When you see two variables (the axes), with a graph moving up and to the right, that indicates that as one variable increases, the other also increases. So, as sugar consumption increases, so do cavities.

You want to reduce the 6% to 1% (or less).

It goes beyond reading. It's comprehension. Many of them can "read" the word, but they don't know what it means, or how it can be used.

I taught for 5 years in one of those schools. Many of them wouldn't get any, and most would get less than half. They're not being taught. They're being babysat, with no discipline whatsoever.

I'm one of your 6%-ers. It would be interesting if most of us were in the top tier.

Of course. I'm in the gulch am I not ;-)
But what is the bit about guessing?

Got em.

I'm suddenly reminded of of unwashed underwear jokes I heard as a teenager back in the 60s.
Such underwear would become so crusty that they'd come alive and run around doing stuff.
I know that makes no sense.
It was just the way some wacko dude told those nonsense jokes when I was at a military school in Florida.

Thanks, that was really nice. I like you back.
There's some who don't think my old dino brain has any common sense stuff.

Really? I haven't seen that statistic. Usually lump my Hebrew friends in with us non-semantic peeps.

I hadn't seen this book. Looks interesting. Hilarious that it drew such attention, and the people deconstructing the conclusions are doing so with logical/mathematic arguments that only the top two IQ categories are likely to follow. Even more interesting the deconstructing arguments assert the statistics are fallacious, but they are far stronger than the statistics for global warming and many statistics regarding income disparity. Clearly these are made to appeal to ready-made targets. I will have to read this. Thanks.

Show off.

Way more than five. First of all, they have to know how to read.

Hi, Dino:
We might consider a contest as to who is crustier. Personally I can't stay in one place more than 30 minutes without forming a crust.

I learned absolutely none of it in school, and that was waaay back when we were supposedly getting a better education than the kids of today do.

Got 11 of the 12. Optics wasn't my best subject! Maybe there is still some hope.

Got 'em all right!
But they were pretty basic and easy.

Aced it. But I also am an old guy who learned stuff before the dumbing down started.

Oh Well, a Dummy among us. I always thought water boils at 212* no matter where I am and I can't hear for shit anyway. 10 of 12 and that is my final answer.

A common failing of pollsters and politicos

yes, it's a 'pick the least incorrect.'

Perhaps add, "Explain why over simplified standardized tests are of so much value." But that's not really "science" ;^)

And the Asians might be disappointed when compared to the Jews (according to The Bell Curve.)

I got 12/12. As an engineer, I thought it was pretty easy.

You are right about hat form. Funny how just rearranging the variables can remove a needle from a haystack.

I only used the more complicated form a little, long time ago, when doing some 1-D modeling of multiphase fluid systems, and wanted to account for fluids (refrigerants) that I didn't have tables for.

Good point - confusing the graph with the reality.