Re: To chyba jakaś pomyłka...

Path: news-archive.icm.edu.pl!news.icm.edu.pl!newsfeed.pionier.net.pl!feeder.erje.net
!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!ecngs!testfeeder.ecn
gs.de!81.171.118.63.MISMATCH!peer03.fr7!news.highwinds-media.com!newsfeed.neost
rada.pl!unt-exc-02.news.neostrada.pl!unt-spo-b-01.news.neostrada.pl!news.neostr
ada.pl.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Ghost" <g...@e...com>
Newsgroups: pl.sci.psychologia
References: <n4ouji$tg4$1@dont-email.me>
<566fff7a$0$22837$65785112@news.neostrada.pl>
<n4ov6o$vll$1@dont-email.me>
In-Reply-To: <n4ov6o$vll$1@dont-email.me>
Subject: Re: To chyba jakaś pomyłka...
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 13:34:09 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-2"; reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <567008c5$0$649$65785112@news.neostrada.pl>
Organization: Telekomunikacja Polska
NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.55.157.1
X-Trace: 1450182853 unt-rea-b-01.news.neostrada.pl 649 80.55.157.1:57671
X-Complaints-To: a...@n...neostrada.pl
X-Received-Bytes: 2015
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2167788376
Xref: news-archive.icm.edu.pl pl.sci.psychologia:717442
Ukryj nagłówki

Użytkownik "Pszemol" napisał w wiadomości grup
dyskusyjnych:n4ov6o$vll$...@d...me...

"Ghost" <g...@e...com> wrote in message
news:566fff7a$0$22837$65785112@news.neostrada.pl...
> Użytkownik "Pszemol" napisał w wiadomości grup
> dyskusyjnych:n4ouji$tg4$...@d...me...
>
>>> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/religious-
people-are-less-intelligent-than-atheists-according-
to-analysis-of-scores-of-scientific-8758046.html
>
>>>A piece of University of Rochester analysis, led by Professor Miron
>>>Zuckerman, found "a reliable negative relation between intelligence and
>>>religiosity" in 53 out of 63 studies.
>
>>>Co Wy o tym myślicie?
>
>> "while 10 showed a positive one"
>
>> Co Ty o tym myślisz?

>Myślę, że obaj przeczytaliśmy ten sam tekst:

>"Only two studies showed significant positive correlations
>and significant negative correlations were seen in a total of 35 studies."

>:-) Jakie wnioski?

No jakie?