The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-11-2013, 02:10 PM   #1
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default I thought that only "right tards" were fearful of Science...

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/0...53.html?hp=r17

“IQ is a metric of such dubiousness that almost no serious educational researcher uses it anymore,” the Guardian’s Ana Marie Cox wrote back in May. It was a breathtakingly ignorant statement. Psychologist Jelte Wicherts noted in response that a search for “IQ test” in Google’s academic database yielded more than 10,000 hits — just for the year 2013.

But Cox’s assertion is all too common. There is a large discrepancy between what educated laypeople believe about cognitive science and what experts actually know. Journalists are steeped in the lay wisdom, so they are repeatedly surprised when someone forthrightly discusses the real science of mental ability.

If that science happens to deal with group differences in average IQ, the journalists’ surprise turns into shock and disdain. Experts who speak publicly about IQ differences end up portrayed as weird contrarians at best, and peddlers of racist pseudoscience at worst.

I’m speaking from experience. My Harvard Ph.D. dissertation contains some scientifically unremarkable statements about ethnic differences in average IQ, including the IQ difference between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites. For four years, the dissertation did what almost every other dissertation does — collected dust in the university library. But when it was unearthed in the midst of the immigration debate, I experienced the vilification firsthand.

For people who have studied mental ability, what’s truly frustrating is the déjà vu they feel each time a media firestorm like this one erupts. Attempts by experts in the field to defend the embattled messenger inevitably fall on deaf ears. When the firestorm is over, the media’s mindset always resets to a state of comfortable ignorance, ready to be shocked all over again when the next messenger comes along.

At stake here, incidentally, is not just knowledge for the sake of knowledge, but also how science informs public policy. The U.S. education system, for example, is suffused with mental testing, yet few in the political classes understand cognitive ability research. Angry and repeated condemnations of the science will not help.


THE PLAIN TRUTH? BOTH PARTIES AND THEIR LACKEYS WILL ONLY SUPPORT SCIENCE IF IT SUPPORTS THEIR ALREADY FORMED NOTIONS


txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 08-11-2013, 02:18 PM   #2
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default Here's more liberal hypocrisy....

Liberals think that IQ is largely irrelevant...... Until it's time to get a minority murderer off of death row.
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 02:58 PM   #3
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,875

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Man! Is that guy naive, or what? Has he spent his entire life in the ivory tower? The danger does not come from the science. It comes from what some people might do with the science. Look at his last paragraph:

This is not just about academic freedom or any one scholar’s reputation. Cognitive differences can inform our understanding of a number of policy issues — everything from education, to military recruitment, to employment discrimination to, yes, immigration. Start treating the science of mental ability seriously, and both political discourse and public policy will be better for it.

"Better for it?" I highly doubt that. This is the kind of foundational criteria the Nazis used to select people for euthanasia.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 03:21 PM   #4
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Man! Is that guy naive, or what? Has he spent his entire life in the ivory tower? The danger does not come from the science. It comes from what some people might do with the science. Look at his last paragraph:

This is not just about academic freedom or any one scholar’s reputation. Cognitive differences can inform our understanding of a number of policy issues — everything from education, to military recruitment, to employment discrimination to, yes, immigration. Start treating the science of mental ability seriously, and both political discourse and public policy will be better for it.

"Better for it?" I highly doubt that. This is the kind of foundational criteria the Nazis used to select people for euthanasia.
Euthanasia? Reach much plastic man? Andwhat good is data if you're not willing to make INFORMED decisions based upon it? This is a football message board. Does the Broncos front office not have standards by which they measure and sort through potential members of our favorite football team? Admit it. It's science and it scares you.
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 03:26 PM   #5
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,410
Default

Group differences are allowed to persecute specific individuals. That's what txtebow wants.

Never mind that the range of individual ability swamps the inter-group differences. txtebow and his ilk deliberately ignore that so they can engage in their collectivist bigotry.

Last edited by W*GS; 08-11-2013 at 03:35 PM..
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 04:14 PM   #6
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,875

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txtebow View Post
Euthanasia? Reach much plastic man? Andwhat good is data if you're not willing to make INFORMED decisions based upon it? This is a football message board. Does the Broncos front office not have standards by which they measure and sort through potential members of our favorite football team? Admit it. It's science and it scares you.
Do you think the Broncos judge players by what racial group they belong to, or by what individual skills they bring to the game?

How would you implement this science? A few examples?

Last edited by Rohirrim; 08-11-2013 at 04:16 PM..
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 04:50 PM   #7
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Do you think the Broncos judge players by what racial group they belong to, or by what individual skills they bring to the game?

How would you implement this science? A few examples?
I would do away with all race based initiatives and quotas in schools and in the work force. Let the cards fall where they may regarding achievement which if juxtaposed to America's current policies of explaining away in-congruencies in wealth and accomplishment as "White privilege" and therefore implementing programs designed to award unworthy candidates opportunity that they don't deserve based upon their own merits.

It's like keeping a roster spot on the Broncos for a 5.5 40 time WR solely because he fits a quota.......but that's our nation's policy in opportunity in education and business...
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 04:51 PM   #8
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
Group differences are allowed to persecute specific individuals. That's what txtebow wants.

Never mind that the range of individual ability swamps the inter-group differences. txtebow and his ilk deliberately ignore that so they can engage in their collectivist bigotry.
IQ Group differences in a civilized, western based society explain why White Privilege is a liberal MYTH.
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 05:01 PM   #9
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

The emotional mind cannot be moved by reason. Liberals are very emotional and even anti-reason, much to the same extent as the "creationist" Right wing morons are. It's yet another example of actually becoming that which you espouse to be steadfastly against:

1) I'm not racist, but I refuse to acknowledge racist practices of blacks towards whites.

2) "right-tards" are anti science! but I refuse to acknowledge that IQ and genetics play a role in accomplishment in a western civilized society despite Science baring that out....
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 05:16 PM   #10
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

But go ahead and criticize SCIENCE you hypocrites.
The reality is that psychometric outcomes are correlated with various academic and socio-economicoutcomes. Far more so than any other variable in psychology. Hence the use of things such as SAT's and psychometric tests in organizations and the military. 



University of Delaware Professor Linda Gottfredson has noted that this has implications in diverse societies where there are different group averages. 



Gottfredson, L. S. (2005).
Implications of cognitive differences for schooling within diverse societies. Pages 517-554 in C. L. Frisby & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), Comprehensive
Handbook of Multicultural School Psychology. New York: Wiley. 





It is also extraordinary that people who claim to believe in evolution are so surprised at the suggestion that groups differ. Consider:

1. Behavioural traits, including cognitive ability, are heritable.

2. Different environments and cultures may favor different traits (greater re-productive success).

3. There is evidence of 1 standard deviation shifts in population average occurring over a 1000 year period. Groups were separated for 50,000 years, why wouldn't you expect to see population differences?

As Jonathan Haidt writes, it's only a matter of time before genomics reveals the basis for these differences.

"But the writing is on the wall. Russian scientists showed in the 1990s that a strong selection pressure (picking out and breeding only the tamest fox pups in each generation) created what was — in behavior as well as body — essentially a new species in just 30 generations. That would correspond to about 750 years for humans. Humans may never have experienced such a strong selection pressure for such a long period, but they surely experienced many weaker selection pressures that lasted far longer, and for which some heritable personality traits were more adaptive than others. It stands to reason that local populations (not continent-wide "races") adapted to local circumstances by a process known as "co-evolution" in which genes and cultural elements change over time and mutually influence each other. ..

Recent "sweeps" of the genome across human populations show that hundreds of genes have been changing during the last 5-10 millennia in response to local selection pressures. (See papers (See papers by Benjamin Voight, Scott Williamson, and Bruce Lahn).

http://www.edge.org/response-d...

Also, see Rindermann et al 'Haplogroups as evolutionary markers of cognitive ability' Intelligence Volume 40, Issue 4, July–August 2012, Pages 362–375. The authors conclude:

"Based on their evolutionary meaning and correlation with cognitive ability these haplogroups were grouped into two sets. Combined, they accounted in a regression and path analyses for 32–51% of the variance in national intelligence relative to the developmental indicator (35–58%). This pattern was replicated internationally with further controls (e.g. latitude, spatial autocorrelation etc.) and at the regional level in two independent samples (within Italy and Spain). These findings, using a conservative estimate of evolutionary influences, provide support for a mixed influence on national cognitive ability stemming from both current environmental and past environmental (evolutionary) factors."


Go spend $31.50 and enlighten yourselves.....http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...60289612000529
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 06:47 PM   #11
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,410
Default

Yep - txtebow is playing the "whites are superior to blacks" canard.

As expected.

Never mind that he drags down the collective IQ of humanity...
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 07:03 PM   #12
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by W*GS View Post
Yep - txtebow is playing the "whites are superior to blacks" canard.

As expected.

Never mind that he drags down the collective IQ of humanity...
I'm simply pointing out the absolute hypocrisy of the leftist swine like you when it comes to critiquing the right wing about their aversion to science. You are no different. This thread is a prime example of that. What makes you worse than the right wing idiots? You pick and choose which science you choose to characterize as legitimate to suit your fallacies. leftists are not just disingenuous but cowardly as well...
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 07:25 PM   #13
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,410
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txtebow View Post
I'm simply pointing out the absolute hypocrisy of the leftist swine like you when it comes to critiquing the right wing about their aversion to science. You are no different. This thread is a prime example of that. What makes you worse than the right wing idiots? You pick and choose which science you choose to characterize as legitimate to suit your fallacies. leftists are not just disingenuous but cowardly as well...
Thanks for posting just about what I thought you would...

Your favorite, eh?

W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 08:39 PM   #14
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,875

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txtebow View Post
I would do away with all race based initiatives and quotas in schools and in the work force. Let the cards fall where they may regarding achievement which if juxtaposed to America's current policies of explaining away in-congruencies in wealth and accomplishment as "White privilege" and therefore implementing programs designed to award unworthy candidates opportunity that they don't deserve based upon their own merits.

It's like keeping a roster spot on the Broncos for a 5.5 40 time WR solely because he fits a quota.......but that's our nation's policy in opportunity in education and business...
It would make sense to give those who score less on the tests more help, wouldn't you think? Perhaps the best thing to do would be to segregate schools by race? Asians in one school, whites in another, etc. What do you do with mixed race kids?

And then there's immigration. Do we only allow asians and whites to emigrate to America? Or perhaps put quotas on the "lesser" races?

What group do Jews fit in with? Are they white?

You also seem to be implying with the above post that selective breeding might be a consideration. Should we simply make sure that whites only breed with whites, or should we test for the best of the whites and only allow them to breed? Is it okay for whites to breed with Asians? What if Asians decide that they shouldn't breed with whites?

And what do we do about hispanic breeding. They're outbreeding us whites. What should we do about it?

So many questions...
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 09:37 PM   #15
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,410
Default

txtebow thinks blacks are inherently inferior, stupid, and violent.

Nothing he's written is evidence against that interpretation.
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 05:35 AM   #16
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
It would make sense to give those who score less on the tests more help, wouldn't you think? Perhaps the best thing to do would be to segregate schools by race? Asians in one school, whites in another, etc. What do you do with mixed race kids?

And then there's immigration. Do we only allow asians and whites to emigrate to America? Or perhaps put quotas on the "lesser" races?

What group do Jews fit in with? Are they white?

You also seem to be implying with the above post that selective breeding might be a consideration. Should we simply make sure that whites only breed with whites, or should we test for the best of the whites and only allow them to breed? Is it okay for whites to breed with Asians? What if Asians decide that they shouldn't breed with whites?

And what do we do about hispanic breeding. They're outbreeding us whites. What should we do about it?

So many questions...
See post #7. You're projecting your own personal biases onto me and my original point. Tried and true, when you are backed into a corner by fact simply yell "racism!"
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 05:45 AM   #17
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,875

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txtebow View Post
See post #7. You're projecting your own personal biases onto me and my original point. Tried and true, when you are backed into a corner by fact simply yell "racism!"
You're the one who brought up the study. I'm just trying to get you to admit what the policy implications are. That's what it's all about. Even the writer sums up the article with that point.

You tell me what the policy implications are.

As far as your post #7 goes, that's the exact opposite policy I would expect from such a scientific finding. Seems to be that race-based special treatment should expand, not contract, in the interest of helping those who need the most help. Right?

Last edited by Rohirrim; 08-12-2013 at 05:50 AM..
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 05:50 AM   #18
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
You're the one who brought up the study. I'm just trying to get you to admit what the policy implications are. That's what it's all about. Even the writer sums up the article with that point.

You tell me what the policy implications are.
The policy implications are that we should do away with quotas for outcomes. Trying to fit a square peg into a round hole is the failure of your ilk and you choose to support artificial outcomes via government led programs. This study simply tells you that's like banging your head against the wall. Repeatedly.
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 05:58 AM   #19
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,875

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txtebow View Post
The policy implications are that we should do away with quotas for outcomes. Trying to fit a square peg into a round hole is the failure of your ilk and you choose to support artificial outcomes via government led programs. This study simply tells you that's like banging your head against the wall. Repeatedly.
That's a very limited policy, based on these findings. How could education be successful if you put the naturally more advanced asian and white kids in the same classrooms with brown and black kids? Seems self-defeating. Wouldn't it hold back the asian and white kids? A policy of segregation is self-evident in these findings.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 06:08 AM   #20
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
You're the one who brought up the study. I'm just trying to get you to admit what the policy implications are. That's what it's all about. Even the writer sums up the article with that point.

You tell me what the policy implications are.

As far as your post #7 goes, that's the exact opposite policy I would expect from such a scientific finding. Seems to be that race-based special treatment should expand, not contract, in the interest of helping those who need the most help. Right?

Our immigration system should be reformed to allow in only needed degreed professionals. Our post 1960s immigration policy has favored and led to an increase in uneducated low IQ third worlders... Another abysmal failure of your political ilk.
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 06:12 AM   #21
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
That's a very limited policy, based on these findings. How could education be successful if you put the naturally more advanced asian and white kids in the same classrooms with brown and black kids? Seems self-defeating. Wouldn't it hold back the asian and white kids? A policy of segregation is self-evident in these findings.
Interesting you focus on this. Incredibly diverse Florida has a policy it wishes to implement to deal with just your concern...... And it's to hold AA's and Latinos to lower educational standards....sad really.

EDIT: apparently Virginia is attempting to implement the same policies...


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_1959151.html

Last edited by txtebow; 08-12-2013 at 06:29 AM..
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 06:25 AM   #22
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Making fun of Right Wingers who don't believe in evolution is like shooting fish in a barrel! However, science that challenges your most basic leftist assumptions is NOT truly science, right? Any intellectually honest person who reads this thread is going to be taken aback by your blatant hypocrisy.

"Right Tards are ANTI-SCIENCE!" --Roh, Wigs, etc

Last edited by txtebow; 08-12-2013 at 06:31 AM..
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 06:37 AM   #23
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,875

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txtebow View Post
Making fun of Right Wingers who don't believe in evolution is like shooting fish in a barrel! However, science that challenges your most basic leftist assumptions is NOT truly science, right? Any intellectually honest person who reads this thread is going to be taken aback by your blatant hypocrisy.

"Right Tards are ANTI-SCIENCE!" --Roh, Wigs, etc
Nobody is arguing about the science. We're talking about the policy implications of such a finding and trying to understand why you would, on the one hand, cherry pick this particular study out of the world of science and post it on this board, and then refuse to openly state what you think the implications of such a study are.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 06:51 AM   #24
txtebow
WARRIOR
 
txtebow's Avatar
 
Crash the plane HOGAN!!!

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Big D
Posts: 1,673

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Requiem
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Nobody is arguing about the science. We're talking about the policy implications of such a finding and trying to understand why you would, on the one hand, cherry pick this particular study out of the world of science and post it on this board, and then refuse to openly state what you think the implications of such a study are.
But in fact you ARE Anti Science for the simple fact that you and your ilk support artificial outcomes via government led programs. I already stated the implications of the study; outcomes will never be equal unless artificial intervention takes place in the form of AA and quotas. This and other studies explain why. Artificial intervention makes our country weaker. The Broncos holding a roster spot for 5.5 second 40 yard dash running WR is the perfect analogy for it....
txtebow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2013, 06:59 AM   #25
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 52,875

Adopt-a-Bronco:
CJ Anderson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txtebow View Post
But in fact you ARE Anti Science for the simple fact that you and your ilk support artificial outcomes via government led programs. I already stated the implications of the study; outcomes will never be equal unless of artificial intervention. Artificial intervention makes our country weaker. The Broncos holding a roster spot for 5.5 second 40 yard dash running WR is the perfect analogy for it....
I've got an ilk? I wish they would chip in once in awhile.

What is an "artificial outcome?"

What is "artificial intervention?"

So, helping those who are fundamentally less advanced is pandering to weakness and will lead to the downfall of our nation, or simply losing the great, existential ballgame? Seems rather anti-Christian. I thought we were supposed to reach out and help the less fortunate?
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:13 PM.


Denver Broncos