Ignorance in our Modern World and why I abhor it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Atheism, liberalism, and male homosexuality are also loosely linked to higher IQ. Margins are fairly small, so aren't you glad about that when you check your testes?

---

It's a difference of 6 points when regarding religion, a difference of 11 points regarding left vs. right :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

So is being black. If you're going to accept one, you're going to have to accept the other.

---

Uh, no?

http://www.skepdic.com/iqrace.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

Fun fact: Conservatism is linked to a lower average IQ :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Atheism, liberalism, and male homosexuality are also loosely linked to higher IQ. Margins are fairly small, so aren't you glad about that when you check your testes?

---

Source please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

So is being black. If you're going to accept one, you're going to have to accept the other.

---

not true at all. Having black skin is not the same thing as choosing to support selfish, hateful, short sighted and self destructive policy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

Source please.

---

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26...x.html?hpt=Mid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro

Uh, no?

http://www.skepdic.com/iqrace.html

---

Are you actually denying the fact that there's a correlation? Hell, there are studies showing that the average IQ in developing countries is lower than in developed ones. Of course I don't buy the explanation for a variety of reasons, but those same reasons applying to not buying the BS about political ideology and IQ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26...x.html?hpt=Mid

---

Kanazawa is a fraud and has absolutely no idea what he's talking about or how to conduct proper research. He's the same guy who claims developing countries are poor because they have low rates of IQ. His most recent article claims that civil wars are fought to gain control over fertile women. His methodology is less sophisticated than that of someone who's taken one stats class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26...x.html?hpt=Mid

---

Heh heh:

Quote:

---

The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be.

---

Nice disclaimer but that's the only interest I have in this story. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Kanazawa is a fraud and has absolutely no idea what he's talking about or how to conduct proper research. He's the same guy who claims developing countries are poor because they have low rates of IQ. His most recent article claims that civil wars are fought to gain control over fertile women. His methodology is less sophisticated than that of someone who's taken one stats class.

---

You know you should post a source to back this opinion. So lets have it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Male same-sex preference. Was a "study" linked in the news recently. Females and lesbians didn't skew the results. Some attempt to correlate changing social norms with neuroscience that didn't quite meet scientific muster (IMO), but was still interesting.

---

:bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

You know you should post a source to back this opinion. So lets have it.

---

I've read his actual articles. Not too hard to find. I believe Wiki has the names of some of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

I've read his actual articles. Not too hard to find. I believe Wiki has the names of some of them.

---

Are you claiming authority as an expert to back your denouncements of his work?

So what's the big deal here? Even the side panel of the CNN article says:

Quote:

---

None of this means that humans are evolving toward a future where such traits are the default

---

Could also argue if they defined conservative or liberal "properly". As I said, it was just interesting.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EyeKhan

Are you claiming authority as an expert to back your denouncements of his work?

---

Yes, the articles I mentioned were published in a poli sci journal. I do have some experience reading and critiquing poli sci articles, being in grad school for 3 years and all. I've actually send one of his articles to several of my friends here, and all thought the guy is an incompetent idiot. The consensus was: how the hell did he get published.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Could also argue if they defined conservative or liberal "properly". As I said, it was just interesting.....

---

Especially when "liberals" are twice as likely to believe in astrology than "conservatives". If that's not a sign of a lack of intelligence, I'm not sure what is.

Loki, it was in the news b/c it's being published in a social psychology journal.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Loki, it was in the news b/c it's being published in a social psychology journal.....

---

And as I implied above, some pretty crappy stuff sneaks through peer review process occasionally. I doubt his theory or methods in that article are vastly superior to the ones I read (the latest of which was published in 2007).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Yes, the articles I mentioned were published in a poli sci journal. I do have some experience reading and critiquing poli sci articles, being in grad school for 3 years and all. I've actually send one of his articles to several of my friends here, and all thought the guy is an incompetent idiot. The consensus was: how the hell did he get published.

---

But you're asking eveyrone who might read that post to nod their heads and accept your word for it. Not to question your qualifications, but you're a grad student using your friends as concurring opinions and this is a peer-reviewed article from a multiple-published professor. Would you ever accept the word of someone else here under the same circumstances???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

And as I implied above, some pretty crappy stuff sneaks through peer review process occasionally. I doubt his theory or methods in that article are vastly superior to the ones I read (the latest of which was published in 2007).

---

That's up to academia and peer-review journals then. For all we know, that March issue it will have a critique from those who find flaw in method or analysis, or dissenting 'opinion'.

It's interesting as a discussion about the fuzzy sciences of human behavior, tho. Nothing wrong with that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

That's up to academia and peer-review journals then. For all we know, that March issue it will have a critique from those who find flaw in method or analysis, or dissenting 'opinion'.

It's interesting as a discussion about the fuzzy sciences of human behavior, tho. Nothing wrong with that.

---

Articles using improper or overly simplistic methods, or poor theory shouldn't be getting published in the first place. It undermines the objective of science.

Then move into Big Pharma R & D. Or work for the AMA or CDC or FDA dissecting medical journal studies. Weeding out the flotsam and jetsom there would be more beneficial than poli sci. :bored:

If I wanted to do something boring just to make money, I'd go into finance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

If I wanted to do something boring just to make money, I'd go into finance.

---

Yes, indeed.
Finance is the art of creating money without producing anything.