SAD TO SEE YA GO FELLA..............

[Whirlaway]

One of America's best late night shows is signing off....Red Eye, hosted by the impish Greg Gutfeld is signing off.

Intelligent, self indulgent, funny, subversive, irreverent.

Red Eye was one of cable tv's best...better than anything on the Comedy Channel.

Gutfeld is one smart-ass, intelligent dude. It will be interesting to see what his next move is. Prior to Red Eye, Gutfeld had been editor of both Maxim and Men's Health.

Once a catholic; Gutfeld is self described as an agnostic atheist and a Libertarian.

[Yssup Rider]

Why did it get cancelled?

Doesn't the fucking constitution guarantee his rights to speak his mind on Faux News.

Maybe you can get him to be a guest poster here, Whir-LIE-turd?

[Whirlaway]

I wouldn't describe it as cancelled; Gutfeld is moving on to do other things. I don't think the Fox suits are going to keep it going with a replacement host.

The show success is totally dependent on Gutfeld's persona. Good on Fox to move along, and not try to keep a brand surviving at lesser levels....You know, opposite of what Comedy Channel will likely do with the Jon Stewart Show?

[UnderConstruction]

Comedy central will be fine. Republicans, in general, aren't very funny. Democrats, that's another story.

[Whirlaway]

As will Fox (be fine). What is your point Ignoramus?

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Comedy central will be fine. Republicans, in general, aren't very funny. Democrats, that's another story.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

As will Fox (be fine). What is your point Ignoramus?

I know it's hard to keep up when you've got three handles going at the same time. You said fox will not go on with the show like comedy central will do. I said they'll be fine, Democrats are funny. Lots of people to choose from. Do I have to spell it out? You're not very intuitive are you?

[Jackie S]

Comedy Central turned into a "shill" for the liberal/progressive agenda. The borrowed the laugh track from the Bill Maher show where all they have to do is say "conservatives bad" and the audience will applaud and squeal with the fervor reserved for Rock Stars.

Comedy Central viewers are made up of morons who, if you take any two and add their IQ's, you are still in double digits.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Comedy Central turned into a "shill" for the liberal/progressive agenda. The borrowed the laugh track from the Bill Maher show where all they have to do is say "conservatives bad" and the audience will applaud and squeal with the fervor reserved for Rock Stars.

Comedy Central viewers are made up of morons who, if you take any two and add their IQ's, you are still in double digits.

Research says otherwise. Being republican, however, I wouldn't expect you to be that smart. John Stewart is fucking hilarious and does much more than just say 'conservatives bad'. He holds a mirror up to society and shows us how goddamned stupid we can be.

Conservatives, for the most part, are humorless. It stems from their religious upbringing I guess. All these potty-mouth liberals are going to hell.

Several sources. Peruse them at your leisure.


http://www.americanscientist.org/sci...-conservatives

http://reason.com/archives/2014/06/1...-than-liberals

http://samuel-warde.com/2014/03/scie...erals-smarter/



This one is particularly fascinating

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-conservatives

And this one pull quote sounds almost exactly like every conservative that has ever commented in the political forum. It describes you guys down to the T. Check, check, check and check. Complexity and ambiguity evades you guys. I've been saying that for weeks. And now I know why you guys don't get it; you're less responsive to information and less likely to change even when facing evidence to the contrary.

These reports convey four interwoven claims. First, conservatives cling more inflexibly to old ways of thinking. Second, they're less responsive to information. Third, they're more obtuse to complexity and ambiguity. Fourth, they're less likely to change when the evidence says they should.

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

This one is particularly fascinating

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...-conservatives

And this one pull quote sounds almost exactly like every conservative that has ever commented in the political forum. It describes you guys down to the T. Check, check, check and check. Complexity and ambiguity evades you guys. I've been saying that for weeks. And now I know why you guys don't get it; you're less responsive to information and less likely to change even when facing evidence to the contrary.

These reports convey four interwoven claims. First, conservatives cling more inflexibly to old ways of thinking. Second, they're less responsive to information. Third, they're more obtuse to complexity and ambiguity. Fourth, they're less likely to change when the evidence says they should.

UnderCunt we have been through all this BULLSHIT... You are wrong again boy or are you?


« March 2013 Beta Of The MonthMen Turning Their Backs On Modernity »
Was Satoshi Kanazawa Right?
March 6, 2013 by CH
Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary scientist and former columnist at Psychology Today who wrote an article (since pulled, and which got him fired from the magazine) about the attractiveness of the different races of women, (concluding that black women were the least attractive), might, in the end, have had his analysis vindicated.

Several sources. Peruse them at your leisure.

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013...anazawa-right/

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...oshi-kanazawa/

http://www.economist.com/blogs/prosp...a-intelligence









.

[UnderConstruction]

I'm not the one who can't read...

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

I'm not the one who can't read...

Really undercunt, can you read it now?

Satoshi Kanazawa
“”The great idiot of social science...
—PZ Myers[1]
Satoshi Kanazawa is an evolutionary psychologist[2] at the London School of Economics and exactly the kind of researcher who makes evolutionary psychology look bad. So say thirty five leading evolutionary psychologists, at least.[3] His chief weapons are causalation, p-value fishing, bad data analysis, bigotry, and surprise. Psychology Today decided to throw standards out the window and gave him a blog, which was ironically named The Scientific Fundamentalist. It later got pulled from the site after he posted some racist drivel dressed up in pseudoscientific language.


Atheists and liberals are smarter
This time around, Kanazawa attempted to demonstrate the intellectual superiority of atheists and liberals. Besides all of the other dubious methodology, one of the studies in the pair he published didn't even use an IQ test — he simply extrapolated "intelligence" from a verbal test.[15][16][17] And this all goes back to our Savanna ancestors, of course!

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Satoshi_Kanazawa

[UnderConstruction]

So? IQ tests aren't the only indication of intelligence. And there's the other two reports. And there are plenty more that say exactly the same thing. What do you expect when a disproportionate amount still believe in creationism? How smart can someone REALLY be when they believe a magical sky daddy made the world in six days and popped a budweiser and kicked up his feet on the seventh day?

[IIFFOFRDB]

Click on the links in the "footnotes" undercunt

HERE->http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Satoshi_Kanazawa

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

So? IQ tests aren't the only indication of intelligence. And there's the other two reports. And there are plenty more that say exactly the same thing. What do you expect when a disproportionate amount still believe in creationism? How smart can someone REALLY be when they believe a magical sky daddy made the world in six days and popped a budweiser and kicked up his feet on the seventh day?

Your 2nd garbage article links to a 2009 study and your boy... Kanazawa... http://66.135.55.40/DaveSource.com/F...ve-ability.pdf

Kanazawa, S. (2006). IQ and the wealth of states. Intelligence, 34, 593−600

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

I'm not the one who can't read...

Your 3rd garbage article by "Liberals Unite" The 24 hour news magazine for discerning liberals, says because I don't find this funny. You are smarter than me... really? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnW3xkHxIEQ