely to get a free flight to the US/ wherever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly , these were poor attempts at sabotage .
Unless they sabotaged their sabotaging purposely to get a free flight to the US/ wherever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Frankly, these were poor attempts at sabotage.
Unless they sabotaged their sabotaging purposely to get a free flight to the US/ wherever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593564</id>
	<title>Two letters...</title>
	<author>ianalis</author>
	<datestamp>1259856360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BS</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593454</id>
	<title>Not so fast...</title>
	<author>MikeRT</author>
	<datestamp>1259855940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

No, extraordinary claims require simple proof like anything else. The burden of proof does not scale with the grandiosity of the claims. Rather, each aspect of the extraordinary claim should be subjected to falsification.
<br>
Here are <a href="http://voxday.blogspot.com/2009/09/mailvox-falsification.html" title="blogspot.com">some falsification tests for Christianity</a> [blogspot.com], for example, which directly map to specific, "extraordinary claims" made by it.</p><blockquote><div><p>If I were to claim to have a device that could solve any problem in linear time, or that produced more energy than it consumed, or that nullified gravity, any engineer worth the title would be highly skeptical and would demand to see hard data before believing such a claim.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

That is because those claims have been demonstrated to be impossible or at least improbable beyond a reasonable doubt at this point. Spiritual claims are primarily testimonial. I suppose you could argue that testimonial evidence is crap, but then you'd also have to argue that the entire foundation of the legal system is crap too, since "forensic science" (at least as practiced by the government) is closer to phrenology than physics as far as being science.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof .
No , extraordinary claims require simple proof like anything else .
The burden of proof does not scale with the grandiosity of the claims .
Rather , each aspect of the extraordinary claim should be subjected to falsification .
Here are some falsification tests for Christianity [ blogspot.com ] , for example , which directly map to specific , " extraordinary claims " made by it.If I were to claim to have a device that could solve any problem in linear time , or that produced more energy than it consumed , or that nullified gravity , any engineer worth the title would be highly skeptical and would demand to see hard data before believing such a claim .
That is because those claims have been demonstrated to be impossible or at least improbable beyond a reasonable doubt at this point .
Spiritual claims are primarily testimonial .
I suppose you could argue that testimonial evidence is crap , but then you 'd also have to argue that the entire foundation of the legal system is crap too , since " forensic science " ( at least as practiced by the government ) is closer to phrenology than physics as far as being science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
No, extraordinary claims require simple proof like anything else.
The burden of proof does not scale with the grandiosity of the claims.
Rather, each aspect of the extraordinary claim should be subjected to falsification.
Here are some falsification tests for Christianity [blogspot.com], for example, which directly map to specific, "extraordinary claims" made by it.If I were to claim to have a device that could solve any problem in linear time, or that produced more energy than it consumed, or that nullified gravity, any engineer worth the title would be highly skeptical and would demand to see hard data before believing such a claim.
That is because those claims have been demonstrated to be impossible or at least improbable beyond a reasonable doubt at this point.
Spiritual claims are primarily testimonial.
I suppose you could argue that testimonial evidence is crap, but then you'd also have to argue that the entire foundation of the legal system is crap too, since "forensic science" (at least as practiced by the government) is closer to phrenology than physics as far as being science.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593350</id>
	<title>Re:Eh</title>
	<author>castironpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1259855580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That trillion dollars wasn't used to 'fight terrorism,' it was used to create jobs. Terrorism was just the excuse used to create those jobs. War is a great way to motivate people when there's nothing meaningful left for them to do. I'd hate to imagine how much worse the current recession would have been if we weren't involved in all these conflicts around the world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That trillion dollars was n't used to 'fight terrorism, ' it was used to create jobs .
Terrorism was just the excuse used to create those jobs .
War is a great way to motivate people when there 's nothing meaningful left for them to do .
I 'd hate to imagine how much worse the current recession would have been if we were n't involved in all these conflicts around the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That trillion dollars wasn't used to 'fight terrorism,' it was used to create jobs.
Terrorism was just the excuse used to create those jobs.
War is a great way to motivate people when there's nothing meaningful left for them to do.
I'd hate to imagine how much worse the current recession would have been if we weren't involved in all these conflicts around the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596038</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>Garble Snarky</author>
	<datestamp>1259864100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not that you don't have a point, but I myself (I'm an engineer) would say that I tend to see both sides and compromise more often than not - maybe even more often than other people. Engineering is often about solving problems by making compromises given limited resources, so you have to understand exactly what you're losing/gaining in a compromise.
<br> <br>
Also, I'd like to think that I'm better at identifying subjective, opinion-based arguments than other people seem to be. This allows me to see both sides, because they're arbitrary, and therefore both more wrong than right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that you do n't have a point , but I myself ( I 'm an engineer ) would say that I tend to see both sides and compromise more often than not - maybe even more often than other people .
Engineering is often about solving problems by making compromises given limited resources , so you have to understand exactly what you 're losing/gaining in a compromise .
Also , I 'd like to think that I 'm better at identifying subjective , opinion-based arguments than other people seem to be .
This allows me to see both sides , because they 're arbitrary , and therefore both more wrong than right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that you don't have a point, but I myself (I'm an engineer) would say that I tend to see both sides and compromise more often than not - maybe even more often than other people.
Engineering is often about solving problems by making compromises given limited resources, so you have to understand exactly what you're losing/gaining in a compromise.
Also, I'd like to think that I'm better at identifying subjective, opinion-based arguments than other people seem to be.
This allows me to see both sides, because they're arbitrary, and therefore both more wrong than right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596680</id>
	<title>Re:"Playing Nice" is Not Considered a Virtue</title>
	<author>rekees</author>
	<datestamp>1259866200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Right on. There is a good comment on the article's page mentioning that engineers have build the Space Shuttle, but they also blew it up - this due to an inherent ineptitude to deal with the social responsibility of stepping up to the plate and shutting down the launch based on the facts that engineers love so much. There are plenty of brilliant engineers right here in the US who are social misfits, don't go out more than twice a year, don't have kids and they vehemently express their hate for one having to change diapers; living in a box is safe and close to the mental attitude of religious extremists.</p><p>One of the issues is what we require from engineers to get a degree, including graduate schools in aerospace and the like; or should I say what we don't require in terms of one's ability to express themselves. A lot of engineers I work with don't have an idea how to write or say what they want in simple ways so they can be heard - and they get very angry when inadvertently reminded of this. Emails that could comprise of two phrases turn into two pages where one has to dig for the purpose of the respective email for hours. Many engineers are angry a lot and they think someone should pay attention to their obscure, but important facts. Guess what: humans read angry first and don't get to the facts most times. So a pissed off engineer, just like the ones who didn't have enough social skills to convince the launch pad managers to postpone the launch until it got warmer, is just that: a pissed off engineer who doesn't make much difference regardless how brilliant she is. Sad; very sad.</p><p>As an engineer going through a decent business school, I had a crazy hard time with the writing-for-a-purpose courses. But once I learned to chill and revise multiple times, taking the volume of my message or documents to the key facts and cut the anger down, I noticed that a majority of people respond much better to a kind context that included critical data. It is still surprising sometimes how much more attention this gets: "Please do this today; it may prove a critical asset to our contribution to this major project" rather than "If you don't do this today, your ass is fired." The former format gets the job done while the latter gets a knee-jerk reaction of "yeah, right, you don't have anyone to replace me with, so I'm going to play my video games instead."</p><p>It's pitiful the level of writing and social skills required to graduate with an engineering degree, even at our best schools. This leaves engineers in their safety little box from where they can justify blowing up things in the name of whatever. Sad, very sad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Right on .
There is a good comment on the article 's page mentioning that engineers have build the Space Shuttle , but they also blew it up - this due to an inherent ineptitude to deal with the social responsibility of stepping up to the plate and shutting down the launch based on the facts that engineers love so much .
There are plenty of brilliant engineers right here in the US who are social misfits , do n't go out more than twice a year , do n't have kids and they vehemently express their hate for one having to change diapers ; living in a box is safe and close to the mental attitude of religious extremists.One of the issues is what we require from engineers to get a degree , including graduate schools in aerospace and the like ; or should I say what we do n't require in terms of one 's ability to express themselves .
A lot of engineers I work with do n't have an idea how to write or say what they want in simple ways so they can be heard - and they get very angry when inadvertently reminded of this .
Emails that could comprise of two phrases turn into two pages where one has to dig for the purpose of the respective email for hours .
Many engineers are angry a lot and they think someone should pay attention to their obscure , but important facts .
Guess what : humans read angry first and do n't get to the facts most times .
So a pissed off engineer , just like the ones who did n't have enough social skills to convince the launch pad managers to postpone the launch until it got warmer , is just that : a pissed off engineer who does n't make much difference regardless how brilliant she is .
Sad ; very sad.As an engineer going through a decent business school , I had a crazy hard time with the writing-for-a-purpose courses .
But once I learned to chill and revise multiple times , taking the volume of my message or documents to the key facts and cut the anger down , I noticed that a majority of people respond much better to a kind context that included critical data .
It is still surprising sometimes how much more attention this gets : " Please do this today ; it may prove a critical asset to our contribution to this major project " rather than " If you do n't do this today , your ass is fired .
" The former format gets the job done while the latter gets a knee-jerk reaction of " yeah , right , you do n't have anyone to replace me with , so I 'm going to play my video games instead .
" It 's pitiful the level of writing and social skills required to graduate with an engineering degree , even at our best schools .
This leaves engineers in their safety little box from where they can justify blowing up things in the name of whatever .
Sad , very sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right on.
There is a good comment on the article's page mentioning that engineers have build the Space Shuttle, but they also blew it up - this due to an inherent ineptitude to deal with the social responsibility of stepping up to the plate and shutting down the launch based on the facts that engineers love so much.
There are plenty of brilliant engineers right here in the US who are social misfits, don't go out more than twice a year, don't have kids and they vehemently express their hate for one having to change diapers; living in a box is safe and close to the mental attitude of religious extremists.One of the issues is what we require from engineers to get a degree, including graduate schools in aerospace and the like; or should I say what we don't require in terms of one's ability to express themselves.
A lot of engineers I work with don't have an idea how to write or say what they want in simple ways so they can be heard - and they get very angry when inadvertently reminded of this.
Emails that could comprise of two phrases turn into two pages where one has to dig for the purpose of the respective email for hours.
Many engineers are angry a lot and they think someone should pay attention to their obscure, but important facts.
Guess what: humans read angry first and don't get to the facts most times.
So a pissed off engineer, just like the ones who didn't have enough social skills to convince the launch pad managers to postpone the launch until it got warmer, is just that: a pissed off engineer who doesn't make much difference regardless how brilliant she is.
Sad; very sad.As an engineer going through a decent business school, I had a crazy hard time with the writing-for-a-purpose courses.
But once I learned to chill and revise multiple times, taking the volume of my message or documents to the key facts and cut the anger down, I noticed that a majority of people respond much better to a kind context that included critical data.
It is still surprising sometimes how much more attention this gets: "Please do this today; it may prove a critical asset to our contribution to this major project" rather than "If you don't do this today, your ass is fired.
" The former format gets the job done while the latter gets a knee-jerk reaction of "yeah, right, you don't have anyone to replace me with, so I'm going to play my video games instead.
"It's pitiful the level of writing and social skills required to graduate with an engineering degree, even at our best schools.
This leaves engineers in their safety little box from where they can justify blowing up things in the name of whatever.
Sad, very sad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598504</id>
	<title>..because engineers have the knowledge and desire</title>
	<author>whizbang77045</author>
	<datestamp>1259873160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hold two degrees in physics, but worked as an engineer and around engineers for thirty plus years. The following are generalities:

1) Engineers think they have all the answers, and are very impatient with those who do not, especially governments. If the government isn't doing it right, they have a better answer. No mind that governments are run by people.

2) Engineers know how to design and execute a terrorist plot, including bomb making. They can also think through how to do the most damage in an unexpected and effective way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hold two degrees in physics , but worked as an engineer and around engineers for thirty plus years .
The following are generalities : 1 ) Engineers think they have all the answers , and are very impatient with those who do not , especially governments .
If the government is n't doing it right , they have a better answer .
No mind that governments are run by people .
2 ) Engineers know how to design and execute a terrorist plot , including bomb making .
They can also think through how to do the most damage in an unexpected and effective way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hold two degrees in physics, but worked as an engineer and around engineers for thirty plus years.
The following are generalities:

1) Engineers think they have all the answers, and are very impatient with those who do not, especially governments.
If the government isn't doing it right, they have a better answer.
No mind that governments are run by people.
2) Engineers know how to design and execute a terrorist plot, including bomb making.
They can also think through how to do the most damage in an unexpected and effective way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593396</id>
	<title>Re:Eh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259855760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it worked though, you idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it worked though , you idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it worked though, you idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593124</id>
	<title>He that spaketh from on high</title>
	<author>digitalsushi</author>
	<datestamp>1259854500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lo, there in the thicket rattled the snake of logic.  Said he, slithering sleeky, "Be afraid not of the close-mindedness your engineering degree affords your feeble mind on the journey of truth, for you will find it blindly".  And then did the engineering student question the snake, "But I have attained logic!  And it was good!  I have learned to question and follow not blindly but to persevere and challenge the status quo!"  So then did the snake rattleth, for pissed was he for the impudence of the engineer.  "Your m-value must be negative, young fool, for surely you are sliding down the slippery slope".  He added, "Take care to realize soon your inevitable conversion to irrationality!"  The engineer plucked an apple from the tree of un-knowledge and smashed it all over his face and rubbed it into his chest, giggling, "Haarrrr I already have dwweeeee".  And thus another engineer was turned away from the cold, uncaring logic that had festered within him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lo , there in the thicket rattled the snake of logic .
Said he , slithering sleeky , " Be afraid not of the close-mindedness your engineering degree affords your feeble mind on the journey of truth , for you will find it blindly " .
And then did the engineering student question the snake , " But I have attained logic !
And it was good !
I have learned to question and follow not blindly but to persevere and challenge the status quo !
" So then did the snake rattleth , for pissed was he for the impudence of the engineer .
" Your m-value must be negative , young fool , for surely you are sliding down the slippery slope " .
He added , " Take care to realize soon your inevitable conversion to irrationality !
" The engineer plucked an apple from the tree of un-knowledge and smashed it all over his face and rubbed it into his chest , giggling , " Haarrrr I already have dwweeeee " .
And thus another engineer was turned away from the cold , uncaring logic that had festered within him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lo, there in the thicket rattled the snake of logic.
Said he, slithering sleeky, "Be afraid not of the close-mindedness your engineering degree affords your feeble mind on the journey of truth, for you will find it blindly".
And then did the engineering student question the snake, "But I have attained logic!
And it was good!
I have learned to question and follow not blindly but to persevere and challenge the status quo!
"  So then did the snake rattleth, for pissed was he for the impudence of the engineer.
"Your m-value must be negative, young fool, for surely you are sliding down the slippery slope".
He added, "Take care to realize soon your inevitable conversion to irrationality!
"  The engineer plucked an apple from the tree of un-knowledge and smashed it all over his face and rubbed it into his chest, giggling, "Haarrrr I already have dwweeeee".
And thus another engineer was turned away from the cold, uncaring logic that had festered within him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603164</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>ChrisMaple</author>
	<datestamp>1259865540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many intelligent people use their intelligence not to find the truth, but to find better arguments to uphold their beliefs (right or wrong).</p><p>Second, it's well established that people can be very good at compartmentalizing their knowledge. That critical faculty you worked so hard to hone for solving engineering problems goes right out the window when your preacher is lulling you to sleep. Similarly, you can become quite adept at ignoring the evidence that's staring you in the face. (My last day at MIT, an udergraduate in the physics department told me at length how wonderful Christianity is and tried to lead me into a prayer session. All the time I had prominently displayed a lapel pin that showed my support of Objectivism.)</p><p>Cherished beliefs come first, and it's the unusual person who will overcome them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many intelligent people use their intelligence not to find the truth , but to find better arguments to uphold their beliefs ( right or wrong ) .Second , it 's well established that people can be very good at compartmentalizing their knowledge .
That critical faculty you worked so hard to hone for solving engineering problems goes right out the window when your preacher is lulling you to sleep .
Similarly , you can become quite adept at ignoring the evidence that 's staring you in the face .
( My last day at MIT , an udergraduate in the physics department told me at length how wonderful Christianity is and tried to lead me into a prayer session .
All the time I had prominently displayed a lapel pin that showed my support of Objectivism .
) Cherished beliefs come first , and it 's the unusual person who will overcome them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many intelligent people use their intelligence not to find the truth, but to find better arguments to uphold their beliefs (right or wrong).Second, it's well established that people can be very good at compartmentalizing their knowledge.
That critical faculty you worked so hard to hone for solving engineering problems goes right out the window when your preacher is lulling you to sleep.
Similarly, you can become quite adept at ignoring the evidence that's staring you in the face.
(My last day at MIT, an udergraduate in the physics department told me at length how wonderful Christianity is and tried to lead me into a prayer session.
All the time I had prominently displayed a lapel pin that showed my support of Objectivism.
)Cherished beliefs come first, and it's the unusual person who will overcome them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596318</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>infinite9</author>
	<datestamp>1259864940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...</p><p>why?</p></div><p>Asperger's Syndrome.  I think a person with AS would be the ideal suicide bomber.  People with AS are drawn to engineering disciplines for obvious reasons.  And for people with AS, (any) religion offers a clear and obvious set of rules that are easy to understand and follow.  They're also very easy for non-AS people to manipulate.  They're good at focusing on the problem, planning an attack, then executing the plan flawlessly.  If they're convinced they'll get 70 virgins, it solves the girl problem for them.  They probably don't have strong attachments to friends or family.  And they're likely to have a pissed-off-at-the-world attitude from being tormented their entire childhood.  They're also able to switch off those troublesome emotions that can get in the way leading up to the main event.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...why ? Asperger 's Syndrome .
I think a person with AS would be the ideal suicide bomber .
People with AS are drawn to engineering disciplines for obvious reasons .
And for people with AS , ( any ) religion offers a clear and obvious set of rules that are easy to understand and follow .
They 're also very easy for non-AS people to manipulate .
They 're good at focusing on the problem , planning an attack , then executing the plan flawlessly .
If they 're convinced they 'll get 70 virgins , it solves the girl problem for them .
They probably do n't have strong attachments to friends or family .
And they 're likely to have a pissed-off-at-the-world attitude from being tormented their entire childhood .
They 're also able to switch off those troublesome emotions that can get in the way leading up to the main event .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and yet my experience in university tells me that the religious social conservatives are concentrated in the engineering college...why?Asperger's Syndrome.
I think a person with AS would be the ideal suicide bomber.
People with AS are drawn to engineering disciplines for obvious reasons.
And for people with AS, (any) religion offers a clear and obvious set of rules that are easy to understand and follow.
They're also very easy for non-AS people to manipulate.
They're good at focusing on the problem, planning an attack, then executing the plan flawlessly.
If they're convinced they'll get 70 virgins, it solves the girl problem for them.
They probably don't have strong attachments to friends or family.
And they're likely to have a pissed-off-at-the-world attitude from being tormented their entire childhood.
They're also able to switch off those troublesome emotions that can get in the way leading up to the main event.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593530</id>
	<title>I agree!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259856180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Engineers will slit your throat if you use the wrong OS, browser or text editor!  Don't get me started on what happens if you use the wrong engine oil!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Engineers will slit your throat if you use the wrong OS , browser or text editor !
Do n't get me started on what happens if you use the wrong engine oil !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engineers will slit your throat if you use the wrong OS, browser or text editor!
Don't get me started on what happens if you use the wrong engine oil!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596778</id>
	<title>Re:What about rich kids becoming terrorists?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259866560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Erm, you have no clue about Marxism, do you? Yeah, that's what I thought.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Erm , you have no clue about Marxism , do you ?
Yeah , that 's what I thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Erm, you have no clue about Marxism, do you?
Yeah, that's what I thought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593108</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259854440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We constantly make tradeoffs between costs, quality and schedule, with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally. Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it (choose 1): better, sooner, cheaper. Instead, compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.</p></div><p>I think that what you're describing is a <i>good</i> engineer. The not quite so good ones tend to be rigidly opposed to compromise. I think it's those that are the likely targets of these recruiters.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We constantly make tradeoffs between costs , quality and schedule , with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally .
Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it ( choose 1 ) : better , sooner , cheaper .
Instead , compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.I think that what you 're describing is a good engineer .
The not quite so good ones tend to be rigidly opposed to compromise .
I think it 's those that are the likely targets of these recruiters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We constantly make tradeoffs between costs, quality and schedule, with the goal of meeting requirements most optimally.
Ask any engineer who has designed a product and they will tell you that they could have made it (choose 1): better, sooner, cheaper.
Instead, compromises were made along the way to meet some criteria in all 3 of those measures.I think that what you're describing is a good engineer.
The not quite so good ones tend to be rigidly opposed to compromise.
I think it's those that are the likely targets of these recruiters.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595376</id>
	<title>Re:Not so fast ...</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1259862120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity, I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromise</p></div><p>But does this same hold true  when you're idealistic and still in college learning your trade? What I learned in school in no way prepared me for the compromises required by real life... just because you must be able to compromise doesn't mean that you like doing it -- most folks don't (engineers and otherwise).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity , I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromiseBut does this same hold true when you 're idealistic and still in college learning your trade ?
What I learned in school in no way prepared me for the compromises required by real life... just because you must be able to compromise does n't mean that you like doing it -- most folks do n't ( engineers and otherwise ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I might somewhat agree with the notion that engineers disdain ambiguity, I completely disagree with the statement that engineers hate compromiseBut does this same hold true  when you're idealistic and still in college learning your trade?
What I learned in school in no way prepared me for the compromises required by real life... just because you must be able to compromise doesn't mean that you like doing it -- most folks don't (engineers and otherwise).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594170</id>
	<title>Re:Lets see</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259858460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course, if said Al-Qaeda member wasn't using the 30 civilians as a human shield, those 30 civilians wouldn't have died.  This is a big reason why, in Iraq, during the troop surge, we started seeing more and more people turning on the terrorists.  They knew the difference between those trying to build up their town and those simply using it as a thin shield.  Just like terrorists are stupid as a whole, neither are those they're exploiting...  Just sayin'...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , if said Al-Qaeda member was n't using the 30 civilians as a human shield , those 30 civilians would n't have died .
This is a big reason why , in Iraq , during the troop surge , we started seeing more and more people turning on the terrorists .
They knew the difference between those trying to build up their town and those simply using it as a thin shield .
Just like terrorists are stupid as a whole , neither are those they 're exploiting... Just sayin'.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, if said Al-Qaeda member wasn't using the 30 civilians as a human shield, those 30 civilians wouldn't have died.
This is a big reason why, in Iraq, during the troop surge, we started seeing more and more people turning on the terrorists.
They knew the difference between those trying to build up their town and those simply using it as a thin shield.
Just like terrorists are stupid as a whole, neither are those they're exploiting...  Just sayin'...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592938</id>
	<title>Wait</title>
	<author>DustyShadow</author>
	<datestamp>1259853600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They target engineers more than other disciplines . . . and more engineers become terrorists.
<br>
<br>
I think you answered your own question.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They target engineers more than other disciplines .
. .
and more engineers become terrorists .
I think you answered your own question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They target engineers more than other disciplines .
. .
and more engineers become terrorists.
I think you answered your own question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_156</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_164</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_150</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_174</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_148</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_159</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_169</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593896
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_135</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_145</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_158</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_166</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593294
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_176</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_134</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_142</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_153</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_163</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594278
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595162
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_139</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_137</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_171</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594696
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_147</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_152</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_128</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593350
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_126</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_160</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_136</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593892
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_144</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_155</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_165</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_173</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594170
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_131</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_141</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593950
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_168</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_154</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592888
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_162</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_172</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_130</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593788
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_127</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_125</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_149</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_133</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_143</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_138</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_170</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603710
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_146</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_157</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_132</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595420
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_167</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_140</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_151</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597564
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_129</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_175</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_161</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_30_1318240_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593742
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593032
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596038
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593992
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595656
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603758
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596810
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599012
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599786
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597270
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596090
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595434
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597086
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598088
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595398
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593896
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594508
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596680
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594286
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593972
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595840
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598110
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595550
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601938
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596614
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599310
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595500
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599218
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595966
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593194
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593246
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593296
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593146
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600178
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599986
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597768
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594810
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594968
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594780
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592870
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593950
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599440
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594346
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599788
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601558
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593362
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597210
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593956
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593236
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595666
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595162
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598712
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593136
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595854
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593826
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594602
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595080
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593544
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594156
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594170
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593314
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595820
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596494
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593414
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593778
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603164
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594960
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599096
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595092
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593294
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593454
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595282
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595502
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601244
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593410
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594612
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595702
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595014
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596318
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597462
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597170
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593958
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594150
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30602236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599294
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593006
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30603616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604970
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597416
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593358
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593914
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593780
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595218
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595344
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592896
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595348
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593076
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593586
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600108
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593324
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593058
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594934
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593238
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594818
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593338
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593254
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594696
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30595792
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598626
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596354
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597354
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596070
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598352
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30600790
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594350
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592994
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593198
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30601372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30597690
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30604344
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594826
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30598820
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594488
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30594340
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596266
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30599498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592904
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30592876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30596268
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_30_1318240.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_30_1318240.30593050
</commentlist>
</conversation>
