What was a fact you were taught in school, that has been disproven in your lifetime?

Si.

 

So technically we weren’t lied to when they said “ you should go to college”. At least this is the case when it comes to median earnings over a lifetime.

For the overall populace college education increases lifetime earnings.

https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/research-summaries/education-earnings.html

That said there’s a bunch caveats but more importantly there’s a few ways to avoid high student debt load.

One, you can join the military and have them pay for it.

Two, there’s no shame in getting the first two years of school done at a community college and then transferring to your in state institution. That will save you a fortune.

Three, you can live in any western country that isn’t the USA and the taxes will offset this cost to varying degree based on country. Canada for instance your first two years of school are 5,500ish Canadian dollars and then 8k after that.

Four, you can vote to change the predatory college system we have now.

Five, really good grades and such in high-school can unlock scholarships.

I think the crux of the problem really should be addressed and those handful of circumventions shouldn’t be absolutely necessary to keep from getting buried in debt.

I find it interesting that in an attempt to get more people into school and level the playing field the government completely boned the implementation and created predatory lending instead. They created a system of loans that couldn’t be bankrupted out of, thus removing all risk from the banks encouraging said banks to loan 300k to someone getting a degree in underwater basket weaving.

I didn’t know my ass from a hole in the wall when I was college age and I would venture to guess that most others don’t either (yes I know gross generalization). Also, this “follow your heart” or your “love” or whatever you want to call it without thinking about the dollars and cents of the situation because they don’t teach that part in high school. Accounting gets taught in college. So, these poor kids get taken advantage of by banks and a failed implementation of democratizing education. To make matters worse colleges became big business. I mean, good god, look at the paychecks for the deans and the football coaches. Furthermore look at all the high promise low delivery “for profit” colleges taking advantage of these kids. Guh, the whole thing makes me furious.

Anyway, my greater point was there’s ways around getting screwed on college loans and I really believe there’s value in education. I don’t think we should throw the baby out with the bath water on this one, instead we should probably fix the underlying problem and put the value back in college while giving these kids a chance.

Do you NEED a college degree to make more money, absolutely not. But statistically it’s still a good idea.

Sorry, I’m pretty passionate about this one.

 

Something something thread derail? You called?

When they told me 35’s would fit without a lift.

 

Nobody said all degrees and college are bad. At all. What was pushed, that you admit in this post is BS, is that you need a degree to do anything and that any degree was better than no degree.

I'd also point out that data in the link is old, from 2004 data. So that'd be people's income over a 50 year stretch ending in 2004. Borderline irrelevant to today with the increased debt/cost, and I would bet money that all the useless degrees of the last 20 years tank out the averages they are touting.

 

Newer studies referenced up to 2022

https://www.aplu.org/our-work/4-policy-and-advocacy/publicuvalues/employment-earnings/#:~:text=College graduates are half as,million more over their lifetime.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michae...but-other-factors-matter-too/?sh=7ff8636335cd

 

Though I appreciate the more recent data, the cynic in me distrusts the source. They are citing the bank of the federal reserve, which has a direct interest in promoting college and the federal loans to find it.

A cannibal telling me his boiling pot is great for relaxing isn't the an opinion that will sway me much.

 

That too.

Statistics courses show pretty readily how it's easily manipulated for whatever is needed.

 

Well we also assumed those governing wouldn't actively sabotage the people they are supposedly serving, so.... yeah. There's that.

 

That’s what makes science awesome. We are always learning and evolving our knowledge. And every study worth its salt is peer reviewed by groups of people trying to prove it wrong.

To your point, there is money buried in there as you have to write books and get grants to fund your studies. Therefore, your study has to be of interest to someone that has the money to pay for it. It’s unfortunate and nobody wants to work for free. Nothings perfect, but it’s the best we got.

 

Yeah. It'd be funny if it weren't true.

 

This is something I hung up at work years ago. It helps remind folks that the story told in a publication is the journey of discovery itself, not a destination sought along the way. Pseudoscience always starts with the conclusion and works backwards to try to prove it, and that helps identify a lot of the garbage out there, they typically tell on themselves immediately that way.

 

Peer reviewed has lost some credibility recently. So much money and politics has bled into science that agendas are taking priority and careers are threatened if the line isn't toed.

 

1/9400 of football field, to be precise.

 

Not so much in school, but in society in general: The world our elders grew up in was a utopia, people with different beliefs or orientation were terrible, new music was trash, the younger generation was lazy and causing the world to go to shit.
Well, I guess that was never disproven since we still think the same way.

 

I'm not a business and I don't get paid by them as a supplier or anything. My paycheck is direct deposit. Any time I get refunds or something, it's put back on my credit or debit card.

 

A gentle reminder that that isn't how peer review works, you don't get to pick your reviewers when a publication is submitted. A board of editors decide if they think the topic is worth publishing (in their specific journal anyway), and select willing, unpaid review participants that are not named to the author that read the paper and submit questions and comments that have to be addressed.

A lot of folks hold your opinion but only think it because they can't tell the scientists from the hucksters telling them NOT to trust actual scientific process. Once they've got you distrusting the scientific community's ability to find and share facts and data discovered, they can sway you with emotional arguments and bias.

I'd encourage you to be skeptical because that in and of itself is science, but to remember the reason scientific opinion seems fluid is because it is! If you can prove that, say, homeopathy is real and water has memory of onion juice drops diluted long ago, and present real hard evidence to show it, I'll change my mind and happily appear the fool even after mocking such garbage nonsense for years! Science is humble without pride and that can seem wishy-washy to people that feel their ideals should be concrete.

 

A bit off topic, but just an interesting observation; Why do people write checks in cursive? I see that all the time from people who never write cursive anywhere else.
I am an engineer who still had drafting classes before CAD was a thing, so I learned to write in block letters, and do so all the time. But I did learn cursive and can actually do it fairly well and legible, but when I write checks I do it in block/print because that's what I am used to.
Just an observation.
Back to the topic...

 

I have found that most of the things I learned in school are still true today, opposite of most posts in this thread. Geography is still true, although some countries have changed borders and names a bit. Math and Science and Biology and Bookkeeping principles are still the same, though with computers that we didn't have back then (I'm old) it might be applied a little differently.
Today they are teaching woke and liberal teachings that are different, but it does not disprove what I learned. I see it as what I learned was basic and correct and what they learn now is misguided and not true, so eventually current teachings might get disproven more than what I learned back in the day.

Just a different perspective.

 

You're confusing sex and gender, they're related but not the same
https://orwh.od.nih.gov/sex-gender

Also X and Y are sex chromosomes and while XX and XY are the two most common they aren't the only combination. About a 1/2 million people in the US classify as Intersex (XXXY, XY, XXX, X)
I learned this in high school (late 90s) but did need some internet refreshing.


To stay on topic I was told computers were the future but when I graduated with my IT degree in 03 jobs were scarce after the dot com crash and now I work maintenance for Athletics at a D3 school.

 

I guess I should say science is more in question than peer reviews. I was painting with too broad a brush, but science has been wrong repeatedly, and that is fine. It should be theories and tests and curiosity, but also open to new info and ideas. This is where it goes awry, and it's not entirely new. The powers that be or "experts" will make a claim and then silence any opposition, even with evidence to support it. The vanity and arrogance of man makes many willing to knowingly lie rather than allow the truth to prove them wrong. Today "science" is frequently used as a political tool and "scientists/experts" are willing to make false claims or alter/withhold data for personal or political gain. Throughout history there have been flaws in science, and there have been corrupt men who would silence the truth to prevent their wisdom or expertise from being challenged. Those in power don't like to have it challenged.

Examples:
The earth is the center of the universe. Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake for stating the Earth moved and that stars were distant suns.

The 4 humors were the height of medicinal science at one point.

Dinosaurs were big slow lizards that drug their tails. The "experts" actually broke the fossils to force them to drag their tails rather than being proven wrong.

There are also two items in recent times that I cannot mention because they are so political I'd be banned for it. Suffice it to say that opposing views in the scientific community were/are actively silenced and threatened, even though they have peer reviewed studies to prove it.