[MMX2010]

Quote:

My point is that IQ is so lowly as a determinant of success, it is easily overcome with work.

Exactly. And if you really believe that, then you should have no problem going into a very low IQ country, and "easily overcoming with work". So when is your one-way flight to Cameroon?

[SamuelBRoberts]

"My point is that IQ is so lowly as a determinant of success, it is easily overcome with work. Emotional Quotient EQ is more useful. Commitment Quotient CQ is more useful. Diligence in your job requirements is more useful. If you execute well on your KPI's, nobody will be looking at your IQ. After as little as 4 years of work experience, with work, you could be more sought for and valued than an Harvard grad because the ONLY thing that counts in the real world is RESULTS. "

But again, this isn't true at all. It's just what you would like to be true.

Here's an illustrative example: My office has a janitor. A very nice old lady, I saw her this morning when I came in. She's there every morning at some ungodly hour, sweeps the floors, cleans out the cabinets, empties the trash, does all the stuff you'd expect a janitor to do. Extremely dedicated. I've never seen her take a day off. I've never seen her be unpleasant. I've never seen her do a bad job. Her "emotional quotient" and "commitment quotient" are off the charts.

I will make more in an hour than this woman will make all day.

This is because my IQ is higher, which means I can do things that she can't. And the things that I can do pay much better than the things that she can do.

It sounds like you're either in sales, or one of those goofy middle management positions that get RIF'd whenever there's an economic downturn. You may have managed to temporarily leverage other strengths to compensate for a low IQ, which is fine. The world needs people who aren't so bright, too.

[MMX2010]

*delete*

[El Padrone]

Sam, the comparison with your Janitor is not valid. Like for like. Apples and apples.

[weambulance]

(09-12-2016 03:28 PM)Buck Wild Wrote:  

@ david.garrett

Exactly. This thread is not about IQ. It's about censorship motivated by misandry and political correctness run amok.

THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT IQ. But it's been hijacked and that's fucked up. Because apparently anything at all about race and IQ is like waving a red flag in front of a bull for some guys. And all while the forum moderation seems to be out to lunch.

I'm beginning to understand why some guys avoid this section of the forum.

Thanks for your input, Percy.

You know why the thread ended up here? Because it's totally normal for the guy to have been banned. Y'all are acting like this is some new shocking revelation when it's been happening regularly for a decade or more. It's a dog bites man story. So we ended up talking about IQ instead.

What do you want us to say about his banning? Obviously it's ridiculous, obviously it's because of the PC culture. What are we supposed to do? Academia is fully converged. I'm glad OP posted this so I know about it, but what the fuck else am I going to say about it?

At least this is an interesting discussion.

-------

I will say I am also interested in the Watson and Crick vs Rosalind Franklin question. This is a breakdown of the history, and it sounds to me like no, they didn't just steal her work, but used part of her (released) data to figure shit out. If they stole her work and thus didn't really make the discovery themselves, no scientist since Ogg figured out how to reliably make fire ever truly discovered anything either.

I never made the connection before, but I solve programming problems for fun on rosalind.info and the project is named after Rosalind Franklin. Many of them are DNA and genetics based problems. The things you learn... no surprise I didn't get it though; I haven't taken a biology class since high school unless you count emergency medicine.

[Dr. Howard]

(09-12-2016 03:39 AM)Coldfire Wrote:  

As a black guy I think culture has a lot to do with it. Black people in America we don't really have a culture that promotes academic excellence, and a lot of groups like BLM (I hate them so much) focus on external conflicts rather than the problems we make ourselves. If you look at the black people in places like Germany it was shown that the black people there didn't have any difference in IQ with other Germans. I think this is because there is no Black German culture its just German culture.

Right here.

Per a DNA test I had done a while ago, I am black. However, you'd never know it looking at me, I look very white have a 'white' family and assumed I was white. I have an IQ in the 92nd percentile and was sent to a 'school for gifted children' (I wish it was like X-men) when I was young. My classmates all came from...surprise...Jewish, white, indian and asian families. You can stereotype those families and how they push their children, regardless of skin color or ancestry.

Thats all I can post. My warning via race thread posting before is too damn high.

[ivansirko]

[NapoleonDynamighty]

After reading a few other borderline controversial threads on the forum I would like to throw in the results of this survey my great grand cousin from Napoli working at the Institute of Fine Science seem to have confirmed that the average score of a black males IQ + Penis size in centimetres is always greater than the score of a white males IQ + Penis size in centimetres . Amen

[weambulance]

(09-12-2016 05:50 PM)NapoleonDynamighty Wrote:  

After reading a few other borderline controversial threads on the forum I would like to throw in the results of this survey my great grand cousin from Napoli working at the Institute of Fine Science seem to have confirmed that the average score of a black males IQ + Penis size in centimetres is always greater than the score of a white males IQ + Penis size in centimetres . Amen

You had a relative whose job was measuring human dicks? Damn, that sucks. I wouldn't share that if it was me.

[NapoleonDynamighty]

(09-12-2016 06:04 PM)weambulance Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 05:50 PM)NapoleonDynamighty Wrote:  

After reading a few other borderline controversial threads on the forum I would like to throw in the results of this survey my great grand cousin from Napoli working at the Institute of Fine Science seem to have confirmed that the average score of a black males IQ + Penis size in centimetres is always greater than the score of a white males IQ + Penis size in centimetres . Amen

You had a relative whose job was measuring human dicks? Damn, that sucks. I wouldn't share that if it was me.

Correction . There are man dicks . Women who are also human do not have dicks . Transexuals who are men in womens clothing however do have dicks . In case you weren't on the up and up on some basic facts of life .

Correction . My Cousin is a janitor (at the Napoli institue of you know what ..) with very little IQ but enough for him to sneak into the research room and dig in to the files and find out the results of the IQ + Dick scorecard classified by ethnicity . Nowhere in my post says his actual job was of a researcher let alone dick measurer .

You are evidently incapable of understanding the shit you read . Damn , that sucks . I wouldn't share that if it was me.

[Delta]

(09-11-2016 02:28 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote:

I understand what you mean, but most people don't get what those terms mean. Witness the general confusion between correlation and causation in the public.

I often ask my students which is more important: correlation or causation. They always say causation, and that's the wrong answer.

Causation creates security in your predictions, because you can finally see the mechanism by which A produces B. But animals (including humans) don't get rewarded for knowing why something works; they get rewarded for behaving successfully, even when they don't know why those behaviors lead to success.

Animals, in particular, never know why anything is successful, because their brain capacity is too low. But animals succeeded all the time by behaving successfully.

So when a human, especially a young human, discovers that two variables are correlated, he should follow whatever the science suggests (at least for awhile), and see what happens.

I missed this on my first pass through the thread, but I strongly disagree.

Children are far more likely to drown to death on days when they use sunscreen. Ergo, sunscreen use is highly correlated with drowning. So should we stop using sunscreen?

[MMX2010]

Quote:

I missed this on my first pass through the thread, but I strongly disagree.

Children are far more likely to drown to death on days when they use sunscreen. Ergo, sunscreen use is highly correlated with drowning. So should we stop using sunscreen?

I'll respect your argument if you post YouTube videos of you going to the beach without sunscreen, because you know that drowning is correlated with wearing sunscreen.

Then, post YouTube videos of you with severe sunburn (or sun poisoning) telling your doctor that you refuse to wear sunscreen because wearing sunscreen is correlated to people drowning.

Without any evidence that you've personally suffered because you implemented your argument, you come across as an insincere individual who contemptuously and undeservedly assumes that others are stupid.

[kaotic]

IQ measuring, racial comparisons, penis measuring, sunscreen, triggers, all in one thread.

10/10 this thread delivered

[ivansirko]

Hmmm....

http://thoughtcatalog.com/hok-leahcim/20...all-penis/

Quote:

I’m into fisting, so even the largest penises are no problem.

Actually, neither are small penises, I just get the guy to fist me.

[Leonard D Neubache]

America should form a line. At the front of a line is a green robot. The green robot asks everyone, one by one:

"Do you swear to reject racial politics in all its forms and live with your brother man as equals, be he white, black or any shade between, disregarding all slights real or perceived, both of your own experience and those of your ancestors, this oath to be upheld against punishment of death?"

People that answer "yes" go back to their normal lives.
People that answer "no" (or anything other than "yes" for that matter) get to go to race-war island, formerly known as Hawaii (sorry Kona).

[SamuelBRoberts]

... OK this has nothing to do with anything, but...

Why is the robot green?

[chicane]

(09-12-2016 08:49 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

... OK this has nothing to do with anything, but...

Why is the robot green?

Good point, it should be orange.

(Irish joke)

[Kona]

(09-12-2016 07:34 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(sorry Kona).

Apology accepted.

I really don't want to share my opinion in this thread, other than to say that rat bastard DNA doctor left the Polynesians out of his little study. He knew not to fuck with us.

Aloha!

[Tim in real life]

Seriously, WTF is this Bad Apple!! shit!?

I could care less about IQ/race group, while Anglo men should really keep their own women in check. I swear, a lot of bad shit that went down in history happened because of excess sexual thirst. Even worse when the Celtic legend of Macha's Curse is STILL alive and well. Yeah, wankers, that's how the Cornish got their own language extinct, due to repeating Viking dickriding before The Crusades.

Also, Handsome Creepy Eel, got tips to ditch that 'sperg' image? Unfortunately, due to emotional wounds in my life, I find it hard to trust people.

[Delta]

(09-12-2016 07:02 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote:

I missed this on my first pass through the thread, but I strongly disagree.

Children are far more likely to drown to death on days when they use sunscreen. Ergo, sunscreen use is highly correlated with drowning. So should we stop using sunscreen?

I'll respect your argument if you post YouTube videos of you going to the beach without sunscreen, because you know that drowning is correlated with wearing sunscreen.

Then, post YouTube videos of you with severe sunburn (or sun poisoning) telling your doctor that you refuse to wear sunscreen because wearing sunscreen is correlated to people drowning.

Without any evidence that you've personally suffered because you implemented your argument, you come across as an insincere individual who contemptuously and undeservedly assumes that others are stupid.

Huh? My example was a deliberately absurd rhetorical device designed to disprove your belief that correlation alone is sufficient to inform one's behavior, obviously not a literal suggestion. I honestly have no idea what you're getting at with this response, but it definitely doesn't address the argument I presented.

[MMX2010]

Quote:

My example was a deliberately absurd rhetorical device designed to disprove your belief that correlation alone is sufficient to inform one's behavior, obviously not a literal suggestion.

Vox Day often explains the difference between "rhetoric in service of truth" and "rhetoric in service of a lie". When you construct absurd examples that have literally never happened in real life, you're using rhetoric in service of a lie.

There's a beauty and a joy to following as many reasonable correlations as you can, and eventually discarding the ones that, for unknown reasons, don't work for you. But you don't know that beautiful joy because you use absurdity to demoralize.

[Leonard D Neubache]

(09-12-2016 08:49 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

... OK this has nothing to do with anything, but...

Why is the robot green?

Robot is green because if it were to be any shade of black or brown through to white then it might be seen as a racially polarising figure of authority.

[Delta]

(09-13-2016 02:54 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote:

My example was a deliberately absurd rhetorical device designed to disprove your belief that correlation alone is sufficient to inform one's behavior, obviously not a literal suggestion.

Vox Day often explains the difference between "rhetoric in service of truth" and "rhetoric in service of a lie". When you construct absurd examples that have literally never happened in real life, you're using rhetoric in service of a lie.

There's a beauty and a joy to following as many reasonable correlations as you can, and eventually discarding the ones that, for unknown reasons, don't work for you. But you don't know that beautiful joy because you use absurdity to demoralize.

All I'm trying to do is present cold, hard logic. Maybe you'll find it more palatable if I don't construct an example:

If Variable A correlates with Variable B, but does not cause Variable B, then altering A by itself will have no impact on B.

That's literally all I was getting at.

[Phoenix]

(09-12-2016 11:31 PM)Delta Wrote:  

(09-12-2016 07:02 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote:

I missed this on my first pass through the thread, but I strongly disagree.

Children are far more likely to drown to death on days when they use sunscreen. Ergo, sunscreen use is highly correlated with drowning. So should we stop using sunscreen?

I'll respect your argument if you post YouTube videos of you going to the beach without sunscreen, because you know that drowning is correlated with wearing sunscreen.

Then, post YouTube videos of you with severe sunburn (or sun poisoning) telling your doctor that you refuse to wear sunscreen because wearing sunscreen is correlated to people drowning.

Without any evidence that you've personally suffered because you implemented your argument, you come across as an insincere individual who contemptuously and undeservedly assumes that others are stupid.

Huh? My example was a deliberately absurd rhetorical device designed to disprove your belief that correlation alone is sufficient to inform one's behavior, obviously not a literal suggestion. I honestly have no idea what you're getting at with this response, but it definitely doesn't address the argument I presented.

Don't bother debating MMX2010. Just read the drug policy thread. He's made it explicitly clear that his goal in debating is just to troll, and that he's not interested in honest intellectual discourse. Don't feed it.

[MMX2010]

Phoenix,

Actually, I made it clear that I'm a troll when debating drug issues, and drug issues alone.

It's one thing to ignore me, meaning I can't defend myself here. It's quite another to ignore me and talk shit about me.