…and this is a 
Pointless poll or serious survey?
Category: Academics • Pointless polls • Politics
Posted on: June 11, 2008 9:52 AM, by PZ Myers
I'm going to give you a choice today.
If you've only got a moment and want to click a button and be done with something fairly trivial, vote on whether to impeach Bush.
For a change, if you've got a half hour or so and would like to contribute data to serious research, take Elisabeth Cornwell's research survey. I think we could add a large dollop of godless attitudes to her work.
(Hmmm…I should do a poll on who would rather crash a poll vs. take a serious survey!)
Humanities & Social Science
Politics
Comments
Oh, but PZ, I did BOTH!
Posted by: Richard Wolford | June 11, 2008 10:18 AM
Well, Richard, you obviously have no life and no job.
/off to do both.
Posted by: Hans | June 11, 2008 10:30 AM
I made a poll on whether to crash polls or take serious surveys.
Posted by: Ted D | June 11, 2008 10:32 AM
I dunno. Does declaring my race as "Air Force" mean that I'm not honestly filling out the survey? I mean, that's what I regard myself, after all...
Posted by: student_b | June 11, 2008 10:38 AM
I especially liked the part where I could identify my race as "Air Force"
Posted by: AngusBeefheart | June 11, 2008 10:39 AM
Baseline for the bill of impeachment:
Support: 78%
Oppose: 19%
Not sure: 3%
Posted by: Wicked Lad | June 11, 2008 10:40 AM
Unfortunately I had to cancel the serious survey because it asks too many questions that just don't apply. Some even seem to assume a culture where "so, what church do you go to?" is smalltalk.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | June 11, 2008 10:43 AM
voted not sure for the bush impeachment. seems like too little too late. it would take months to accomplish and a new pres will be voted in nov. overall it would be a massive waste of time and resources for congress. theyre doing a fine job of wasting time and resources as it is without worrying about a pointless impeachment.
2005-2007 would have been the time to impeach
Posted by: andrew | June 11, 2008 10:44 AM
Yeah I couldn't get through the serious survey either. It needed more "N/A" and "I don't accept the premise of the question" options.
Posted by: Malcolm | June 11, 2008 10:51 AM
Thats one of the worst designed surveys I have ever taken.
If I feel "rejected by my family for my agnostic beliefs", it is assuming that my family are religious, yet in never asks.
It asks when did I "abandon religion", assuming that I was at some point religious. I did not abandon religion, I was never religious to start with.
Seems very much like it is imposing religion as the default state of mind of humanity, and atheists and agnostics as those who have abandoned humanity, when it is of course the exact opposite.
Posted by: Mongoose | June 11, 2008 10:54 AM
Cornwell's survey isn't too bad - I ran through it and answered it honestly. I think there are a few questions where to answer honestly I'd have had to give an answer along the lines of "this question does not make sense because..."
Constructing a survey that works well is really hard, and she did a pretty good job with this. Could have been better, but it sure could have been a LOT worse.
Aaah, the joy of self-selected samples!
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | June 11, 2008 10:59 AM
The serious survey's questions are way restrictive.
Posted by: Josh | June 11, 2008 11:01 AM
I stopped the survey after it became clear that the assumption for atheist was that you stopped believing in God at some point in your life, told your parents, told your friends, etc. Some of us were raised in atheist households, you know.
Posted by: Comstock | June 11, 2008 11:02 AM
oh no, those questions weren't loaded at aaaaalll...
Posted by: InnerBrat | June 11, 2008 11:03 AM
In the section where you're supposed to chose which statement you agree more with, a lot of the time the statements were pretty much unrelated. It's like answering what do you prefer, ice cream or Red Dwarf?
Posted by: Andreas Johansson | June 11, 2008 11:12 AM
I just got through the survey. It's from UCCS! Hey, I almost went there!
They asked a few questions that I didn't like answering, or I just didn't like the way the question was phrased. Like: Are you a spiritual person? or Do you feel a spiritual connection to nature? Right out I would say no. But, do I feel the same things that other people feel, and describe as being spiritual? Yes, I am sure that the feeling is the same. It just has nothing to do with a "spirit" or something supernatural. So I answered no. I wouldn't call it a "spiritual connection". It's on the atomic or molecular level really.
There were some odd questions at the end about believing in aliens or mind reading. The one that stood out to me was:
true or false?
I have had the momentary feeling that I might not be human.
Tee hee. I don't know what that means. (I said false BTW)
Posted by: Serena | June 11, 2008 11:16 AM
i got most of the way through the survey and then my internet bloody well stopped working and it wants me to start from scratch now. bugger.
good survey though, i thought.
Posted by: alex | June 11, 2008 11:22 AM
Serena @ #16:
Heh I had to answer true for that. When I was a kid I was convinced I was an alien for a while. I can't remember why.Posted by: MarkW | June 11, 2008 11:30 AM
I completed the survey, and yes, the last page seems like it's a test for paranoid schizophrenia. The questions are really odd in the last section. Some questions were a little loaded, but I don't think it's that far out of line to assume a religious baseline in America. We're easily the most religious country in the world, and I don't find it that absurd to ask the questions from that POV. I do happen to fall into that group of going to church when I was little, with a somewhat religious home etc so the questions suited me fine. If you were raised in a nonreligious household, just consider yourself lucky and close the survey.
Posted by: zer0 | June 11, 2008 11:34 AM
Technically, this is two different questions
"Creationism and/or Intelligent Design should NOT be taught in our science classes; only evolution, which is grounded in science, should be taught as part of the science curriculum."
Posted by: THADD | June 11, 2008 11:36 AM
MarkW, I've also had that feeling. Might it be an Asperger's thing? I mean, I felt I was surrounded by a load of .... weirdos, freaks, or members of a different species. That was because of the difference between what they like & what I like, & what they believe & what I believe.
Posted by: Richard Harris | June 11, 2008 11:39 AM
I agree with DM others - the survey is definitely US-centric in its foundational assumptions, and presumes that your are, by default, religious.
Also - I found the questions on 'spirit' - just wierd. Certainly I can look at a sunset or a flower or a waterfall and feel awe-at-nature. I can look at my kids playing in the sand and feel all warm & fuzzy inside. BUt is that 'spritual'? Hell no! It's empathetic humanity.
Mostly I disagreed with 'spirituality' as in woo, and answered i the negative.
The last set - regarding aliens and ghosties and such - I was very tempted to answer frivolously! I did not succumb to the temptation, but this is Science! We do not pollute the data!
Generally a reasonable job at a survey, but woefully us- & religion-centric. Hopefully that does not introduce significant bias in the results...
Maybe (if she reads this) she could create a parallel set of questions - but with all 'religious' and 'spiritual' referents removed and replaced by more technical terms. Then randomly, with a 50% weighting, use one of the other version. Just a thought.
regarding the BUSH survey. Impeach the bastard. I am not at all 'retributionist', but his legacy needs to be honest - impeachment is the only way that future historians will know that we really truly recognized that he was a total fuckwad.
If possible, I'd draft the bastards and send them to iraq - on the front line.
:)
Posted by: tony (not a vegan) | June 11, 2008 11:44 AM
Comment from a sociologist: UCCS survey was a disaster.
Posted by: Cliff | June 11, 2008 11:45 AM
Zero, talking about the States being "easily the most religious country in the world", I'm working with a Seattle-based Engineer at the moment, & received a copy e-mail, sent to our client who's got terminal cancer, that reads, "I'm praying for you on your trip to Mexico.
From my Canadian/British perspective, that hit me as really weird.
Posted by: Richard Harris | June 11, 2008 11:49 AM
Comment from a web-developer: UCCS survey is bugged.
Posted by: NoAstronomer | June 11, 2008 11:50 AM
Damn straight I want him impeached! >:o(
Posted by: Patricia | June 11, 2008 11:53 AM
@ #19:
Really? More religious than the Vatican City? Or, say, Iran, where more than 90% of the population are Shi'a? I'd say the US is anomalously religious, given its status in the developed world, but it's far from being the world's most religious country.
Posted by: Moggie | June 11, 2008 11:53 AM
Took the research survey. I agree that many of the questions were worded badly. Also it was rife with typos.
And some of the questions...I have to wonder about the person that answers yes to them. You think strangers are reading your thoughts? Really?
Posted by: Trykt | June 11, 2008 11:59 AM
Hmm. The second survey's interesting, but the radio buttons for the questions concerning your current income relative to other people your age and your family's relative income when you were a kid are in the same group, so you can only answer one of these questions.
"Pantheism" is also misspelt in the second section, and "luck" in the third, and "behaviours" (as "behaiors") and "certain" (twice) and "agree" (9 times) in the sixth, and "able" in the seventh, and "get" in the ninth, and so on... some more proof-reading and testing would've helped with this. :) And there's the occasional problem with grammar, too.
Other than that, though, it was interesting.
Posted by: Muffin | June 11, 2008 12:00 PM
Do you mean the "How many sexual partners have you had throughout your life" question? ;)
Posted by: windy | June 11, 2008 12:00 PM
Damn, how many sections are in the serious survey, I'm starting to get bored with my views already.
I voted with the right block wrt the impeachment survey, bush in chains.
Posted by: Jacques | June 11, 2008 12:02 PM
I took the UCCS survey and had a hard time with it, too, especially the questions about my life's meaning and purpose. I don't believe that I have any real purpose here, but I do believe my life has meaning (at least it does to me). And I'm not searching for purpose, but am always looking for meaning (things to feel good about). That whole section gave me a headache.
Also, I grew up in a household that didn't really practice any religion, but allowed me to seek out my own religion. My parents were very supportive if I felt I wanted to go to church or meditate or talk about the non-existence of god. So, we didn't have an atheist, agnostic or religious household. I didn't see an option I liked for that question.
Posted by: Amanda | June 11, 2008 12:15 PM
Survey is stupidly broken in places too. Was this even tested?
Posted by: Brendan S | June 11, 2008 12:15 PM
MarkW #18
Really? Your weird. ;)
I used to have a mixed fear of aliens and demons when I was younger. I tended to think they were equally evil and fearsome. But then I was told demons were real and I should fear them. It seemed equally likely for aliens.
Maybe yours was a version of an orphan phantasy?
Posted by: Serena | June 11, 2008 12:17 PM
Regarding that survey...No wonder these social science folk as often so wrong. They base their ideas on horrid surveys. I mean how do I "somewhat disagree" to statements with words like "always" and "never".
Do words not mean anything anymore?
/long time lurker, first time poster
Posted by: debaser71 | June 11, 2008 12:18 PM
Darn I wanted to make another comment but there is no edit feature.
Again regarding the survey.
Another thing that bugs me is when they ask a question with an "and" or "or" in it. What if I agree with one thing but not with the "and" or "or"?
Just sayin, because these sort of surveys interest me greatly but I am always left disappointed. Once, I'd like a decently worded survey without these basic problems.
Oh and never mind the spelling mistakes and typos.
Posted by: debaser71 | June 11, 2008 12:22 PM
Part V made me feel really boring.
Posted by: Thorn | June 11, 2008 12:29 PM
Any question in the survey that was unanswerable due to the lack of applicable choices i skipped. I'm not certain how that will affect the outcome, but at least i didn't have to misrepresent myself, or force my round self into the square hole questions.
Also, in the "religions you grew up with" section there was no Druid ;) That made me very sad.
Posted by: Yttrai | June 11, 2008 12:36 PM
Moggie: Really? More religious than the Vatican City?
Oh, we're way more religious than Vatican City! They're professionals --- prostitutes don't really love their Johns!
Posted by: frog | June 11, 2008 12:36 PM
Funny, just last night I read the Atheists book by Bob Altemayer, the guy who did the Right Wing Authoritarian survey up in Canada. In the atheism book, he examined zealotry, dogmatism, and authoritarian leanings (or unleanings) of atheists, among other things. Conclusions: We're dogmatic but not zealous (we believe strongly, but aren't particularly inclined to force our views on others), and anti-authority (big surprise!).
Anyhow, it looks like the "serious" survey here is trying to do what he was, but with less fairness and objectivity. This survey was insulting at times, and tedious, too.
Posted by: Aquaria | June 11, 2008 12:43 PM
I accidentally answered that I was raised both Catholic and Orthodox Jewish. Hail Mary full of matzoh, I wanted to change my answer, but Oy vey! *makes the sign of the cross*, I couldn't!
Posted by: Brownian, OM | June 11, 2008 12:50 PM
Come to join us in slicin' up eyeballs, did you?
Posted by: Brownian, OM | June 11, 2008 12:53 PM
And I don't want Bush impeached unless we get Cheney out of there first. He's scarier than Bush. Or maybe it could be a package deal that would make Pelosi President. That might be the first occurrence of a mass epidemic of head explosions. Sort of like Scanners. Only real, and self-inflicted.
Posted by: Aquaria | June 11, 2008 12:55 PM
I notice there's a range of sexuality to choose from. That seems not quite so conservative. I expected the choices to be "heterosexual" and "heterosexual deep down but in need of reparative therapy".
Posted by: Dennis N | June 11, 2008 12:58 PM
"When introduced to strangers, I rarely wonder whether I have known them before." that had a true/false answer. I don't think that was appropriate.
Posted by: thorn | June 11, 2008 12:59 PM
I did both.
That was a fairly long survey. Need to blink more...
Posted by: wintremute | June 11, 2008 12:59 PM
I noticed the typos, but not the loaded questions. I thought it changed the questions based on previous answers; I don't think I was ever asked about going to church.
I don have a gripe about how you can't sign up, at the end, to hear about the results that come from the study. Tit for tat, I spent 45 minutes answering questions, I want to know what they found!
Posted by: KC | June 11, 2008 1:09 PM
I didn't know what to pick here:
Both are wrong. Children get into trouble because they're children, that's what they do.
Posted by: Dennis N | June 11, 2008 1:11 PM
Cool survey.
...
In my opinion, anyone who thinks impeachment would be a waste of time is a brainless ditz who has no sense of history, or the nature of precedent.
If the Republicans get away with it all, if they go off to continue to lead their rich, powerful lives, if they leave the White House and get $50,000 speaking fees, and write books in which they twist history, if the Democrats refuse to ever hold them responsible ...
In my opinion, America and all its ideals have ceased to exist, and it's just a matter of time before things get REALLY nasty.
To let Bush and company get away with all they've gotten away with is exactly the same as saying "Oh, that rape/molestation/assault/murder happened a long time ago, and it's unlikely that we could get a conviction anyway. Let's just let it go. Why bother? This stuff happens all the time."
Government and society exist only as long as the lot of us act as if they exist. If the people who make the laws are thieves and liars and killers, eventually people will ask why they should bother obeying them. And there goes your society.
Kings should obey the same laws as peasants, and be subject to the same penalties ... WITHOUT EXCEPTION.
Posted by: Hank Fox | June 11, 2008 1:16 PM
Has anybody mentioned that THE SURVEY IS BROKEN?
In addition to being able to list your race as "Air Force", at least one of the radio button groups are miscoded - the question about family income during your childhood and the one about income level for your age group clear each other's answers when filled in (that is, they're part of the same button group).
Somebody should notify them to fix this, assuming they're interested in getting correct results at all.
Posted by: K. Signal Eingang | June 11, 2008 1:16 PM
Just finished that survey. Seems a lot of the questions were religious in nature. Got a sneaky suspicion that the Templeton Foundation is behind it!
And on the Bushwacker- impeach the religious dolt! He'll be out soon and it pisses me off that he never did anything serious to warrant impeachment, such as traitor, rape, murder or anything that would evict him to a prison term. Now he'll get a nice pension for the rest of his life, have Secret Service protection, franked mailing privileges, a library built at taxpayers expense and other benefits that the working stiff has to be lucky in obtaining at a reduced living comfort. In there for eight years and I had nothing to do with it! Damn, I am pissed!
Posted by: Holbach | June 11, 2008 1:17 PM
I think this entry should have been titled "Pointless survey or serious poll?". I got to section IV of the survey before I had to stop since I was being forced to put in answers I didn't agree with, simply because there was no available answer that I did agree with, and I did not want to submit information that was contrary to what I actually thought.
The poll, on the other hand, asked a simple, straightforward question that I was able to answer in such a way that I could easily stand by my choice, which is much more useful.
Of course, both the poll and the survey are inherently worthless due to having a self-selecting sample, however at least the poll was easy while being worthless.
Posted by: JSW | June 11, 2008 1:21 PM
At first I thought it was only meant for the USA, but then it let me write in anything for country of birth and country of current residence. It seems to be meant for the whole intarwebz.
Not before they've had all of their days in court.
Oh yes. It's like with university exams: astonishing amounts of people are incapable of asking an understandable question, even though that is supposedly part of their job description.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | June 11, 2008 1:26 PM
I am always glad when people when people know what my name tag refers to.
Anyone play Rock Band? I'm hooked...anyway Doolittle is coming out for it. Cool.
on topic: I am glad lot's of people are seeing some of the things I saw in that survey? Has anyone seen a good survey? One that actually acknowledges language? I really like to take them but I am always disappointed.
Posted by: debaser71 | June 11, 2008 1:26 PM
Latest poll results:
Chimpeachment: 81 %
No chimpeachment: 17 %
Not sure: 3 %
Total votes: 7297
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | June 11, 2008 1:32 PM
Hmm, in adition to the lack of a "This question is bullshit" answer, It had quite a few other mistakes, the "Air force" as race is one.
If I have 2 brothers, and i'm the youngest, does that mean I was born third? or last?
Asking people in what category their income is? Why not just ask how much they make? That's much less biased.
And how the heck can you be somewhere in between Homosexual and Heterosexual? is that like being a little pregnant?
Also, you can't unselect a relion...
luckily, you can leave an answer open
Posted by: Alcari | June 11, 2008 1:36 PM
Short poll = EASY
Long thing didn't make sense to me. A lot of the questions didn't make sense and didn't have a "Does not apply to me" option... Sorry. I tried...
Posted by: Anna | June 11, 2008 1:36 PM
Brownian:
Good grief, can you imagine a Catholic/Jewish mother? The guilt!
Posted by: Moggie | June 11, 2008 1:36 PM
I say impeach the bastard.
Even if it's too late, even if it fails, even if there's Dick, it doesn't matter, that's still the best signal America can send to the whole world that you want to clear your conscience from this regrettable mistake of having elected twice this monster.
Posted by: negentropyeater | June 11, 2008 1:38 PM
David,
Just so you know: "asking an understandable question" really isn't on the job description for hiring faculty... Sure, departments need to make some attempt at determining that new hires will be willing to work with graduate or undergraduate priority. But at least at research-oriented universities proven teaching ability is not always regarded as one of the primary requirements for new faculty (especially when compared to proven publication and/or successful grant records).
There are, of course, exceptions to this. Once in a while departments do make the teaching element a priority.
Posted by: Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. | June 11, 2008 1:41 PM
When the survey asks things like 'have you ever felt rejected by your family for your atheist/agnostic beliefs' it assumes that my family *knows* about my atheism. They don't. I haven't told them (or my religious friends) yet because being rejected by them is exactly what I'm afraid of. Several questions went along the same vein, assuming my atheism is out in the open for everyone in my personal and work life to voice an opinion on it. It doesn't take into consideration many of us are still "closeted," making those questions painfully unanswerable. Rather insensitive, I think.
Posted by: Sara | June 11, 2008 1:50 PM
@ Moggie, #58
--- You wrote:
Good grief, can you imagine a Catholic/Jewish mother? The guilt!
--- end of quote ---
Welcome to my childhood... My mother is Catholic, with all the stereotypical "Jewish mother" traits in addition to that. The talent to both feel and induce incredible guilt is mind-blowing.
Posted by: Sara | June 11, 2008 1:54 PM
@#56 Alcari --
While much of the survey was silly, it actually is quite possible to be somewhere between homosexual and heterosexual -- ie, being bisexual. Though some bisexual people identify as having equal preference for both genders, many have a tendency to prefer one gender over another. (Additionally, some people who identify as homosexual or heterosexual may in fact have some slight inclinations in the other direction.) See the Kinsey scale for more.
Posted by: Etha Williams | June 11, 2008 1:59 PM
Oh yeah, forgot to mention that I was hoping that they would allow at the end of the survey your quick response to this question: "What is your evaluation of religion?" Ha, that wouldn't be hard to express in a few choice words!
Posted by: Holbach | June 11, 2008 2:02 PM
My race is Airwolf, but there was no button to check.
Posted by: Ben | June 11, 2008 2:32 PM
I haven't yet, but it looks like I'm gonna have to now.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | June 11, 2008 2:36 PM
Those criticsing the survey seem to have no idea how to design one. I thought it a very good survey with a good range of corrobaritive questions. It showed a great deal of thought. IIRC there was an option in how you were raised to choose atheist. I wasn't so I didn't choose it, but it was there.
I was slightly disappointed that it didn't ask about where you had lived between birth and the present day. MIne looks like I am completely Scottish, my New Zealand background featured not at all though I have spent most of my life there.
Posted by: Peter Ashby | June 11, 2008 2:41 PM
The toughest question on the survey for me was the one about whether I feel I've been discriminated against because of religion. Gee, does the fact that I pay taxes on my acres while the church up the road pays nothing count?
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | June 11, 2008 2:43 PM
Rock Band is the greatest game on the planet.
Posted by: zer0 | June 11, 2008 2:46 PM
I say balls to both those polls.
Your serious poll seems ot have been designed by a 12-year-old church kid projecting into what a white ex-church kid might be like as an theist as a Sunday school project. Too many bogus assumptions. Whole thing seems like an exercise in rationalisation. Oh, and the spelling?
But I wonder if the NBC poll on the impeachment thing might be a better one to crash...not that it needs it. The great beast really does seem to want to impeach the bastard...not that the dems are going to do it, spineless jackasses that they are. You lot really need to fix your political system. It truly sucks.
Posted by: devnulljp | June 11, 2008 2:46 PM
Peter Ashby writes:
Those criticsing the survey seem to have no idea how to design one.
Really. It's hard - one of my undergrad psych classes was all about testing methods and survey-making and it was one of the most difficult classes in the curriculum. It turns out it's pretty easy to make a survey that measures something but controlling what that something is, is really hard.
The survey design is pretty good, which makes me think that she knows what she's doing enough to understand self-selected sample bias. My guess is that the internet version of the survey is just a test to make sure the survey is reasonably sorted-out and the results won't actually be used for anything.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | June 11, 2008 2:48 PM
To hell with the impeachment!
Send the bleedin' Shrub to den Haag!
Posted by: Sili | June 11, 2008 2:48 PM
I had some trouble as well. For one, I am an atheist, but also a member of the local Unitarian congregation. When I am stressed out I do tend to seek out fellow members (friends), go to the service (routine), and I also volunteer through them. But does that mean I "turn to my religion" when I'm stressed? And what percentage of my volunteer work could be considered "religious"? I was kind of stuck. I finally decided "no" and "0%", because even though I may do these things through a religious organization, I do not do them because they are religious.
The income/financial questions were bizarrely and vaguely worded. I agree also with the poster above that the survey should have just asked income (if known), rather than some self-imagined category that we think we fit into. The researcher can do the work on figuring out how the various incomes fit into the cultures and standard salaries at the time.
Also, income throughout all of childhood AND adolesence? That's a period of almost twenty years! I remember that we were quite poor when I was young, but quite financially comfortable by the time I graduated high school.
Finally, I wasn't even quite sure about my own income. Was the question referring to only my income? To the household income? Eh?
The "pick the one you most agree with" section was idiotic. Often I not only disagreed with both statements, but was creating mental arguments about why they were both flat-out WRONG. Sometimes it seemed as though (as someone else noted) the two were completely unrelated, other times it seemed as though they were both flimsy, strawman versions of what the researcher thought conservative/liberal people "should" think.
And the typos...oh the typos.....
Posted by: EntoAggie | June 11, 2008 2:55 PM
The "serious survey" was full of holes. It makes a ton of assumptions that the questions are valid or have meaning, and I can see issues with analysis/interpretation - for example, I have 3 children, but only 1 is old enough to have come to any conclusions about the existence or not of gods (she's 5, and has decided not) - the 1 year old and 2 year old haven't given it any thought. Yet, it'll likely make the assumption that if I have 3 children and one shares my beliefs, the other two don't.
What about the wonderful question about the Loch Ness monster? Was that a test to see if you understand that you cannot disprove the existence of something by failing to observe it? What possible anwers can anyone give? If you thing Nessie exists, you answer "Strongly Disagree". If you understand how proofs work, and that the non-existence of Nessie can't be proven by lack of observation, you also answer "Strongly Disagree". What a useless question. How the heck do you differentiate between someone who thinks they met Nessie in the rain at a little bistro and a skeptic who is rational enough to know that one can't possibly claim to be sure without a doubt that Nessie cannot exist?
Oh, and (in case Peter Ashby, above, comments) my work is currently largely health survey analysis. I look at surveys all day.
It wasn't the worst survey I've seen, but it was lacking.
Posted by: Epinephrine | June 11, 2008 3:04 PM
Peter Ashby:
Surveys are difficult to word correctly, but, again, I saw one just yesterday for gauging the viewsand attitudes of atheists that was much clearer and more objective, not to mention less prone to errors. This one looks like amateur hour next to it, even though it is much more comprehensive.
Posted by: Aquaria | June 11, 2008 3:06 PM
The poll question should have a follow up: "Do you think Darth Cheney, Rummy and Turd Blossom should be a)shot, b)hanged, or c) drawn and quartered?" Well, perhaps that would be a might loaded for a US poll.
Posted by: Jase | June 11, 2008 3:07 PM
Alcari
"And how the heck can you be somewhere in between Homosexual and Heterosexual?"
You're kidding right? Or is your world composed of polar opposites such as black/white, up/down, liberal/conservative? You can't love dogs AND cats? You must choose SURF OR TURF! We don't allow AND on our menu. Can you say "false dichotomy"?
Posted by: Jase | June 11, 2008 3:18 PM
The second one was long and boring. Many of the questions were poorly worded making answering them difficult as there are nuances to my thought processes that left the "either/or" response incomplete.
Posted by: Moses | June 11, 2008 3:31 PM
Serena @ 16:
Exactly. I have no spirit, therefore no "spiritual connection." I do have an EMOTIONAL connection based solely on my preferences. For example, I love the western mountains (US), forests, lakes and waterfalls, Pacific-Ocean winter storms, blizards, snow, glaciers and the northern oceans.
But I hate the desert, jungles, plains, wide-open spaces, thunderstorms, suburbia's sprawl and the eastern mountains (US). I despise the wet, gloppy eastern snow. And southern food.
Ooops, I ramble.
Posted by: Moses | June 11, 2008 3:38 PM
In the middle of that scale it says "bisexual"...
Oh, I know. It's just sort of implied in "can teach".
(However, now that students don't have a say anymore in hiring faculty, "can teach" is no longer a requirement in Austria...)
It also doesn't take into consideration the fact that there are places where people simply don't ask each other for their innermost deeply held beliefs or lack thereof. That's what I alluded to in comment 7.
My own mother knows I don't go to church, but that's it. She hasn't ever tried to find out anything beyond that.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | June 11, 2008 3:40 PM
One thing after another. First impeachment of Richard the Lying-Hearted. Then chimpeachment. Then the Hague.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | June 11, 2008 3:51 PM
Or, actually, first impeachment of all Busheviki together. Then the ICC.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | June 11, 2008 3:52 PM
"Pantheism" is also misspelt in the second section...
Hey! Don't be denigrating my worship of the great and sublime Pa.
Posted by: Sarcastro | June 11, 2008 4:00 PM
#42 - Come to join us in slicin' up eyeballs, did you?
Hehe, are you serious? The lab I was in did some stuff on chronic ischemia (2VO model) and retinal degeneration in rats, way back when I was doing my undergrad. Funny having a box full of eyeballs in wax cubes.
Posted by: Epinephrine | June 11, 2008 4:00 PM
My wife, my Dad and a couple of friends know of my lack of belief in god/gods. My mother would simply go into denial and probably prate on about more evangelical pap than she does now (Love ya Mom! but...) My wife is uncomfortable with my contempt for people who attribute any and all phenomena to god, but she has eased up on her criticism.
Atheism is anethema to my wife's very evangelical family as well They're good people but not prone to sophisticated discourse, especially on religious views. I would not be welcome at family gatherings if I made my views clear, or my presence would make everyone uncomfortable and invite unwelcome proselytizing.
I care very much for my wife's family (well, most of them, anyway) and I understand their fear since I was raised in that environment. My Dad's best friend is a Veterinarian who's a YEC; he swears the Earth isn't over 6000yo.. Sad, so very sad.
Posted by: Jase | June 11, 2008 4:05 PM
He really did!
I second this.
Posted by: SC | June 11, 2008 4:06 PM
I'm not seeing the impeachment poll on that page. Is it just me? Did they take it down?
Posted by: Nemo | June 11, 2008 4:15 PM
Never mind, I'm being stupid -- it's the Flash thingie at the bottom. Didn't see it because I have FlashBlock, and didn't unblock because I assumed it was an ad.
82/16/2 right now.
Posted by: Nemo | June 11, 2008 4:17 PM
I did the survey. It looked to me very like a Meyers-Briggs personality test dressed up with religious clothing.
Posted by: Malky | June 11, 2008 4:18 PM
Impeach the frigging bastard yesterday.
People like Bush only succeed because other people in power are too chicken-shit to oppose him.
By taking impeachment off the table, Pelosi basically said: the corruption and lies and the violations of the law perpetrated by BushCo are acceptable.
Shame on her. We need better from our Congress.
Posted by: CalGeorge | June 11, 2008 4:19 PM
It looks like other people have already made all the complaints I was going to make, including the "income during childhood" bit. Well done!
Posted by: Blake Stacey | June 11, 2008 4:20 PM