John Engelman, come on down.

[mayfly13]

Oh, do fuck off. I told you not to respond but I guess your reading comprehension is subpar.

rofl they got on your nerves didn't they?

it's so hopelessly idiotic, their preening.
they act as if, their countries being on top of the lists, we all automatically accept that theirs is

 

[JohnEngelman]

Insults and obscene words are all you deserve.

I am too polite to respond to you with the contempt you deserve. You obviously are incapable of examining evidence and arguing rationally. My opinions are based on facts I document. Your opinions are based on hot air and wishful thinking.

 

[Rightguide]

Coming back to IQ's:

never took one, they were not done in any institution back in my day

You must be older than dirt.

 

[mayfly13]

You must be older than dirt.

younger than you are

 

[Rainblow]

I am too polite to respond to you with the contempt you deserve. You obviously are incapable of examining evidence and arguing rationally. My opinions are based on facts I document. Your opinions are based on hot air and wishful thinking.

 

[ll74]

The science of genetic criminology is in its infancy. Many people want to strangle the baby in its crib because they fear the legal and political results of a consensus that criminal behavior is largely determined genetically.

No, it's really not. It has kept pace with all genetic studies. You just hearing about it doesn't mean that it's newer than other fields of genetic research. As with all your other biased and cherry picked information, you have found it because you have seeked it out.

If you want a real world view of your racist positions, search out studies that specifically disagree with your position and rationalize why there is just as much data opposing your views.

 

[JohnEngelman]

No, it's really not. It has kept pace with all genetic studies. You just hearing about it doesn't mean that it's newer than other fields of genetic research. As with all your other biased and cherry picked information, you have found it because you have seeked it out.

If you want a real world view of your racist positions, search out studies that specifically disagree with your position and rationalize why there is just as much data opposing your views.

Data does not discredit my views. Wishful thinking discredits my views. When I consider the failure of social welfare reform and social welfare spending to reduce the crime rate I expect people like you to retreat into embarrassed silence.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Giving me the finger is not a rebuttal of my opinions. It demonstrates that rebuttal is impossible.

 

[JohnEngelman]

younger than you are

So what? The truth never ages.

 

[iso36]

the institutions ‘tag was in wouldn’t need to do IQ tests.

 

[Rightguide]

younger than you are

I doubt it.

 

[JohnEngelman]

European countries did not stop IQ tests because the tests had been disproved as accurate predictors of academic and economic success. They stopped the tests because they feared the results. For similar reasons IQ tests were forbidden in the Soviet Union under Stalin.

Is it illegal to sell and own books by Charles Murray in Western Europe and Canada? That is an honest question. i do not know the answer.

 

[Rightguide]

Interesting that you mention eugenicists being a predominant school of thought back in the day. I have an original copy of the New Yorker (1937 or thereabouts) praising Hitler. When I get home I'll send it to you. You'd be surprised at the number of generally respected historical figures that believed in that shite. IQ tests are also sexist as well as racist and are culturally biased. The only time we use anything even remotely resembling a heavily modified IQ test is using it to determine if a student needs academic assistance (either to focus on a particular area or to determine if they would benefit from enriched classes) and then it's modified form is used in conjunction with a plethora of other tests for example a depression test that span several days of testing and doesn't rely solely on one specific test alone. My son was tested in school and has reached genius level in several areas of academic study but he dropped out of school whereas my step daughter attended and finished university becauseshe was a hard and motivated worker. She would often say to my son if you put in a quarter of the effort I do into school work you'd be getting straight As.
And fuck off stupid racists I'm talking to Mayfly not you so don't bother responding to my post.

One can go here for a list of known eugenicists:

https://eugenicsarchive.ca/database/category/people

https://www.conservapedia.com/List_of_people_who_supported_eugenics

 

[jomar]

I miss phrenology.

 

[iso36]

What if we all chipped in and bought him a tv?

Maybe he’d get hooked on the scrolling ticker on the weather channel like other shut-ins.

 

[LdyHoneybee]

The 1% did not write the rules during the Roosevelt administration. The top tax rate rose to 94%. Even with tax loopholes, the rich paid a much higher percentage of their incomes in taxes than they do now. They also had to contend with a much larger and more powerful labor movement that was protected by the government.

Our problems started with “trickle down” because, well, it just doesn’t. But greed does. The labor movement did not pull the country out of Depression, at least not in my family. My family were small business owners and farmers. Additionally, that big terrible government that so many people hate so much these days employed a huge number of people outright to build our roads and bridges and so on. Many great artists were employed by the government to tour the country, visiting small country towns and large cities. The focus was own building a financially strong and large middle class, thus sharing the tax burden out. But when you have a small group of fantastically wealthy people who think and even SAY that not paying their share for the services they receive from “the big bad government” makes them “smart,” the overburdened middle class gradually becomes the “working poor” and even the indigent as they fail to see much return for the money they are investing in government services…because those fantastically wealthy people are not helping. They are keeping what they make for themselves and the government is subsidizing them So that they can keep even more. Yeah, things are relatively cheap at Walmart but do we need cheap goods and the pipedream of someday joining the 1% (or even owning your own home) or do we need cheap goods? Cheap goods never made America great. A strong middle class did, and that is being destroyed by greed.

 

[Chobham]

Coming back to IQ's:

never took one, they were not done in any institution back in my day
but I would also dread taking one.
While scoring far higher than my schoolmates in Math in school, that was due to ten times more labor and hours put in
I also struggled with Physics and my verbal skills have always been poor.

Moreover, ever since I took this Critical Thinking paper
my hunch became that such tests measure both innate intelligence BUT ALSO "acquired" intelligence -- aka proficiency in skills that if you were lucky, were drilled into you by talentedteachers.

See? Prior to the Critical Thinking paper, I would get lost in the sea of intentional and unintentional obfuscations on this board.
Now I can see right through them,
and I can also see how some posters' arguments look more intelligent than others merely because they are applying skills taught in this course.

I've already addressed that aspect of testing.

IQ tests don't care about your race, gender, creed, or place of national origin. IQ is actually part of the US code. 10 US Code 520. That law forbids the US military to induct anyone with an IQ less than 83. (The test used is the Armed Forces Qualification Test and that is an IQ test by any other name. The required score translates to an IQ of 83 although more than a few researchers in the field claim it's closer to 92.)

the European nations do continue to test for IQ. They just use different tests with different names. Much like the AFQT, the results yield different number scales but no one is really being fooled.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Honestly, Ish?
As a non-Anglo, I find all this preening and demeaning re IQ tests that AngloSaxs do, re IQ tests to be caricatural or annoying at best.

mainly because I found out that you AngloSaxs fucks placed yourselves on top,
anwhile placing most Eastern Europeans in the mediocre range

despite the fact that EE shools don't do achievement and IQ tests
and despite the fact that we routinely outclass other countries in Maths and Chess.
Transplant any average EE student into an Anglo school, and they'll outwit the locals at Maths.

Professor J. Philippe Rushton rated the races this way:

RACE, INTELLIGENCE, AND THE BRAIN: THE ERRORS AND OMISSIONS OF THE ‘REVISED’ EDITION OF S. J. GOULD’S THE MISMEASURE OF MAN (1996) J. Philippe Rushton Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario. London, Ontario N6A 5C2, Canada

Gould withholds from his readers that The Bell Curve is mainly an empirical work about the causes of social stratification and that it reached its conclusions only after fully analyzing a 12-year longitudinal study of 12,486 youths (3022 of whom were African-American), which showed that most 17-year-olds with high IQs (Blacks as well as Whites) went on to occupational success by their late 20s and early 30s whereas many of those with low IQs (both Black and White) went on to welfare dependency. The average IQ for African-Americans was found to be lower than those for Latino-, White-, Asian-, and Jewish-Americans (85, 89, 103, 106, and 115, respectively, pp. 273-278). Failure to mention these data fosters the false belief that IQ tests are not predictive and are biased in favor of North Europeans.

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.543.2771&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 

[JohnEngelman]

I've told you time and time again....Im not here to argue your points. I'm not here to refute your bullshit conclusions ....I reject them ....you're simply a racist who thinks you're arguing facts and looking for validation from a porn board.

The OP made several arguments against your bullshit....maybe respond to them on that if you're looking to "discuss". Strange enough you've responded to everyone except him

You know that what I say is true, but you hate the truth, so you hate me for telling it.

 

[JohnEngelman]

That's because most Americans, and possibly present company included, are economically illiterate.

In a Progressive income tax system only the Middle Class pays the tax.
The poor are absolved of the income tax and the rich write the rules that allow them to pass the cost of business, e.g., TAXES (being one component of their costs) back on to the Middle Class in the increased cost of goods and services (which the Middle Class is unable to pass on to the poor). I have repeatedly seen this childish economic notion that when you raise taxes on the "rich" they just take it out of profits. Too any people are completely ignorant to the simple economic concept of a profit margin in which price reflects all inputs.

A progressive tax system by definition taxes the rich more heavily. During the 1950's the top tax rate rarely got below 91%, but for most Americans, at least white Americans, those were good years. The average house cost twice the average salary. Most Americans got raises every year that beat inflation. This continued during the 1960's, when the top tax rate never got below 70%.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

I've already addressed that aspect of testing.

IQ tests don't care about your race, gender, creed, or place of national origin. IQ is actually part of the US code. 10 US Code 520. That law forbids the US military to induct anyone with an IQ less than 83. (The test used is the Armed Forces Qualification Test and that is an IQ test by any other name. The required score translates to an IQ of 83 although more than a few researchers in the field claim it's closer to 92.)

the European nations do continue to test for IQ. They just use different tests with different names. Much like the AFQT, the results yield different number scales but no one is really being fooled.

Where in the current code does it say that?

 

[ll74]

Stop bringing dead threads that went nowhere back to life

 

[RobDownSouth]

I've already addressed that aspect of testing.

IQ tests don't care about your race, gender, creed, or place of national origin. IQ is actually part of the US code. 10 US Code 520. That law forbids the US military to induct anyone with an IQ less than 83. (The test used is the Armed Forces Qualification Test and that is an IQ test by any other name. The required score translates to an IQ of 83 although more than a few researchers in the field claim it's closer to 92.)

the European nations do continue to test for IQ. They just use different tests with different names. Much like the AFQT, the results yield different number scales but no one is really being fooled.

Disputin' common fallacies from dullards who insist on calling the Armed Forces AFQT "the same as IQ":

LINK

It's also worth remembering the government axiom "where there's a will there's a waiver". When enlistment goals fail (as they did under Dubya), the government periodically allows waivers for "Cat-IV" enlistees, up to 2000 per fiscal year. This is presumably how BoBo was able to enlist.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

Lesson learned: Don't ever listen to Ishtard, folks.

Here's what's funny: I had no idea about the "83 IQ" thing and thought that sounded weird. I checked and of course, my suspicion that Ishtard didn't know what the fuck he was talking about was correct.

 

[JohnEngelman]

Disputin' common fallacies from dullards who insist on calling the Armed Forces AFQT "the same as IQ":

LINK

It's also worth remembering the government axiom "where there's a will there's a waiver". When enlistment goals fail (as they did under Dubya), the government periodically allows waivers for "Cat-IV" enlistees, up to 2000 per fiscal year. This is presumably how BoBo was able to enlist.

The AFQT is closely equivalent to IQ.