SOWPub Small Business Forums  
 

Click Here to see the latest posts!

Ask any questions related to business / entrepreneurship / money-making / life
or share your success stories (and educational "failures")...

Sign up for the Hidden Business Ideas Letter Free edition, and receive a free report straight to your inbox: "Ordinary housewife makes $500,000+ a year in her spare time, using a simple idea, and her driveway!"

NO BLATANT ADS PLEASE
Also, please no insults or personal attacks.
Feel free to link to your web site though at the end of your posts.

Stay up to date! Get email notifications or
get "new thread" feeds here

 

Go Back   SOWPub Small Business Forums > Main Category > Original SOWPub Forum Archive
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 17, 2003, 06:46 AM
Michael Ross (Aust, Qld)
 
Posts: n/a
Default How To Interpret The News

There are standard terms and phrases news readers say when reading the news. And there are ways to interpret what they really mean.

"Public opinons shows... insert whatever you want the public to believe here."

The question you need to ask is, WHO are these public who think this? The newsreader's son, daughter, husband, wife, friend, nextdoor neighbor?

"Lastest polls show... insert whatever you want the public to believe here."

When was this poll taken? What was asked? How was it asked (method of polling - in person, phone, etc.) How many people were polled. What is the political demographic of those who were polled?

During the Olympic games in Sydney, the media kept harping on and on and on and on and on about how the country was all goo-goo with that little girl from the opening party.

The reality was... the media were the only ones going on about her. No-one else cared.

"X% of Americans are... insert what you want to scare the public about."

What they should really say is, "X% of the small tiny number of people we survey are..." Of course, because those people were Americans...

Remember that piece of Mars rock with those odd looking things on them? Remember how the media said the scientists reckon it showed proof of life - or some such claim?

The reality was completely different. The scientists NEVER said anything of the sort. They said they did not know what the things were but they did resemble certain bacteria.

The news often does what the current affairs shows do... leave out words and splice together things.

For instance... "The reality was... the things were... certain bacteria."

If you read the above paragraph relating to this quoted comment, you will see the words used and used in the same order. Technically, I said it... but I didn't say it that way.

Splice together. Also they will deliberately take words out of context to help create the impression they want to.

It's for this reason I prefer Fox News. They manipulate the least of all news channels. As they say... we report, YOU decide.

I post, you decide.

Michael Ross
  #12  
Old September 17, 2003, 06:51 AM
Oliver Peters
 
Posts: n/a
Default Myth: Do We Use Only 10% Of Our Brains?

There is no scientific evidence to suggest that we use only 10% of our brains.

In other words, the statement, "We use only 10% of our brains" is false; it's a myth. We use all of our brain.

To learn more about that myth, where did the 10% myth begin, why does the myth continue, what does it mean to use only 10% of your brain, go to
http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html

So next time you hear someone say that they only use 10% of their brain, you can set them straight. Tell them,

"NOT TRUE; We use 100% of our brains."


Myth: Do We Use Only 10% Of Our Brains?
  #13  
Old September 17, 2003, 09:39 AM
Phil Gomez
 
Posts: n/a
Default News: You can live (better) without it...

This post is right on. Most modern news shows (at least here in the US) are either biased or incompetently reported (or both). The overall effect is terribly negative on society as a whole -- which they do deliberately because negative news keeps people watching so they can sell more advertising. That's one reason I like getting news from the Internet: I can quickly pick out any events that I may need to know about while limiting my exposure to the negativity.

I find that the more I ignore the news, the happier and more productive I tend to be.

Just $.02

--Phil

> There are standard terms and phrases news
> readers say when reading the news. And there
> are ways to interpret what they really mean.

> "Public opinons shows... insert
> whatever you want the public to believe
> here."

> The question you need to ask is, WHO are
> these public who think this? The
> newsreader's son, daughter, husband, wife,
> friend, nextdoor neighbor?

> "Lastest polls show... insert whatever
> you want the public to believe here."

> When was this poll taken? What was asked?
> How was it asked (method of polling - in
> person, phone, etc.) How many people were
> polled. What is the political demographic of
> those who were polled?

> During the Olympic games in Sydney, the
> media kept harping on and on and on and on
> and on about how the country was all goo-goo
> with that little girl from the opening
> party.

> The reality was... the media were the only
> ones going on about her. No-one else cared.

> "X% of Americans are... insert what you
> want to scare the public about."

> What they should really say is, "X% of
> the small tiny number of people we survey
> are..." Of course, because those people
> were Americans...

> Remember that piece of Mars rock with those
> odd looking things on them? Remember how the
> media said the scientists reckon it showed
> proof of life - or some such claim?

> The reality was completely different. The
> scientists NEVER said anything of the sort.
> They said they did not know what the things
> were but they did resemble certain bacteria.

> The news often does what the current affairs
> shows do... leave out words and splice
> together things.

> For instance... "The reality was... the
> things were... certain bacteria."

> If you read the above paragraph relating to
> this quoted comment, you will see the words
> used and used in the same order.
> Technically, I said it... but I didn't say
> it that way.

> Splice together. Also they will deliberately
> take words out of context to help create the
> impression they want to.

> It's for this reason I prefer Fox News. They
> manipulate the least of all news channels.
> As they say... we report, YOU decide.

> I post, you decide.

> Michael Ross
  #14  
Old September 17, 2003, 10:13 AM
Linda
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hooked on Phonics & The Brain - Use it or Lose it.

Hi:

> About Phonics. Phonics is the old-fashioned style of learning to read by sounding out
> letters and combinations. Accuracy is higher, as is retention and comprehension
> according to tests done by several universities when the controversy occurred
> over the 'new' (old actually) method of look-say teaching of reading occurred.

Thanks to the "Hooked on Phonics" ads, I think most people are probably familiar with the return of phonetic reading.

I was taught phonetic english, too, and had NO trouble reading the "Cambridge University" tidbit.

It's just my humble opinion, but I think that the "look say" way of teaching was just a bone headed way of trying to rush people through the process.

Many people that were taught phonetic English DO, indeed, read with full word recognition instead of looking at each letter. Hence the ability of many people to read that letter and laugh because it WAS so easy to read.

But full word absorption is a stage you get to - not a stage to start at.

I know many people that learned phonetic english and still struggle with reading and comprehension. Know what else I notice? Those people don't read all that much.

Just my belief, but I believe it has more to do with whether the person reads regularly than with the teaching method.

Take playing the piano as an example. The more you practice, the better you get. The same applies to hockey, or soccer or tennis... or reading.

Progression of ability improves with comfort and familiarity derived from repetition.

The same could be applied to reading. A person that reads two books a week is going to be a more fluent reader than someone who might pick up one book a year - regardless of how they were taught.

Use it or lose it? Does that apply to the brain? You bet it does.

Interesting tidbit from an article called "Use it or Lose it"
  • Though most of the research providing information on the plasticity of the brain comes from animal studies, recent experiments from the Brain Research Institute at UCLA have shown similar results in human brains. In Wernicke's area, which deals with word understanding, the nerve cells have more dendrites in college-educated people than in people with only a high school education.
    http://www.newhorizons.org/neuro/diamond_use.htm

And here's another tidbit to chew on.

It is a fact that when people watch television, within 30 seconds of sitting down in front of the boob tube, the brain goes from predominantly beta waves (alert, conscious) to predominantly alpha waves (unfocused, receptive lack of attention: the state of aimless fantasy and daydreaming below the threshold of consciousness).

Food for thought, indeed. For anyone that's not on vacation in the "alpha" camp, of course. ; )

Linda
  #15  
Old September 17, 2003, 04:18 PM
Sandi Bowman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Myth: Do We Use Only 10% Of Our Brains?

> There is no scientific evidence to suggest
> that we use only 10% of our brains.

> In other words, the statement, "We use
> only 10% of our brains" is false; it's
> a myth. We use all of our brain.

> To learn more about that myth, where did the
> 10% myth begin, why does the myth continue,
> what does it mean to use only 10% of your
> brain, go to
>
> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html
> So next time you hear someone say that they
> only use 10% of their brain, you can set
> them straight. Tell them,

> "NOT TRUE; We use 100% of our
> brains."

Where is the proof that we use 100% of our brains? If that were true there would be no way we could learn new things or replace damaged areas by re-processing and training. Redundancy is built into a lot of our body parts, why not the brain?

What is more likely is that the brain is capable, as is the liver, of regenerating tissue on an as-needed basis assuming the proper stimuli and environment are present (and within physical limits, of course).

Thanks for sharing the info on the 10%. I was merely going on the information I was fed, complete with notations and references as is usually found in college textbooks, 40 some years ago. I hadn't heard anything to the contrary. Well, now I have and it seems authoritative.

As for the difficulty reading, it's just that I had to slow to a crawl to be able to decipher it and that I find difficult at any time because of the frustration factor. FYI: I read so fast, when in good form, that I was put on a monitor set for 1200 words per minute and beat it by a page and a half at least. Comprehension was averaged at 90% (oops! 92% when I looked it up in my files. Sorry, didn't mean to lie.) on the tests after reading. Perhaps now you can better understand why I found going so slow so frustrating. Lest you think faster is better, think again...it's almost impossible to keep oneself in reading material. :o)

Anyway, it's a fascinating discussion, folks. Love this forum...

Sandi
  #16  
Old September 17, 2003, 09:48 PM
Ankesh Kothari
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Myth: Do We Use Only 10% Of Our Brains?

Yes we do use almost 100% of our brains. But how much brain power do we use at any given moment?

Obviously we dont use 100% of the brain every moment, every second, every day.

When we are sleeping, different parts of our brain is activated than when we are awake. We dont use 100% of our brains while sleeping. We dont use 100% of our brains while awake.

Overall - we do use 100% of our brains. But at any given moment, how much brain power do we use?
  #17  
Old September 17, 2003, 10:03 PM
Erik
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The human brain

> Yeah, the human brain is very smart...and so
> under-utilized it's pathetic. Even the
> brightest among us use less than 10% of
> their brain's potential.

I enjoyed the insight into what % of our brains we truly use, but I think Sandy's original point was lost. And that was not a % figure, but the statement that we are not using 100% of our brain's POTENTIAL. Different than just physically using many different areas of the brain.

-Erik

P.S. Ankesh, good post.
  #18  
Old September 19, 2003, 07:15 PM
Michael Ross (Aust, Qld)
 
Posts: n/a
Default News Causes Chaos

Phil,

Thanks for ignoring the news brainwashing.

When you ignore the news and current affairs shows, you can't get frustrated. You can't get annoyed at the news for their bad reporting. Can't get heated over WHAT they report. Thus, you can get on with your life without "things eating away at you."

No "negative news thoughts" means you get to be more productive. You can concentrate on the job at hand.

Self-inflicted news-ignorance is bliss.

HA! Reminds me of Sgt Schultz... I know nothing.

Reminds me of the hotdog seller story. Business was fine and dandy until his son told him we were in a recession and thus advertising should be cut back. End result = dead business.

Sky News in Aust report false news for a whole day. Other news services - Fox, CNN, CBS, CNBC, BBC - were all reporting the "true" news as based on live statements from those in authority. Sky kept on with the false news - even after telecasting the live statements. I guess it furthered their agenda. Who knows. (shrug)

Michael Ross
 


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Other recent posts on the forum...


Seeds of Wisdom Publishing (front page) | Seeds of Wisdom Business forum | Seeds of Wisdom Original Business Forum (Archive) | Hidden Unusual Business Ideas Newsletter | Hotsheet Profits | The Art of Leverage | The Success Report | Persuade via Remote Influence | Affia Band | The Entrepreneur's Hotsheet | The SeedZine (Entrepreneurial Ezine) | The Fly Low Collect Dough Update Hotline

Get the report on Harvey Brody's Answers to a Question-Oriented-Person


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.