<p>Given that Stanford comes out on top of Chicago in all those rankings, it would actually hurt your argument to declare them BS. Then again, your claim is that Stanford is on a “whole other league”, so I can see how you wouldn’t agree with them seeing as very few have it as number one. It seems like the only ranking that would please you would be one that creates a “Stanford/Harvard” tier, makes it clear that no other institution comes close to touching them, and then ranks everybody else for the sake of the plebeians that don’t get into these schools. </p>
<p>In all seriousness, I concede that Stanford is a more “complete” and well rounded university. I don’t think anybody here is arguing that UChicago offers more programs or that, overall, its programs are ranked as highly as Stanford’s. I’m just an undergrad at a single college, but my perception, based on rankings and such, is that Stanford indeed is a superior institution, if you define such as one that offers more programs and said programs rank higher. However, as JHS so eloquently explained, in this particular race UChicago’s undergraduate college was deemed to be on equal footing as Stanford’s in terms of academic quality. You can rant all you want about the rankings that take into account all of the universities’ programs, but at least on this measure, it wouldn’t be heresy to say that UChicago offers a comparable education. It also wouldn’t be heresy to say that UChicago IS distinguished in the Physical Sciences, long established as one of the university’s strengths. You might have some valid points when it comes to comparing them as a whole, but to be frank your claims that UChicago is not distinguished in the Physical Sciences and your attempts to discredit the discipline it’s arguably most well known for make you look like little more than somebody who is lashing out irrationally.</p>