Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Half are below IQ 100. A quarter are below 90. My IQ is 140 (I make no claim about wisdom) and I have no idea how to make a tech worker out of the IQ 90 guy. There has to be a viable dignified path for them.
Go look at the world IQ map. The East Asians are the smartest on average. The Europeans are average to smart, the Americans are average to less smart, and the Latin Americans and Africans pull up the rear. The white European stock is only average to smar but not really all that smart. The East Asians should rule over us, given your love of these silly IQ levels.
Go look at the world IQ map. The East Asians are the smartest on average. The Europeans are average to smart, the Americans are average to less smart, and the Latin Americans and Africans pull up the rear. The white European stock is only average to smar but not really all that smart. The East Asians should rule over us, given your love of these silly IQ levels.
Asians tend to have very good work ethics. Again, work ethic is much more important than a high IQ to being successful. There are many, many people who are poor with high IQ levels who lack productive work ethics for different reasons.
Many high IQ people also can be labeled as mad because they see the absurdity of it all much clearer. Asians seem to not be certifiably crazy as much as Americans for some reason...yet...in America.
Good work and study ethics can lead to higher intelligence levels is my hypothesis.
Last edited by Objective Detective; 06-30-2017 at 07:04 PM..
ResidentScienceDenier2007,
You are either lying or you are functionally illiterate.
#1 The study you critiqued clearly agreed with me. You are either lying or lack basic reading comprehension. Professor Plomin is outspoken that genetics play a role in IQ and claims to have found specific genes.
#2 Your anti-science claim that they haven't found specific genes linked to IQ is pure BS and several of my links have shown this.
Just curious what your "flat earth theory" is for why males have greater IQ variability. Science says it is because known specific genes corresponding to IQ are on the X chromosome. What does an anti-science person such as yourself say? Or do you deny the global statistics on IQ and gender?
P.S. If you are being serious and actually reading and thinking based on how your college taught you to think and read, then you should sue your college for fraud.
Glad you are smart at tantruming and name calling.
Again, your links don't back what you are saying, however, if you want to believe they are, then that is fine with me.
You also only quoted specific portions.
Also from your free library link (which is a synopsis of a study from 1998 - nearly 20 years ago so is more th an likely obsolete based on innovations in genetic research today)
Quote:
Plomin emphasizes that the IGF2R variant associated with high IQs is not a "genius gene." It appeared in nearly half of the high-IQ children but also in nearly one-quarter of those with average IQs. The majority of high-IQ youngsters missing this specific gene presumably have other genetic variants that boost general intelligence scores, the researchers theorize.
The gene in this article is different from those mentioned in other articles. So pray tell, what gene is intelligence linked to?
Your second link is a review of a study from 1996 that focused on heritability of mental retardation being associated with the X chromosome and the assumption that intelligence is also on the X chromosome. It is over 20 years old and does not name any specific genes at all and is only an assumption.
The third is from "Psychology Today." Last I heard psychologist did not perform biogenetic research.
Not sure why you are trying to argue something and tantruming about IQ.
Nothing you have posted says what you think it says. You are taking snippets and not reading the article in their entirety and you are acting like the media summary and psychology today are scientific journals.
You also have not mentioned what you do for a living after having been asked multiple times, which makes me believe you are some low level service worker who thinks that his skin color makes him more intelligent than other people even though you've done nothing with your life and who has never even had to take an IQ test.
Also, again, IQ is something that is made up. Intelligence as a definition depends on the society and what they believe constitutes intelligence. Only one of your articles even gave a definition of "intelligence" (and FWIW it was a great definition!). Until you specifically determine what you are looking for in genes in relationship to biogenetics, you cannot equivocally state (which all your articles/links mentioned) that any gene carries intelligence since intelligence is different for everyone.
I have no dog in this particular fight, but I believe many people are simply uncomfortable with the idea that IQ is tied to genetics.
I think it's rather obvious myself. Some people simply don't have the innate aptitude to process information as well as others.
A friend of mine from a poor family (homeless for a short period) who dropped out of highschool as a sophomore (very rarely studied or completed homework), scored very high on his GED exam and has recently been offered a job by a large tech company in California, who offered to cover his living expenses. I've always known he was a smart guy (although I would deny it because he was arrogant about it) and he began life in pretty dire circumstances.
I noticed similar cognitive abilities in other family members of his. He has an older brother who actually competed in various science contests in his youth but unfortunately developed schizophrenia in his early teens.
On this, I actually do believe that intelligence will be linked to genetics in the future in a more equivocal way.
However, I don't believe that it is or will ever be linked to an arbitrary "racial" category like many people seem to believe that it is. There is just too much genetic diversity in specific groups of people that we like to classify as a specific "race" for that to occur. Also there is no such thing as a different "race" of humans from a biological perspective.
However, I do believe that specific traits that can be defined as a part of "intelligence" can be inherited just like other types of heritable behaviors that humans exhibit.
I have no dog in this particular fight, but I believe many people are simply uncomfortable with the idea that IQ is tied to genetics.
I think it's rather obvious myself. Some people simply don't have the innate aptitude to process information as well as others.
A friend of mine from a poor family (homeless for a short period) who dropped out of highschool as a sophomore (very rarely studied or completed homework), scored very high on his GED exam and has recently been offered a job by a large tech company in California, who offered to cover his living expenses. I've always known he was a smart guy (although I would deny it because he was arrogant about it) and he began life in pretty dire circumstances.
I noticed similar cognitive abilities in other family members of his. He has an older brother who actually competed in various science contests in his youth but unfortunately developed schizophrenia in his early teens.
To me the biggest problem is that the poster "residinghere2007" is so emotionally anti-science, that s/he lies and uses BS to propagate anti-science positions. This poster has posted anti-science lies on multiple threads.
It is one thing to be "uncomfortable" with science as "residinghere2007" clearly is, it is another thing to start lying to deny science.
The gene in this article is different from those mentioned in other articles. So pray tell, what gene is intelligence linked to?
Science Denier,
They have linked DOZENS of specific genes to intelligence. I have pointed this out multiple times. Once again you are either BSing or you are functionally illiterate.
Some genes impact the cortex, some the neural connections, others the size of the brain, etc...as I pointed out and you denied...high IQ brains are physically different as seen in autopsies.
You claimed that they do not have a genetic connection to IQ, that is wrong.
You claimed that they do not have specific genes connected to IQ, that is wrong.
You claimed that an abstract of a study from Professor Plomin was saying something that it wasn't, that was a BS lie or functional illiteracy on your part.
Now you are claiming some nonsense about 1 gene being mentioned in one article so why wasn't it mentioned in other articles is so illogical that now I see why you are so sensitive and anti-science on the hereditary nature of IQ.
Here is Professor Plomin's website: You were either BSing or you are functionally illiterate when you claimed that his abstract agreed with you.
There is a study on DNA impacting educational scores - specific genes mentioned - DENY THE SCIENCE!
Another study on DNA impacting Socio-Economic Status - DENY SCIENCE IT HURTS OUR FEELINGS!!!
For anyone who is actually interested in science - here is a leading scientist, professor Plomin, speaking on the BBC saying the opposite of what "residinghere2007" lied and said he was saying:
What percentage of people in a low income ghetto go to college?
What percentage of people in a upper middle class neighborhood go to college?
A persons economic environment has more effect on getting a good job than low IQ.
Excellent idea.
Its refreshing to hear actual talk of ways to reduce poverty like the above. But unfortunately today's political conversations rarely include such real ideas, rather its usually attacks on those who receive government aid.
Chad.
Bush didn't inherit a surplus. Only those who do not understand basic economics would say so. It has been proven time and time again that he didn't inherit a surplus. All it takes is to look at one data point to understand how absurd it is to believe there was a surplus.
1. When the debt goes up you cannot have a surplus.
Back in the day the low IQ folks could oftentimes find a remedy for their disability by getting into a union. Making a living wage bolting fenders and doors on cars moving down an assembly line. Running cable digging ditches for the phone company.
Now even the most menial jobs are being automated. McDonalds is going with touch pad menu ordering and there are even plans for robotic food preparation. This situation is also exacerbated by dwindling state and local funding to help the mentally challenged. A perfect storm.
Back in the day the low IQ folks could oftentimes find a remedy for their disability by getting into a union. Making a living wage bolting fenders and doors on cars moving down an assembly line. Running cable digging ditches for the phone company.
Now even the most menial jobs are being automated. McDonalds is going with touch pad menu ordering and there are even plans for robotic food preparation. This situation is also exacerbated by dwindling state and local funding to help the mentally challenged. A perfect storm.
Yes. Exactly. Those paths to the middle class are no longer available.
Special needs people have jobs and go out to work.
I'm not standing up for anyone who uses excuses to be poor, but I will say that this is not proof of anything.
And my extremely unPC reason (which is truth) is because it is easier to get a job as a special needs person than it is to get a job if you just have a low IQ.
Why? Because people want to hire that special needs person for their "feel good moment", for the pats on the back, for the adulation and praise and teary eyed girls saying things like, "OMG, this company is so great for doing this! This is amazing, I'm doing all of my shopping here to show my support..." or something similar.
You get medals and cheers when you hire special needs people.
You don't get jack if you help someone out who simply has a lower IQ.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
