Misconceptions Based on Race, 'Genetics', et. al.

They work fine for me. Are you able to open PDF files?

This is a hoax.

http://www.snopes.com/obama-iq-test/

 

you believe this crap?

it was debunked long ago

 

He doesn't know how to fact-check and site credible sources. He just searches the internet for whatever he can find to support his views without taking thought to the source's credibility.

 

Obama is not a member of Mensa but according to IQ experts he could qualify as a member.

Check this link:

http://www.kidsiqtestcenter.com/obamas-iq.html

Their reasoning is that Obama graduated from Harvard Law with high honors (Magna Cum Laude). Law school students are required to take the LSAT. The average score for LSAT students at Harvard during Obama's college years was 171. Since he graduated with high honors it can be safely assumed that his LSAT score was above the average placing him in the 98.8% percentile of intelligence qualifying him for Mensa membership. They estimate Obama's IQ to be in the range of 130 to 148 classifying him as a genius. Again this is not news to people with the ability to gauge intelligence. I can tell Obama is highly intelligent based on his vocabulary, reasoning and knowledge. IQ experts (not the biased idiots you cite) seem to agree and his academic success is proof positive that his IQ is around genius level.

 

You along with a lot of people have been had regarding Obama's i.q. as well as the i.q. of Harvard Students....for the real truth: https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/07/12/the-iqs-of-academic-elites/

Also...you still seem not to understand Obama got into Columbia and Harvard only because of his race and affirmative action. Obama admitted this in a moment of rare honesty. He himself...has said his i.q. is in the 120 range which is probably an exaggeration. His i.q. has been estimated by the method used to determine the i.q. of famous people who have no i.q. test on record or abailable for viewing...it came in around 106 which is a little over the average of 100....actually very good for a Negro.....now the only reason I bring this up is to show how people have been hoodwinked by the media.

Jimmy Carter had the highest i.q. of any modern President...and look what a lousy President he was. So political leadership and having a good presidency is about much more than i.q.---though of course it would not be good to have a President with a very low i.q.

Now Geroge Bush got labeled a moron quite sucessfully....but his i.q. which was made available to the public was in the 120 range which of course is higher than Obama's but neither one was a good President...Obama in my opinion is right up there with Carter in fact worse than Carter and many besides myself believe that...has done great damage and he is not done yet...his latest blunder granting more visas for foreign workers.

Also...I would point out that in addition to getting help from Affirmative Action....there is little doubt he received more help from those mysterious figures who had plans for him....these backers more than likely provided tutors and perhaps more.....he would not be the first to get through college by being able to get test questions aka cheating aka Teddy Kennedy and numerous others....a lot of fraternities were notorious at one time for helping their members cheat. With his i.q. there is no way he could have graduated Magna Cum Laude without it...no doubt about it.

http://www.akdart.com/obama132.html

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...ISTUDGUvu2duu10fQ&sig2=1PG7MQdiK4zYwkAJPQC9Rg

 

You cannot prove any of my sources are incorrect....on the other hand I can prove the liberal media whom you cite as sources are quite dishonest.

The dishonesty of the mainstream media has become very well understood in the past few years....that is one reason for Trump's popularity....people are fed up with the liberal media and how they spin and lie constantly.

 

In your dreams....what has been debunked is that Obama was some kind of genius, some kind of magical negro.

I well remember some historian being on the don imus radio show and claimed obamas i.q. was so high it was off the charts.

Imus axed the professor....well what is his i.q.---he didnt know what to say...but finally said he didnt know but he was definitely a genius....such media crap like this actually convinced a lot of people Obama had a genius level i.q. ...many even voted for him because they really believed that baloney. The media had great success in promoting the phoney...but people are finally waking up.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/iq-scores-of-famous-people-76779/

 

You're just rambling now and citing garbage websites. I cited actual IQ experts who estimate Obama's IQ to be in the genius range based on him graduating with high honors from Harvard.

I did prove your sources to be incorrect. You cited a source saying Obama's IQ was 102 and I countered it with Snopes.com the website that specializes in addressing Urban Legends. They debunked your source. Case closed.

What do you have to say about Obama's IQ being estimated to be in the genius range based on him graduating from Harvard with high honors? Are you disputing the claim? Do you have counter evidence? By the way how is your reading of my PDF files coming along? All you have to do is go to the Adobe Acrobat website and download their software. The links will work. I want feedback not mindless rhetoric.

 

This has been explained many times. Now perhaps you do not understand how Affirmative Action works...it essentially gives better grades to Negroes than what they actually score....in addition it is well known that Obama had powerful backers....people who had selected him for reasons of their own....these people had the influence and power to get Obama admitted to Harvard when it is rather well known he was not qualified......what I found regarding his grades.............you must remember he has refused to release his college transcripts that alone tells you much or it should......if he actually had good grades there would be no reason to hide them....................

Few issues arouse so much interest as Barack Obama’s grades. Everyone from Jodi Kantor, columnist for the New York Times, to David Maraniss of the Washington Post to Donald Trump has weighed in on what they are or might be. Despite the interest, however, we still don’t know what they are — Obama has not yet released his academic records from Occidental (1979-1981), Columbia (1981-1983), or Harvard Law School (1988-1991).

Theories abound as to why, but one that has largely been ignored is that maybe they’re hidden because they reveal Barack Obama was entirely average. How so? New research into the Occidental and Columbia archives by TheBlaze shows that Obama transferred from Occidental during a time of rampant grade inflation and entered Columbia during one of the easiest years to transfer in recent memory.

Newspaper accounts from Occidental show grade inflation was rampant for the years 1977-1981, the year that Barack Obama transferred to Columbia. It was so bad that, according to the student newspaper at the time, the dean of faculty had to intervene in the fall of 1981. (Barack Obama transferred in the spring of 1981 as a sophomore, meaning he would have enrolled.)
Grade Inflation Could Explain How Obama Got Into Columbia

A cartoon from the Occidental newspaper at the time mocks the rampant grade inflation at the school.

During that five-year period, “average GPAs ran 3.11, 3.07, 3.01, 3.08 and 3.08, respectively,” wrote Michael Bruce Abelson for The Occidental on February 19, 1982. “A statistical study by Dean of Faculty James England printed in this month’s [February] edition of the Faculty Newsletter, assails the college’s rising grade point average and makes a direct appeal to faculty members to reconsider the basis upon which grades are given.”

To put these high GPAs in perspective, consider that were Occidental College’s entire student population to apply to Columbia College in ’81, half would have had sufficient GPAs to be admitted at the New York Ivy League school.

The only reason that is possible, however, is because Columbia’s transfer student standards during that same period were very low. At Columbia, the quality of the transfer student had declined so much so that the average admitted transfer student’s GPA was a meager 3.0 and the average SAT score an 1100 (out of a possible 1600).

Jeremy Feldman, a student newspaper writer at Columbia, documented the lower standards in a Nov. 18, 1981 and quoted admissions officials: “On paper at least, the quality of the students accepted [as transfers] has declined along with the number of applicants, the officials say.” (Columbia Spectator, “Tight Housing Discourages Transfer Applications to CC)

Feldman, quoting Robert Boatti, Assistant Dean of Admissions, as well as the former college Dean Arnold Collery, continued:

Boatti also attributed the drop in transfer application to the College’s policy of requiring transfer students to take courses in its core curriculum and to the limited availability of financial aid for them.

He added a “majority” of the transfers come here from college in the New York area. Many come from community colleges, rather than the nation’s top schools.

In grades and other indicators of academic performance, the crop of transfer applicants “doesn’t stand out the way they did before,” [Dean Arnold] Collery said.

Boatti confirmed Dean Collery’s observations:

Among accepted transfer students, the average combined math and verbal score on the Scholastic Aptitude Test is a 1,100 and their grade-point average at their former schools is about 3.0, Boatti said.

The freshman class at the College had a combined SAT score more than 100 points higher.

Only 450 students applied to transfer to Columbia in 1981 and sixty-seven were admitted, according to the Columbia Spectator, compared to 650 applicants just four years before.

Interestingly, Obama’s GPA may not have mattered to get into Columbia at all.

“GPAs were dropped from student transcripts [at Occidental] during the late 1960s, in an effort to de-emphasis grades and stress learning for its own sake,” wrote Arpie Balekjian in the student newspaper, The Occidental on March 13, 1981. On March 11, 1981, Occidental’s faculty voted to reestablish GPAs on transcripts, but by then, Obama had already filled out an application to transfer to Columbia and been accepted. Impossible though it may seem, he may very well have been admitted to Columbia without ever having to reveal his grades.

And that may not be far-fetched considering Columbia’s lower standards at the time, which were in part fueled by a housing crunch that forced the college to lower standards in order to attract transfer students.

Barack Obama did not graduate with honors at Columbia and so his acolytes make much of his time at Harvard where he was president of the Harvard Law Review and where he graduated magna cum laude. Many ignore that his magna cum laude honors may well not been magna cum laude today. Under the system in place when Obama was a student, only one third of a graduating class did not receive honors. For the class of ’95, a whopping 71.3 percent of the student body graduated with honors, doubling the number of students graduating with honors since 1972 and tripling the numbers receiving magna cum laude. Receiving magna cum laude may be impressive, but it is less so, if one in six students win it.

Eventually the Harvard Law faculty voted overwhelmingly to make it harder to get honors, a policy change that cut the number of students graduating with honors in half, according to The Harvard Law Record, a student newspaper of Harvard Law School. Under the old system, all students had to do was reach a GPA cutoff. Given the stiff competition, professors felt pressure to inflate the grades of their favorite students. Under the new system, only the top ten percent of students received magna cum laude. (Victoria Kuohung, “Class of ’99 May Find Honors Harder to Earn,” Harvard Law Record, February 16, 1996).

What does this all mean? Ultimately, given the grade inflation of the time at all three institutions Obama attended, the larger story isn’t about Barack Obama’s grades, but his courses and the radical professors who taught them.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...e-found-surrounding-obamas-grades-in-college/

http://www.cashill.com/intellect_fraud/obama_makes.htm

Also you apparantly are not even reading the links I post....aka.....................You along with a lot of people have been had regarding Obama's i.q. as well as the i.q. of Harvard Students....for the real truth: https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/07/12/the-iqs-of-academic-elites/

Now you may have difficulty understanding what that link reports....look for this....the key paragraph.

The SAT likely overestimates Harvard intelligence because when you select people who did especially well on one test, you are also selecting people who got lucky, were well prepared and overperformed on that one test. Such people will likely regress to the mean when given a test that wasn’t used to select them. On the other hand the abbreviated WAIS may have underestimated Harvard students because it’s a very brief test, and thus gives only rough results. Averaging their scores on both tests, gives an IQ of about 135. Almost identical to what simple regression predicted based on the 0.65 correlation between IQ and academic success.

 

btw...I should have mentioned that your claims that the average i.q. of harvard students are in the 170 range....absolutely ludicrous...that would be higher than Einsteins.....<Rule 3>

 

I have shot that assumption down twice.....look it up...try and actually read the posts and the links....<Rule 3>

BTW you have your sources and I have mine and never the twain shall meet....which does not bother me....just remember I am not posting for your edification ...I post for those who are interested in the truth.....as I understand you have been subjected to a severe indoctrination which prevents you from a true understanding of the true nature of how a huge fraud has been perpetrated on the American People in regards to obama....there are people in his administration who do know the truth....and someday one or more of them will reveal how the American People were conned into voting for obama.

 

Obama is the fraud and your source is not to be believed either.

 

You're just spamming garbage all over the place. Obama graduated from Harvard Law with high honors. That alone means he got good grades indicating high academic performance establishing his high IQ.

I did not say that the average IQ of Harvard students was in the 170 range. I said that they averaged 171 on the LSAT.

Are you capable of providing feedback on my sources or not? I do not care about your rhetoric, I am only interested in whether or not you can respond to an argument. I provided you with two sources that debunk Rushton. You said the links don't work. You are either lying or you don't have the software to open PDF files. Find the appropriate software and get back to me. Otherwise I'm going to assume that you are ducking a response.

You have no evidence Obama is a fraud and my source is credible.

 

Some of Rushton theories got severally crapped on by recent scientific discoveries. I laugh every time I see a racist use them and their melt downs when they are proven wrong.

Not really. Look at the one-drop-rule and its opposite Regla del Sacar.

 

Yes, I recommend people read the following article by Joseph Graves who refuted Rushton's evolutionary arguments in detail. Graves shows that Genome-wide Association studies do not support Rushton's racial theories.

Race, genomics and intelligence: Slight return. In Intelligence Quotient: Testing, Role of Genetics and the Environment and Social Outcomes. (pp. 69-86). Nova Science Publishers, Inc.. (2013)

Good point. Biological definitions of race and social definitions of race differ. Human genetic variation does not fit the phylogenetic criteria for classification as subspecies. Social definitions of race are socially constructed and vary from place to place.

 

I think the fact that scientist have said our brains have been shrinking over the millennial is the biggest blow. That and other studies came to the same results as the Eyferth study, which he and Jensen criticized.

 

If you ever want to pursue the truth you must get away from your politically correct sources......they are designed to deceive and to lie....the nature of political correctness. Perhaps your biggest failure is that you simply do not understand political correctness and how it has run rampant across the American political system and Academia as well...in fact this ideology is destroying America. I suggest you study up on political correctness and get back with us....we might have a more positive discussion if you do so.

Is Obama a genius?

http://ezinearticles.com/?Is-Obama-a-Genius?&id=2044262

The origins of political correctness: http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/

 

Affirmative Action at Harvard

Posted by College Insurrection Saturday, November 17, 2012 at 9:30am

On November 2nd, a Harvard Student named Sarah Siskind published an article in the Harvard Crimson titled Affirmative Dissatisfaction, which was not only critical of the policy but asked serious questions about what it means to be a minority.

Here&#8217;s an excerpt of Ms. Siskind&#8217;s article:

The Supreme Court is in the midst of hearing a suit against the University of Texas at Austin by Abigail Fisher. She maintains she was the victim of an admissions process that elevates skin color above academic qualifications and gives unfair advantage to minorities.

But who counts as a &#8220;minority&#8221; in affirmative action? Unfortunately for Ms. Fisher, adorable gingers are not considered a minority (despite red hair occurring in only 1-2 percent of the world population). So clearly, not just any minority can qualify as a &#8220;minority.&#8221;

Perhaps affirmative action is meant to help those who have historically been discriminated against. It would be hard to overlook women and Jews when considering historical punching bags. However, women and Jews are indeed overlooked in the affirmative action policies of most schools.

Perhaps affirmative action attempts to help those groups heavily correlated with lower incomes. One of the strongest correlations with lower incomes is held by those with lower centers of gravity. As if short people didn&#8217;t have it bad enough: being refused at roller coasters, being unable to stand in the shallow end of pools, and now, being denied affirmative action. At least they don&#8217;t have to stand in the back for pictures.

Finally, what about intellect? Perhaps our universities are in dire need of diversity of intelligence. Counter to most stereotypes, ugliness is highly correlated with poor intellectual performance by traditional measures, though I don&#8217;t know how many qualified applicants will be willing to put that down on their application.

Race-based affirmative action attempts to target these groups: the discriminated against, the poor, and those with unique experiences and intellectual merits. However, affirmative action is fundamentally flawed because it uses race instead of targeting these groups themselves. Less academically qualified applicants should be treated as such, unless they come from poorer households and therefore do not have access to the same amount of resources as other applicants. However, this would be class-based affirmative action, not race-based.

Helping those with primarily low academic qualifications into primarily academic institutions makes as much sense as helping the visually impaired become pilots. How would you feel if you were assured before going into surgery that your surgeon was the beneficiary of affirmative action in medical school? I do not see why higher academic institutions should lower their standards for admission.

 

There are a lot of areas of Rushton's research that have been criticized. I feel that Nisbett dealt the most serious blows on the psychometric literature and Graves contributed significantly to refuting Rushton's evolutionary arguments. There were other critics but these are the main ones. The points you mentioned are good as well.

You are really in no position to lecture anyone on the credibility of their sources. Your sources have been exposed as frauds numerous times and your attacks on Obama's intelligence have been exposed as nonsense. The man graduated from Harvard Law School with high honors. Few people in the world will be able to claim that and IQ experts estimate his IQ to be in the genius range based on that. You have done absolutely nothing to refute their reasoning. I've tried to be patient with you but you seem to be arguing in bad faith. When your sources are shown to be incorrect and outright lying you do not acknowledge this and when I present sources that have credibility you dismiss them as politically correct. Your biggest blunder is when I posted two PDF files that provide scientific evidence against Rushton and asked you to provide feedback on them. You said the links don't work. They work, you just need the correct software to open them. So let's start there. Open up those articles, read them and provide feedback. I've already told you how to open them so there is no excuse now.

 

Obama: I Personally Benefitted From Affirmative Action


Back in 1990, when Barack Obama was the President of the Harvard Law Review (one of the few achievements Obama supporters can dig up when questioned), he responded to a bit of controversy about the Review’s editor selection policy. An unusually low number of women had been picked to be editors at the time, and some at Harvard were concerned about it.
In his capacity as President of the Review, Obama wrote a letter addressing the concerns and in it admitted that he had benefited from affirmative action policies in his academic career.

I’d also like to add one personal note, in response to the letter from Mr. Jim Chen which was published in the October 26 issue of the RECORD, and which articulated broad objections to the Review’s general affirmative action policy. I respect Mr. Chen’s personal concern over the possible stigmatizing effects of affirmative action, and do not question the depth or sincerity of his feelings. I must say, however, that as someone who has undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action programs during my academic career, and as someone who may have benefited from the Law Review’s affirmative action policy when I was selected to join the Review last year, I have not personally felt stigmatized either within the broader law school community or as a staff member of the Review.

Affirmative action, which places importance on skin color instead of strictly on merit, is a noxious practice. That Obama would admit to having benefited from such policies is astonishing. It is an admission that he was not good enough, based solely on merit, to achieve what he achieved both in his academic career and at the Law Review, and that he only made it as far as he did because of absurd policies that took into consideration what color his skin was.
That is nothing to be proud of. That Obama is, apparently, proud of it speaks volumes about his character.

https://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obama_i_personally_benefitted_from_affirmative_action/

 

I can't find any credible sources that authenticate this alleged letter and even if it was true (I doubt it) it says nothing about Obama's intellect. He graduated from Harvard with high honors. You don't do that if you are lacking in intellectual ability.

 

Anti-American Americans



The United States has reached the extraordinary position where it has nurtured an ideology within itself, formulated and taught at schools and universities, that is not only hostile and disparaging to the majority race of the citizens ("white"), the majority religion (Christianity), and those economically successful minority groups (Jews, Koreans, etc.), but is equally and actively hostile and adverse to the principles of free speech, free association, free enterprise, and an open, participatory democracy upon which the nation was built. Joseph Schumpeter thought that capitalism could be destroyed by many of the people who benefited the most from it. But it is worse than that. Elite culture not only despises capitalism, it celebrates impoverished dictatorships like Cuba, or even, as with Noam Chomsky [], Eastern Europe under Soviet rule. These preferences are reflected in the complacency, or the active encouragement, for the Obama Administration to rule by administrative decree and to arbitrarily suspend, enforce, or rewrite existing law to its preferences. The suppression of speech at American universities and the suspension of ordinary standards of due process and the rule of law demonstrate a preference for Stalinism that is contradicted by nothing otherwise expressed by elite intellectuals and "educators."

It is difficult to imagine a previous country whose own elites turned against it, and against most of its citizens, so thoroughly. Roman history was often written by historians who preferred the Republic to the Empire (Livy or Tacitus) or who were alarmed at disasters that had occurred (Ammianus Marcellinus); but the Roman elite never conceived a hatred of themselves. Indeed, the Roman state survived the disasters of the 4th and 5th centuries largely because of the confidence of the Romans in the value of their own civilization and their own religion. The same cannot be said for America, which has raised and holds a deadly viper to her own breast; and an unprecedented event may occur, where a great nation is precipitated into eclipse through the self-hatred of its own privileged, educated ruling class -- however baseless, absurd, or perverse that self-hatred actually was, and however clueless and repellent the folly of that elite.


"America is the land of opportunity.&#8221;
"Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough."
"Affirmative action is racist."


http://www.friesian.com/antiam.htm

 

Both Justice Sotomayor and President Obama State They Benefitted From &#8220;Affirmative Action&#8221;&#8230; Full Transcript Of Obama&#8217;s Harvard Letter To Editor (1990) Describing His Benefit Of Affirmative Action

http://theconservativetreehouse.com...-describing-his-benefit-of-affirmative-actio/

 

Obama's Inability to Write

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/08/early_obama_letter_confirms_inability_to_write.html

 

Look at your source for crying out loud. TheConservativeTreeHouse.com? We're supposed to take that seriously? The link they give to the Harvard Law Record does not work. There is no evidence authenticating this alleged article by Obama so the claims and the critiques are meaningless.

Now let's get back on topic. The PDF links criticizing Rushton's work. When are you going to respond to them?