There are many basic experiments that could be designed to at least narrow down the reliability of the data. I could imagine a fairly simple test in which actors are hired to answer scripted questions with scripted answers, they are video recorded wearing suit A and then suit B. You'd use a large set of actors to help…

I don't know, my friend. I've yet to see any double blinded studies around suits with just a dab or red and white.

This kind of a survey result is largely irrelevant. They are asking for opinions. Let's see the data of who gets hired. Without that, this is like asking someone what features would convince them to buy a car. Sure, you'll get insight into what that person thinks they want, but will they actually put down the cash…

Oh yes it is.

Exactly

Or you could get a tablet actually built for survival, something that is water resistant, solar powered, has a built in transmitter, and can survive a drop, like the Earl Backcountry Tablet:

Everyone hates 3D. If you don't hate 3D, you are no one.

Man, used to love this show until I found out that it's all highly staged, even sometimes using actors. Broke my heart!

Grado Labs

The argument is more about these_screen_names_stink not knowing his psychological history. I know of virtually no students of psychology who take Freud seriously in the context of theory, only in the context of history.

Tripit is probably very very worried right now.

MrTea: Science does not say fat is bad for you. Specific types of fate are worse than others. Literally decades of work on this, some really great, some flaky, but in any case there are no nutritional scientists I know of who say "fat is bad" anymore. It comes down to the types of fat and amount consumed.

Other than noting that a few famous people wake up fairly early... where are the citations showing how this data was gathered? I don't see any "we surveyed 1000 top performers, and more than 60% perform at least 3 of these actions each day" kind of data. Or is this just one of those "Hm, i read about 3 people and they…

Don't believe this nonsense. The study is barely worth paying attention to. Might as well be talking about "favorite colors and personality." Very nearly the definition of specious.

So, I can tell from your horrible grammar mistakes that you just used google translate (or need some remedial help). Please bro, I grew up in Hamburg. Don't test me, bro! Don't test me! Echter Deutsch ist eine Symphonie fur die Augen; diese Scheisse ist nur vortäuschung.

I hear ya, but I'm not on lifehacker for meaningful debate! I mean, who get's their science news on Lifehacker? ;)

Let's see the studies, dude. It's not on me to prove that their works aren't true, it's on you (and them) to show that they ARE. That's how science works. You do know about proving a negative, right? Post'em right here. I can't wait to eat up their delicious methodologies. NOM NOM NOM.

I'm not buying it. You sounds like a wikipedia summary reader to this guy. And it just happens, I actually have a copy Freud's seminal work about one foot away from me, of course in the original German. Might be a little dense for some though.

And the thing they all have in common is that they are completely made up nonsense. YAY.

Wow. So it's kind of like being a Capricorn, only Astrology actually uses real things, like stars, to make up its bull crap, where as Myers Brig just waves its hands and makes you feel good about yourself, huh?