I do find this scene entertaining, as well as disturbing.
When I was a kid, back in the Jurassic period, I read just about everything that was hanging around, ate up the World Book Childcraft books in my kinder years, every volume and almost every page of the World Book encyclopedia, dictionary, books on child psychology, etc and so on. We had walls of books, and I read almost all of them. Despite this, I never presumed to be more intelligent than anyone else --- and I still don't --- because intelligence doesn't reside in knowledge (although knowledge can support intelligence).
Surrounded by physicists, biologists, Berkeley educated veterinarians, physicians, rock stars, athletes, notable actors and other millionaires, I found each of them with strengths and weaknesses. I do not consider them my betters, nor do they presume to be better than me (or, if they do, I quickly remind them of their inequities and we are once again on even terms). By this same token, I am surrounded by real estate agents, clerks, bridal consultants, nurses, firemen, gymnasts, journalists, photographers, graphic artists, accountants, housewives, homeless vets, and disabled persons, each of which I treat as equals, assuming they do the same. But I firmly respect their expertise and will query them to their demise if given the opportunity. Every person, young and old, sharp or dull, has something to share, some insight to provide, and in turn I provide insights of my own, in a form of social trade. So when you talk about your classmates with such disdain, it presents to me that you do not recognize the value of others and have posed narrow definitions to classify yourself as "better" than others. This is a false sell, a trick of the mind, a conceit that poses a greater issue before us, and hopefully before you, that conscious, actively supported lies are far more damaging than mere apathy.
But, this is not an issue of who is smarter or more knowledgeable, and Thomas' comments here are a demonstration of the misinformation being presented to gullible people who do not foster the strength of character to research what is presented to them so readily (in fact, when Thomas mentioned he gained his education on history from a video game, my jaw just about struck the ground. I just hope he doesn't confuse Sonic the Hedgehog with actual hedgehogs or, less of a stretch, Lara Croft for real women, let alone the historical distortions presented in that game, and so many others). Thomas does not know what he's talking about. It is not knowledge, and certainly not wisdom, that defines his perceptions. Instead it is fears and hatred, presented with a vitriolic smacking of the keyboard. And in these meager efforts, he expects others to blindly accept his unsupported allegations as factual.
Thomas, I really don't care how smart you think you are, the fact is there are a lot of people with far more knowledge and understanding on various fields that you purport to be an expert on at your ripe old age of pubescence. Let's face it, when you have one dollar, you can claim to be richer than a person with 99 cents, but you're still poor as crap. And so is the status of your knowledge. At this stage in your development, you're academically bankrupt. When you argue your stances, when you pose your claims, it is with a check that will bounce, a credit card denied, a wallet empty of coupons, let alone hard-earned cash. Running this metaphor to its economic collapse, you simply do not have the backing to set up shop and claim to be a financial consultant. You don't even have enough to setup a lemonade stand.
