2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum

GLD 374.96

+0.2%

Nov 19 4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (69672)	12/17/2010 9:43:16 AM
From: Lane3	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) of 217900

Let me start by admitting that I skimmed the first of your links and skipped the rest. I'll just address your presentation of your hypothesis. Your post, as usual, is an entertaining read. Having sifted through it all I came up with two points that seem to capture its essence. The reason that women didn't and still don't invent things is that their brains are not intended for that and By the time serious maths and science are being taught, women have long since had a fully grown brain. Re the first, that women's brains may be intended for eugenics and used for polishing fingernails does not exclude their capacity for other things. That said capacity may not be fully demonstrated does not mean that it doesn't exist. It may not, but you have not so demonstrated. Re the latter, now that's intriguing. But no matter what you do, you can't make female brains take longer to develop which is the underlying problem. But you can teach math and science earlier, can you not? That would be the way to prove or disprove the hypothesis.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next