<p>Afan,
Seriously, you need to calm down. </p>
<p>You say, </p>
<p>"This “study was meant for entertainment. Not to be taken seriously.” …by anyone other than, perhaps, you-- I guess (or that laugh out loud, comedic rag the Wall Street Journal). </p>
<p>It sure got you motivated into histrionic mode that in no way testifies to WSJs supposed virtue of comedic diversion [or perhaps Im simply missing its more tragic capacity to produce squealing sounds from drama-queens].</p>
<p>You quote Kalidescope saying: “you might want to give some passing thought to the possibility that some schools may give you a better edge than others at doing it [get into Johns Hopkins Med, or Chicago Business, or Michigan Law].”
Im sure you believe that there is no possibility of this happening and therefore such talk must be stamped-down.</p>
<p>Kalidescope, modestly, qualifies his statement with might-passing-thought-possibility and you leap up onto the ramparts to light a sophistic bonfire with the following flame That is the worst of the many misinterpretations one could draw from this study. </p>
<p>The worst huh?! Holy shet! Call in the thought police!: Someone says there might be a passing thought or possibility of something I disagree with actually being [possibly] true, AAAAhhhhhhh!!!</p>
<p>Chill!</p>
<p>And make sure there are no innocents bystanders around the next time you come across the Wall Street Journal unmedicated.</p>