Race and IQ gap

You know....it is not important to me for you or anyone else to believe a thing I post.....but at the very least you could acknowledge the logic of the post.

IQ....is not limited to any one specific aspect of Mental Human Ability.

And that includes those who are more apt to refuse to acknowledge certain realities.

AboveAlpha

 

By the way...do you even know what the Oort Cloud is or what I was even talking about?

Or is that all Bull as well?

AboveAlpha

 

The 'logic' of your post is that you guess that your smart friend (who we have no reason to believe even exists) would score low on an IQ test...if he took one?

 

He did in fact have to take one as well all did as IQ tests were at one time mandatory and taken by all Jr's in High School.

The school told his parents that he should be placed in another school specific for Mental Retarded Individuals.

AboveAlpha

 

Maybe they got your results mixed up.

Please stop telling us anecdotes about your 'friend'. There is a mountain of data showing a strong correlation between IQ and academic performance, it isn't even in dispute.

 

You don't seem to get it either.

Well....you are simply lacking the specific intelligence to be able to grasp the concept of varying forms of Intelligence.

AboveAlpha

 

Gee. I guess that is one way of avoiding the reality that someone with a peak exposure of 80ug/dl would be measured in the plausible scenario given as 5ug/dl (or less, with longer periods), and (moreover, though I didn't demonstrate it---one needs to understand logarithms...) would be more likely to be measured below 10ug/dl than above.

I should also point out that mikemikev is needlessly whining---he wanted to know what I had done to date---I had previously warned that it would take at least a month before I would be ready to apply the math to data:

Anyhow, seeing as there is no substantial criticism of what I said, I guess I should criticize myself. For the Chinese population (on the assumption that diet and/or petrol are the main contributors, versus paint chips), they will still have higher lead intake (at lower BLLs)---as I'm likely to be misrepresented, I will spell this out: if one consumes lead at a low rate over a prolonged period, one will retain a low BLL (BLL is rate-limited), versus if one takes a single very high dose, where one will have a high (but decaying) BLL, but can have a lower total intake. The relevant question is in which scenario the brain will absorb more lead.

Previously, I complained (I believe on the AlJazeera threads) to Rayznack that the doses were not integrated. Implicit in that complaint (although I didn't realise it at the time) is an assumption that the brain takes as much lead as it can from the blood stream, i.e. that equilibrium is not reached. Such an assumption could render my argument about the decaying blood lead irrelevant, depending on post-natal Chinese exposure. Such an assumption also implies that lead is relatively mobile in the brain.

From one of my previous references (X-ray fluorescence imaging of the brain), it is clear that the brain tends to store lead in certain locations, which suggests (but does not demonstrate) that the would likely reach an equilibrium with the blood at even low concentrations (presumably diffusion transport---I have much still to read before I do a comprehensive stab at the problem). The literature is a bit schizophrenic on this point: on the one hand, there is an assumption that peak blood lead reached determines IQ (some of the papers and other references I've provided on this thread), and thus sustained high lead should do no more damage than a single (decaying) peak---this is usually justified in terms of red blood cells (erythrocytes) keeping lead out of plasma, but it could equally be justified on the basis of brain-blood equilibrium (over some potential drop, thus the long brain lead half-life. On the other hand, the literature mentions repeated effort to aid an already poisoned child by means of chelators and removing sources of lead in the home (though arguably it would otherwise aid the child, and subsequent siblings).

If brain lead is determined by diffusion, concentration (in both the equilibrium and non-equilibrium cases), time and potential barriers will matter. The concentration is important for the lower Chinese brain lead scenario that I'm setting up to test.

Anyhow---if there is no further substantial (or substantially foolish) response, I'll continue with that project, and be missing for a while...

 

Negritos were probably very short like pygmies are in the first place .
The hobbit is very small when compared to it's contemporaries , it is not short when compared to Australophithecians .

This is a relatively recent article about the Wallace line , it looks like it was no problem for humans to cross it

Hyenas are more like humans when it comes to hunting, endurance runners & persistent they are just not omnivorous.
I agree that a big part of our brain is dedicated to social activities tho .

Although this is a valid hypothesis the fact that erectus split into many different species says otherwise , there was a need for change .
In our story i think that Toba catastrophe forced us to innovate, plan for the future , sharpen our survival skills ; other human species did managed to survive it but they were not hardened enough to face us , maybe we inhabited a much harsher environment ?

 

There are of course what are called idiot savants, or people with Aspergers,
who have a sort of laser-like mind, and are quite brilliant in one thing, cannot function otherwise.

No "IQ" test is likely to be usable.

here is a sort of IQ test:

Will a person who repeatedly claims to have taught at a 'world renown" school ever learn to write that correctly? How many times will he have to be corrected?

They say that after about 150 electric shocks, even a planaria can learn
to turn a certain direction after a light is turned on.

 

the perception that I.Q. testing is the end all to be all of intellectual ability is generational arrogance. The questions we ask to access knowledge capability are different now compared to the questions asked in 1918, why? Because the paradigm has changed. This will continue to change as our ability to access what is pertinent and how the mind works. In the end, it is what allowed us to evolve as a species is what counts and every attribute whether measured by a test or not has a play in our makeup and our future and because our knowledge of this is incomplete at best all facets of human knowledge, whether we acknowledge it now or not, have equal weight in the computation in how we advance as a species. Last I looked, all races of man were the same species.

 

which confirms my point, Denisovians were contemporaries of Neanderthals and our ancestors and very intelligent, large brained Denisovians had the intelligence and social organization required to make the deep water crossing of the wallace line but floresiensis with a brain smaller than that of an Orangutang also made the crossing... brain volume clearly wasn't an issue as Floresiensis crossed the wallace line and orangutans did not, so volume alone is not a strong factor in intelligence among hominds...

the hypothesis that erectus split may be on the verge of being thrown out, the various forms may be nothing more than regional variation no different than we see today in modern man...
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/17/skull-homo-erectus-human-evolution

 

Yeah? What were the questions in 1918 and what are they now?

How is matching patterns, arranging blocks, and repeating numbers backward a test of knowledge?

 

No that isn't "a sort of IQ test". Does anybody "contributing" to this thread even know how an IQ test is conducted?

 

suit yourself, but do you think its a sign of a genius level IQ?

 

I could get into Mensa with my SAT score. I have taken Stanford Binet, Officer Entrance Exam, Cattell(SP?) and a slew of unofficial and work related tests along with personality tests. Such tests are targeted for specific results and ends, not a bad thing, not a good thing. Your missing the point, while I often point out that certain folks in this forum have relative low I.Q.'s it doesn't detract necessarily from their ability to advance as a species, for instance, ol' mike in here might possibly tell you the square root of 754332.887 off the top of his head but probably would have been eaten by a lion 30 seconds out of the cave.

 

Regardless of the inadequacy of testing, there are smart people and dumb people. Dogs, too.

 

Let's see if anyone here is smart.

Simple riddle.

Three men are traveling and stop at an Inn due to heavy rain and ask if any rooms are available.

The Inn Keeper tells the 3 men there is only one room available but it has two beds and a roll out couch.

The 3 men ask how much and the inn keeper looks at his chart and tells them the room costs $30.

The 3 men pull out a $10 bill each and pay the inn keeper the $30 and follow the Bell Hop to the room.

Later the Inn Keeper who is an extremely honest man looks at his chart and tells the Bell Hop that room only should have cost the 3 men $25....so he hands the Bell Hop 5 one dollar bills and tells him to give the 3 men a refund.

The Bell Hop gets to the door of that room and starts to rationalize..."Well...I have 5 $1 Bills and I have no change so I will hand each of the 3 men a single $1 Bill and keep the other $2 out of the $5 given to me by my boss"....so he does this.

So if each of the 3 men paid $10 each and were each given back $1 by the Bell Hop they each would have paid....$9 each.

3 Men so $9 times 3 equals $27....and the Bell Hop gave back 3 dollars and kept $2....so $27 plus the bell hops $2 equals......$29.

Where is the 30th Dollar?

AboveAlpha

 

What you should be saying is there are educated people and ignorant people.

Intelligence Level is subjective.

For instance....I can start talking about a few things specific to Multiversal Theories connection to Quantum Mechanics and you would not understand a single thing I said unless you took about a MONTH Googling such a thing.

This is a LEARNED KNOWLEDGE OR SKILL.....but just because I can run circles around you in Particle Physics does not necessarily mean you are stupid.

AboveAlpha

 

3 x $9 does equal $27, but the $2 tip is included in that $27, so it makes no sense to add the $2 to $27 to make $29. They paid $25 for the hotel room, $2 for the tip ($27), and then got $1 back each to make the original $30.

 

Glock...the $2 Tip as you say which was actually $2 stolen is NOT included in the $27.

The 3 men were given back $1 each so $9 times 3 men equals $27 plus $2 the bell hop kept is $29.

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

By the way Glock...why have you not replied to my PM about our.....CONTEST?

AboveAlpha

 

30-5 = 25....+ 2 for bellman= 27.........+3 for all three men = 30

I have no PM from you....

 

True but irrelevant. We are not talking about knowledge we are talking about IQ. Scoring an IQ of 80 probably does mean you are stupid. IQ is found to be largely.immune to training.

 

Glock....I am GLAD it was YOU that was able to understand this simple riddle as most don't or waste huge amounts of time trying to figure it out.

I will send another PM.

AboveAlpha

 

State what specific Category of Intelligence you are talking about as Analytic Intelligence is just ONE category.

AboveAlpha

 

You haven't shown that solving this problem has a positive, negative or any connection to IQ. And even if you did you are levelling it at forum members rather than fitting it into contextual data (Race IQ).

>>>MOD EDIT: INSULT<<<