decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 51 minutes later, 59 minutes after the original post[^][v]#450,920
I'd be curious to know about the sample size, the definition used of each gender, the method of selecting participants, and whether this graph takes disparities in education level between the genders in question in place, where the results were taken, when, over what period of time, the metrics used to determine intelligence, the areas in which intelligence was tested, the occupations and histories of all people in the sample, and a comprehensive list of the other published works of all the scientists involved in making that graph.
Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,924
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj) > a whole load of factors stemming from correlaton/causation fallacy (the connection between education and intelligence being one of them)
Moreover, of course verbal intelligence is higher in femalewhores, I explain this disparity in my post, I explain why this is a cheap trick to artificially inflate the figures of femalewhore intelligence. But we all know the ability to speak fluently is not the substance of civilization building. > occupations and histories
That doesn't make a damned difference and you know it.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,926
@previous (Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g)
Oh, it absolutely does. Someone wealthy enough to go to university is likely to score higher than someone who had to drop out during grade 10 to support their family.
Intelligence metrics are useless for sociological purposes without considering class. Absolutely useless.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj double-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,928
@450,924 (Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g)
And please, do explain how the hell they made an intelligence test that doesn't have any effect from nurture factors. Did they port Geekbench to the human brain or something? :v
Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,930
@450,926 (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
He dropped out because he lacked the aptitude of course, this is what I mean. @previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
Statistical models would not nearly perfectly predict the distribution if it were so malleable to social circumstance that all outcomes could be equalized by your proposed social measures, and of course, they have not.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,935
@previous (Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g)
Actually, in fact, no, I don't mean that! One dead parent, another parent too grief-stricken to work? Someone's gotta keep them from being starved to death by the ruthless, unyielding machine of capitalism. @previous (Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g)
That's an interesting leap of logic. Could you explain your rationale for that whole multi-parsec jump from observation to result?
Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,937
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
I see the inference quite clearly drawing itself. Sorry you have trouble following a simple syllogism.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,947
@previous (Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g)
It's a fucking weak link - almost like "Android sales outstrip iOS sales 4:1; therefore, Mountain View is a nicer town than Cupertino".
(Edited 8 seconds later.)
Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 57 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,948
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
"When in doubt, let's strawman the opposition as having made a non-sequitur!"
I stopped doing that when I was what, 8, 9?
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,956
@previous (Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g)
Someone's been reading WP's List of Logical Fallacies again, right? Testing out all those intimidating, patently useless terms?
Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,960
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj)
WP?
Also you find these intimidating? Please grow up, you're telling me now why lefties have a hard time dealing with biological reality.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,965
No, I'm mocking you. I don't find them intimidating at all - rather like the wimpy mewling of a Reddit libertarian, begging for decent human beings to validate their "concerns" about "misandry".
Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,969
@previous (decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj) > I'm mocking you
So you admit to devalidating yourself by saying you're just effervescing meritless contempt for some occupation of vindictive emotional ground. You are pathetic.
decibelmilliwatts !!8lSAEPzaj replied with this 13 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#450,986
@previous (Autphag !FaiGWhdD4g)
Dude, I always devalidate myself. Welcome to depression, dude.
