Academic Twaddle
The IQ test ... a measure of academic intelligence. That and nothing more. They have been found to be lacking in accuracy; to be ethno-centric; in other words, to be of limited use, at best. The same person can achieve different scores on different sessions with the same test. How excited should we get about these tests that only test how well a person can do on IQ tests?
Apparently, some people get quite excited, indeed. Take Richard Lynn, for instance, Professor Emeritus at the University of Ulster. He has made a great deal of use of IQ test results to prove some very interesting statements over the years. Keep in mind that proponents of IQ testing declare 100 to be average when you read the following gem of wisdom from the enlightened professor:" In 1991 I extended my work on race differences in intelligence to other races. I concluded that the average IQ of blacks in sub-Saharan Africa is approximately 70. It has long been known that the average IQ of blacks in the United States is approximately 85. The explanation for the higher IQ of American blacks is that they have about 25 per cent of Caucasian genes and a better environment."
To put a little perspective on this, here a few numbers: an IQ of 120 implies that the test-taker is brighter than about 91% of the population, while 130 puts a person ahead of 98% of people. A person with an IQ of 80 to 85 is brighter than only 9% of people.
Lynn's brilliant theory to explain the difference? Well, says the professor, life was just too darn easy for those dark-skinned, southern lay-abouts. Pluck a date or two from the nearest tree, pop 'em in your mouth, and lie back for another nap. The people who ventured further north found it harder to survive in the cold climes, however, and evolution favoured those who could figure out that they needed to get in out of the snow. Easy to see why whites are so much smarter, eh?
One statement the man makes, however, should raise the hairs on the back of absolutely everyone's neck, without exception. Remember that eugenics were of very special interest to Hitler when you read the following: "My book Dygenics showed that the eugenicists were right in their belief that modern populations have been deteriorating genetically in respect of health, intelligence and the personality trait of conscientiousness. This deterioration began in the second half of the 19th century and has continued up to the present." Anyone who could buy into any interest in eugenics should be regarded as best used for landfill, and nothing else.
Now, the moron has made another claim, this time in adjunct to Paul Irwing, Senior Lecturer in Organisational Psychology at Manchester University. Apparently, Irwing was a little unsure about associating with Lynn at first, because of the controversy the man has fomented, but not quite uneasy enough to avoid the man entirely. This time around, they looked at the IQ's of men and women, in order to determine who was smarter. Their research was based on IQ tests given to 80,000 people, plus a further study of 20,000 students.Their study results? Men are supposedly smarter.
When are these guys ever going to move past the "us and them" mentality?
Says Irwing, "I'm not particularly pleased with the things we have found. I would like there to be equality between the sexes. In many ways there are, but there are some small differences and this is one of them." Says Lynn, "My work on intelligence and brain size led me to consider the problem that women have smaller brains than men even when allowance is made for their smaller bodies. This implies that men should have higher average ices than women, but it has been universally asserted that men and women have equal average ices. In 1994 I proposed that the solution to this problem is that girls mature faster than boys and this compensates for their lower ices, which only appear at the age of 16 onwards. Among adults men have higher average ices than women by about 4 IQ points. This advantage consists largely of higher spatial abilities but is also present in non-verbal reasoning."
The paper to be presented by the two towering intellects will argue that there is evidence that at the same level of IQ, women are able to achieve more than men "possibly because they are more conscientious and better adapted to sustained periods of hard work".
If you're really bored some afternoon and have nothing better to do, put on your hip-waders and get ready to slosh through some knee-high bullshit as you read the latest lunacy offered by these two. Better still, drive to a garden centre, buy some cow manure and fertilize a garden-bed. The returns will be far more worthwhile.
Apparently, some people get quite excited, indeed. Take Richard Lynn, for instance, Professor Emeritus at the University of Ulster. He has made a great deal of use of IQ test results to prove some very interesting statements over the years. Keep in mind that proponents of IQ testing declare 100 to be average when you read the following gem of wisdom from the enlightened professor:" In 1991 I extended my work on race differences in intelligence to other races. I concluded that the average IQ of blacks in sub-Saharan Africa is approximately 70. It has long been known that the average IQ of blacks in the United States is approximately 85. The explanation for the higher IQ of American blacks is that they have about 25 per cent of Caucasian genes and a better environment."
To put a little perspective on this, here a few numbers: an IQ of 120 implies that the test-taker is brighter than about 91% of the population, while 130 puts a person ahead of 98% of people. A person with an IQ of 80 to 85 is brighter than only 9% of people.
Lynn's brilliant theory to explain the difference? Well, says the professor, life was just too darn easy for those dark-skinned, southern lay-abouts. Pluck a date or two from the nearest tree, pop 'em in your mouth, and lie back for another nap. The people who ventured further north found it harder to survive in the cold climes, however, and evolution favoured those who could figure out that they needed to get in out of the snow. Easy to see why whites are so much smarter, eh?
One statement the man makes, however, should raise the hairs on the back of absolutely everyone's neck, without exception. Remember that eugenics were of very special interest to Hitler when you read the following: "My book Dygenics showed that the eugenicists were right in their belief that modern populations have been deteriorating genetically in respect of health, intelligence and the personality trait of conscientiousness. This deterioration began in the second half of the 19th century and has continued up to the present." Anyone who could buy into any interest in eugenics should be regarded as best used for landfill, and nothing else.
Now, the moron has made another claim, this time in adjunct to Paul Irwing, Senior Lecturer in Organisational Psychology at Manchester University. Apparently, Irwing was a little unsure about associating with Lynn at first, because of the controversy the man has fomented, but not quite uneasy enough to avoid the man entirely. This time around, they looked at the IQ's of men and women, in order to determine who was smarter. Their research was based on IQ tests given to 80,000 people, plus a further study of 20,000 students.Their study results? Men are supposedly smarter.
When are these guys ever going to move past the "us and them" mentality?
Says Irwing, "I'm not particularly pleased with the things we have found. I would like there to be equality between the sexes. In many ways there are, but there are some small differences and this is one of them." Says Lynn, "My work on intelligence and brain size led me to consider the problem that women have smaller brains than men even when allowance is made for their smaller bodies. This implies that men should have higher average ices than women, but it has been universally asserted that men and women have equal average ices. In 1994 I proposed that the solution to this problem is that girls mature faster than boys and this compensates for their lower ices, which only appear at the age of 16 onwards. Among adults men have higher average ices than women by about 4 IQ points. This advantage consists largely of higher spatial abilities but is also present in non-verbal reasoning."
The paper to be presented by the two towering intellects will argue that there is evidence that at the same level of IQ, women are able to achieve more than men "possibly because they are more conscientious and better adapted to sustained periods of hard work".
If you're really bored some afternoon and have nothing better to do, put on your hip-waders and get ready to slosh through some knee-high bullshit as you read the latest lunacy offered by these two. Better still, drive to a garden centre, buy some cow manure and fertilize a garden-bed. The returns will be far more worthwhile.
2 Comments:
Very well written response to the "research." Lynn obviously has an outlook he is trying to prove, and is willing to cook up whatever proof he needs. The fact that IQ testing lacks objectivity in discerning intelligence seems lost on him.
Intelligence: the capacity to acquire and apply knowledge.
IQ: ratio of tested mental age to chronological age.
How stupid do you have to be to not recognize that IQ is not a test of intelligence? Apparently Lynn's propensity for stupidity is far greater than his IQ. So is Irwing's for that matter, since the man didn't see the career limiting move he was making by allying himself with Stupid.
Oh dear. I can't believe people are taking IQ tests anything more seriously than a bit of fun? It is extremely worrying.
The interesting thing I have noticed about me is that the older I get - as opposed to being a kid - the more I realise that I don't have to sit up and perform with these tests.
There came a point when I realised "what is the point?". Also, if you do enough of them you get to know the answers without even thinking! So what is that a test of? The whole thing is a lot of twaddle.
The eugenics side is scary. Thanks for bringing this to my attention!
Post a Comment
<< Home