Why can't we talk about IQ?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
That's right, I remember now.

Eventually I'm going to make a list of all SDN girls with my estimate of their attractiveness based on irrelevant criteria. That should clear up the confusion.

Ooohh! Oooh! Pick me!
Lemme guess...1 up for the motorcycle, 3 down for the "stupid enough to ride a motorcycle", 5 down for the obnoxiously attn-seeking "pick me!" (though let's face it, the attention seekers are usually pretty damn hot), and 10 up for the Firefly avatar? :laugh:

This is why I'm worried about people judging me on the internet...they know all of my deepest darkest secrets and are evaluating based on my most meaningful personality traits. When I get rejected on here, it's soul-crushing :scared::scared::scared:
 
Ooohh! Oooh! Pick me!
Lemme guess...1 up for the motorcycle, 3 down for the "stupid enough to ride a motorcycle", 5 down for the obnoxiously attn-seeking "pick me!" (though let's face it, the attention seekers are usually pretty damn hot), and 10 up for the Firefly avatar? :laugh:

This is why I'm worried about people judging me on the internet...they know all of my deepest darkest secrets and are evaluating based on my most meaningful personality traits. When I get rejected on here, it's soul-crushing :scared::scared::scared:

Girls who want to be judged are usually attractive. Therefore you are most likely attractive. Feel free to PM pics for further analysis.
 
Listen lady, it is the writer's responsibility to make themselves understood. it was possible to interpret what you said in more than one way. Your syntax was unclear, so it was harder to pick up on the pragmatics. You said, "It isn't exactly necessary to make me aware of it." What is "it"? That's not clear writing. You were talking about being unintentionally rude in the previous sentence. So it's possible that you meant, "it isn't exactly necessary to make me aware of [being unintentionally rude.]" Indirect writing doesn't make you seem smarter, so don't even bother with it. Seriously. Just try saying, "It is exceedingly rare that I am rude unintentionally," out loud. It sounds so pretentious and jumbled.

Also, stop referring to me as "he" and "broski." You're a woman. You should know that's insulting.

FYI, specter isn't a lesbian, so specter is a guy. Just wanted to clear the misconception.

Carry out with your rant.
 
Anyone want to comment on the brain MRI images posted on the politico.com article? Not sure what these images have to do with the subject of IQ. They are not images of a normal brain. Looks like some sort of big left hemisphere lesion with mass effect. Looks like a gad-enhanced image. Big stroke, tumor, encephalitis? 😕

The article was so clearly a piece of political propaganda that I didn't even notice that, but yes. Good catch. Seems like a good time to mention this: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gen...science_by_Sally_Satel_and_Scott_O_Lilienfeld

Although some find them controversial (for reasons other than their science) the authors of this book raise some valid points. In this case, the misuse of neuroscience is not only mindless, but egregiously unethical.
 
Jason Richwine's dissertation: "IQ and Immigration policy."

Then there is this excerpt taken from said dissertation:



😕😡😕😡😕

After voting against such dissertation, some clowns decided it is not in their power to decide discrimination and immigration policy because after all, Harvard is just a maximal house of studies.

Jason, I will not sleep until I see the committee strip you from your degree.

/end of rant


Especially hilarious because this "prediction" is in no way supported by observation. Two things of significant note happen with the children of Hispanic immigrants: 1. Hispanic immigrants arrive in the US with significantly superior physical health, although they test lower on IQ tests

2. The children of Hispanic immigrants who grow up in the United States fare as well (adjusted for economic status) on IQ tests as US-born whites, and also they fare as poorly health-wise as US-born whites, in other words acclimating incredibly rapidly to the US white norm.
 
The article was so clearly a piece of political propaganda that I didn't even notice that, but yes. Good catch. Seems like a good time to mention this: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gen...science_by_Sally_Satel_and_Scott_O_Lilienfeld...

...In this case, the misuse of neuroscience is not only mindless, but egregiously unethical.

Thanks for the reference to the Satel & Lilienfeld book. I liked the reviewer's sound-bite quip about "Brain Scans" becoming "Brain Scams"...! guess that the Politico editors just picked any handy brain MRI to attach to their IQ article, totally oblivious as to what it actually showed.

Modern brain imaging (CT/PET/SPECT/MRI/fMRI) is quite useful, but as with any other technology we need to understand it's limits.

I gave a Grand Rounds case presentation about a decade ago about a 42 yo patient who was admitted the neurology service for refractory epilepsy. He'd had seizures since adolescence. These had been more or less well-controlled, first on phenobarbital, and later on phenytoin. He had a BSEE, and was working as a computer software engineer in Silicon Valley. Oddly enough, he had never had a brain CT or MRI.

We managed to get better seizure control by using more modern medications. that was easy enough. But we also went ahead and got a brain MRI to rule out some progressive brain lesion. Not that there was anything in his neuro exam to suggest this (other than loss of previously good seizure control).

I began the presentation by describing a patient who was admitted for refractory epilepsy. saying nothing about his educational/high cognitive functioning background. Then I showed his MRI scan, which elicited a lot of oohs and ahs from the audience. The reason for the oohs and ahs was that this guy had massive lateral ventriculomegaly. There was very little cerebral cortex to be seen...basically only about 1/2"or so of cortex that seemed to be plastered up against the cranium all around. This was clearly a case of arrested congenital/perinatal hydrocephalus.

We then moved on to opinions from the audience. These were all physicians, and their consensus was that this had to be a case of severe congenital encephalopathic epilepsy, and it was assumed that the patient suffered from profound cognitive impairment. I allowed the audience to discuss their opinions about what sort of neurological deficits they expected the patient have.

After we discussed this for a while, I then brought the patient out to be seen by the audience. They were quite surprised by the fact that he not only spoke fluent English, but that he was apparently quite intelligent. 🙂

Oh. In retrospect I realized that his neuro exam was not quite "normal." He did have a slightly larger-than-normal hat size.
 
Last edited:
Top