IQ and Intelligence

Posted by: DoctorSarah

IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 10:33 AM

Hello all,
I recently conducted an experiment in which I researched the effect of cannabis on intelligence. I found out that it greatly diminshed the intelligence of people with an IQ of below 100, but actually increased the IQ by a number of points in those of an IQ above 130.
I am now investigating a link between science and IQ. Therefore, I am asking you: what is your IQ? I imagine it will be quite high as we are of an intelligent breed!
I am actually a member of mensa myself, with an IQ of 162, however it is said Einstein had an IQ of 200. All comments and information will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Sarah.
Posted by: Orlaith Kadoahsinjenkinson

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 10:39 AM

my dear doctor sarah, i do agree that the members of this particular science forum are of a high iq and intellingence i mean you just have to read the messgaes posted by rodriguez to relaise that we are indeed of a talented kind. i'm not yet a member of mensa however i do treasure my IQ of 149. thankyou very much my friend xx Orlaith
Posted by: Rodriguez

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 10:43 AM

oh yes doctor sarah, u seem a truely, truely smart individual! i wonder how u would look in a spandex simba suit, so i culd watch u enact it together! oh doctor doctor i need help
Posted by: Orlaith Kadoahsinjenkinson

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 10:47 AM

Doctor I have a problem...maybe i could make an appointment with you for coffee some time wink
Posted by: DoctorSarah

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 10:47 AM

I do believe this is rather off topic. However, i am not averse to spandex at times.
Posted by: Rodriguez

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 10:49 AM

aren't we all a little in awe of spandex and its great powers. it can reduce a masculine strong man like me to a nervous wreck! my iq is 150, so im probably not quite at your level oh wondrous doctor, but i too am a mensa man!
Posted by: Charlie Brown

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 11:48 AM

http://www.gladwell.com/2005/2005_05_16_a_brain.html

Opening:

Twenty years ago, a political philosopher named James Flynn uncovered a curious fact. Americans--at least, as measured by I.Q. tests--were getting smarter. This fact had been obscured for years, because the people who give I.Q. tests continually recalibrate the scoring system to keep the average at 100. But if you took out the recalibration, Flynn found, I.Q. scores showed a steady upward trajectory, rising by about three points per decade, which means that a person whose I.Q. placed him in the top ten per cent of the American population in 1920 would today fall in the bottom third. Some of that effect, no doubt, is a simple by-product of economic progress: in the surge of prosperity during the middle part of the last century, people in the West became better fed, better educated, and more familiar with things like I.Q. tests. But, even as that wave of change has subsided, test scores have continued to rise--not just in America but all over the developed world. What's more, the increases have not been confined to children who go to enriched day-care centers and private schools. The middle part of the curve--the people who have supposedly been suffering from a deteriorating public-school system and a steady diet of lowest-common-denominator television and mindless pop music--has increased just as much. What on earth is happening? In the wonderfully entertaining "Everything Bad Is Good for You" (Riverhead; $23.95), Steven Johnson proposes that what is making us smarter is precisely what we thought was making us dumber: popular culture...

Aloha, Charlie
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 12:56 PM

IQ is very important in Science ...
EQ is very important in Business...
And if you want to do some real test of someone's intelligence then both parameters must be considered ....
Posted by: Charlie Brown

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 02:44 PM

Gardener developed a theory of multi component intellegence. Perhaps its best to avoid having a single number rating as a human being.

Gardener, H., (1983). Frames of the mind: The theory of multiple intellegence. New York:Basic Books.

Gardener?s Seven Styles of Learning:

A. Linguistic Learner
1)Strong memorization skills.
2)Processes information by saying, hearing and seeing words.

B. Logical/Mathematical Learner
1)Strong in math, reasoning, logic, and problem solving.
2)Processes information by categorizing, classifying, and working with abstract patterns.

C. Spatial Learner
1)Strong with imagination, sensitive to changes, mazes, puzzles, reading
2)Processes information by visualizing and using pictorial images.

D. Musical Learner
1)Strengths lie in picking up sounds, remembering melodies, sensitive to pitch and rhythms.
2)Processes information by using rhythms, melodies and music.

E. Body/Kinesthetic Learner
1)Strengths lie in tactile behaviors.
2)Processes information through body movements and tactile behaviors.

F. Interpersonal Learner
1)Strong leadership style, good empathy skills, good conflict resolution skills, and strong communication skills.
2)Processes information by accessing others, sharing ideas and comparing informational feedback from others.

G. Intrapersonal Learner
1)Strengths lie in understanding self, internalization of thoughts autonomously driven.
2)Processes information by individualizing projects, self pacing instruction and private work environment.

Aloha, Charlie
Posted by: Uncle Al

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 03:27 PM

High autists' performance at a given task generally benefits from mild exclusion of external stimuli. Adding entropy to a garbage midden does not improve it.

Let's party! Two parts:

Uncle Al took the 1973 GRE early on a Saturday morning while rather stoned from a dorm double birthday party the evening before. He chugged own two cans of Coke and went at it. 750 Verbal, 750 Math. 1500/1600. Then again, consider the competition.

Psychology, Public Policy,and Law 11(2) 235-294 (2005)
"THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY"
The 15-18 point difference in average Black (and to a lesser degree Hispanic)-White (and to a greater degree Asian) IQs is hereditary.

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 11(2) 328-336 (2005)
"WANTED: MORE RACE REALISM, LESS MORALISTIC FALLACY"
There has been no narrowing of the 15-18 point average IQ difference between Blacks and Whites (1.1 standard deviations) over the past 100 years.

Lynn, R and Vanhanen, T IQ and the Wealth of Nations (Westport, CT: Praeger (2002).
A mean IQ of 70 was reported for the general African population.

http://www.isteve.com/IQ_Table.htm

(based on a sample of 6,246,729 from corporate, military, and higher education.)

Not a single scholarly refereed paper is to be had proposing Blacks as a group are *not* intellectually inferior by simple demonstration. All objective evaluations - elementary school performance, standardized testing, preferred university admission, life itself, even speaking English - overwhelmingly demonstrate that Blacks as a group fail at any task that depends on intelligence. Project Head Start is a $7 billion/year example of refractory intransigent innate stupidity.

CUNY, educating naught but the dregs of NY City ethnic scum, pulled 11 Nobel Prizes during the 35 years Project Head Start produced nothing.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 10:13 PM

Hello, Sarah,

162 is an impressive IQ. I doubt Einstein was even close to that number.

Those with lower IQ might be having outstanding achievements, due to the fact that their abilities profile matches the needs of the problems they are working on. In such case the weaknesses in some areas might be beneficial, channeling the performance in particular direction.

Has anyone researched the abilities profile of living Nobel laureates, and such?

ES
Posted by: Count Iblis II

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/11/05 11:56 PM

IQ tests only measure how well one is at doing IQ tests. There is a correleation with school performance, but this doesn't imply that someone with a low IQ isn't intelligent.


I know that I have a very low IQ, I don't know exactly how low. But when I was tested in primary school to determine to what sort of secondary school I should go, the psychologists adviced that I was unsuitable for technical/mathematical stuff. This was much to the surprise of my teachers, I was the best of my class.


Since then I've done a few times similar tests, but each time the outcome was very bad compared to how well I was doing at school. The tests didn't measure IQ but were measuring what type of education is most suitable for you. But superficially the tests are very similar to IQ tests I've seen.


The only part of the test I performed well are the number series. I suspect that what's going on is that the test assume that to do well in certain subjects means that you must be able to quickly spot certain patterns quickly. I think that it is actually the other way around. If you can spot the patterns quickly you will probably be very good at certain subjects. However, it can be the case that your brain is wired differently and that you are good at seeing patterns at a more abstract level than is tested.


In that case you may have very bad mathematics ability according to the test, but still be very good at mathematics. Note that there are some tests in which Chimpanzees score better than Humans. If you train Chimps to find a way out of a labyrinth they'll point out the solution much faster than well trained humans can. The Chimp brain is apparently much better configured for this task.


Now suppose that the labyrinth test was used by psychologists to test for mathematical ability. Arguably there is some correlation between mathematical ability and finding your way out of a labyrinth, because you need some logical reasoning for this. Then according to this test Chimps would be mathematical geniusses. laugh
Posted by: Charlie Brown

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/12/05 12:46 AM

What if employment offices for different roles in an enterprise were at different ends of a labyrinth with differnt clues or treatments at the branching points?

Aloha, Charlie
Posted by: YOGI

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/12/05 03:38 AM

My IQ hasn't been tested since early grade school. I am 66 years old so that is quite a ways back. I do remember being somewhere in the top third on that test.

I never finished second year high school, and that second year was a joke anyway. I got shafted by the Chicago school system and ended up in one of their dumping ground schools instead of Lane Tech where I went for my first year. Seems that an over the summer move by my mother put me one block outside of their area and in the area for Crane Tech. By the time I found out that I couldn't go to Lane it was too late to register for Crane and get my classes.

Anyway, I managed to work in some machine shop and high tech areas and have become proficient enough to be an engineer with a 15 million company with plants and warehouses in five states. And that after running my own industrial engineering and repair business for 25 years.

I have always been a heavy reader of technical material. I read several science and engineering magazines monthly. And I don't mean popular mechanics or discover. In fact I don't even read Scientific American much anymore since they dumbed down to appeal to the common market.

I also do things like solve the Jumble puzzles in the paper as fast as I can write them; they are not really a challenge. I do the new york times crossword puzzle in pen and you can read it when I am done.

So, I do not know what my IQ level is and I am not so sure it matters in the real world. I do know that I have solved engineering problems without a formal education that professional engineers with the sheep skin have failed to solve.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/12/05 04:03 AM

That is amazing....
So many times in the past we have seen such non-linear behaviour.
It is a fact that knowledge comes coded with the genes...
Posted by: Arrogathor

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/12/05 12:50 PM

A few points. On IQ I am a member of a society limited to the top 1% of IQ in the world. Like Al I once took the GRE aptitude test. I did not score as high as he did. I scored in the top 1% of college graduates in English skills and the top 14% in math. Since I had never been to college and indeed had dropped out of high school, this is not a bad score. I consistently score in the top 2 or 3 tenths of 1% of IQ in the world.

IQ does exist. There is a G factor. However, the situation is a bit more complex than that. Focusing on one area or another will make you less immediately effective in areas outside that. It takes time and effort to retrain from one area to another. So the multiple IQ model is both true and false. G can be applied to virtually all areas of human endeavor, however, people tend to specialize and develop one or the other.

Flynn is a rather brilliant man and quite a nice fellow. I E-Sponded with him while writing my section on race and IQ http://www.overalltech.net/huff/YIQRace.htm

He has recently developed a thesis which he calls reciprocal reinforcement which is probably the best model for explaining the difference in IQs between members of different cultural groups such as Whites and Blacks.

Uncle Al said, "Not a single scholarly refereed paper is to be had proposing Blacks as a group are *not* intellectually inferior by simple demonstration."

It is apparemt that he is not familiar with Dr. Flynn's work, or he is making a rather silly statement.

"The Bell Curve" itself does not support what Uncle Al said. While TBC with no evidence does suggest that the IQ difference is genetic, it also states that the difference is insignificant in terms of daily life. The IQ overlap between blacks and whites is so large that in any given situation where you are comparing a black to a white the possibility that the black will be more intelligent than the white is so large that to ignore it is insane.

Actually, the real scientific data available today more and more supports the idea that the measured difference between black and white IQ is environmental and not genetic.

You can read my paper posted above or read Dr. Flynn's book on the subject.

Another cultural factor promoting this difference between black and white IQ is discussed in my paper on husband murder in black society.
http://www.overalltech.net/huff/YHusband.htm

Al, as usual, shows no ability to rub two facts together and come up with an idea. As in all his posts, all he does is react in an emotional knee jerk fashion to the irritating silliness of the extremist left.

The extremist left is quite stupid, silly, and irritating, but that should not lead us to abandon fact based empirical evidence and just scream and shout.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/13/05 11:53 AM

Did we scare off dr. Sarah?

By the way, what is effect on IQ of the fetus stage, vs the genetic makeup? Of the early childhood?

ES
Posted by: Mike Kremer

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/13/05 12:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by extrasense:
Did we scare off dr. Sarah?
I hope not (Mike Kremer)
By the way, what is effect on IQ of the fetus stage, vs the genetic makeup? Of the early childhood?

ES
Intelligence, per se, is extremely difficult to define.
I am sure it has different aspirations, and different meanings in different societys.
Prehaps the ultimate definition of intelligence, is genetically 'locked up' in the genes of every different species, whether insect, animal or human.
That of procreating, producing, and keeping oneself alive,
whatever ones circumstances, inspite of drought
disease, or enemies within, or without, ad infinitum, is a desirable achievement.
Modern western society looks with favour upon the man who builds up a Company. The more Company's he builds, the more persons he employs, the more his intelligence is respected.
I would have difficulty in living upon a barren desert island, were I transported to one. Yet a few of us, just might be able to survive with care dilligence, and intelligence.
The average Negro is not a hard worker in a modern western society. The average Chinese is a very hard worker. The average Negro has aspirations to marry a white female, and often milks the system. The average Chinese, rairly ever milks the system, and never marrys anyone darker skinned than themselves, for they are determined to integrate, to fit in. And yet the average black has an almost idyllic, 'laze-along' (from his point of view) life within our society, respected for his musical talents and often physical prowess. Gold bling, and a large car, announce to his mates, that he has made it. We require the golf club, membership cards, and the mansion, as our announcement.
Does it take a different kind of intelligence, to be one of the above, without becoming a 'drop-out'?
Many clever people 'drop out' in our society upon reaching middle age. For reasons best known to themselves?
Having a high IQ and a respected member of Mensa has little meaning in other parts of the world. Unless the IQ test was tailored to fit that particular society in general.
A child of ten, brought up reading books of Mensa tests and puzzles, will score an enormously high IQ when tested at this young age.
Some people of a different genetic disposition, 'drop out' when placed in our society, and only recover when placed back to live in their 'home' society. Why is that?
Prehaps hundreds of years of adapting to life, in their natural enviroment, and living it in the manner best suited to themselves, has an influence upon innate intelligence?
Prehaps its those people who have learn't to live their lives without attracting attention, who always keep a low profile, who are the real super intelligencia of a future society?
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/13/05 04:05 PM

I never took the GRE for real. I was intending to take it and took one real test to practice for it. I gave myself the correct time allotment (but finished early) and other restrictions (no calculator or book), but I took it in a coffeeshop. I got 780 verbal and 790 math. The math was not surprising, as I got 750 on the SAT math and I've never scored less than the 99+ percentile on any standardized math test (at least not since the fourth grade). The verbal was a little curious. I think I got a 580 on the SAT verbal. As I didn't practice for the GRE (that test WAS the practice), I can only think of two things that I've done:

1) in my youth, I primarily read only science and sf, but since I graduated HS, about 30% of my reading is now classics. MANY of those GRE like words are to be found in classics.
2) I started posting regularly on the net about 1980 and have had an extraordinary practice at writing since that time.

I know that some IQ orgs accept (or at least used to accept) surrogate tests in place of IQ tests. OTOH, many of the people I know in these kinds of organizations irritate me. My opinion has softened over the years. It used to be that every single person I knew who belonged to a hi iq organization was a complete idiot. But I've met a large number since then who were really very smart - so I don't suspect, as I once did, that there is an inverse relation between IQ and intelligence.

I've never had an IQ test that I can recall. I don't have any real interest in taking one. I took the mega for fun, though I did not finish it. I solved all of the verbals, all but one of the pattern matching, most of the algebra stuff. I think that based just on the ones I solved, I could estimate about 160. (I never had the test graded, but these are the kinds of things that you just know when you're right.) I suspect that's high, though I'd guess I would measure somewhere between 130 and 164 and most probably between 140 and 150. Just a guess.

I don't know what IQ means and I'm not convinced that others know what it means. Richard Feynman scored 125 on his IQ test in HS (James Gleick mentions it in his book "Genius," which I do not recommend, btw). The fanatics about IQ postulate that he was so contemptuous of the test that he probably just picked a score and tried to get that score on the test. They postulate this based on no evidence other than the fact that they really believe in the correctness of IQ tests and can't accept the idea that someone truly brilliant would not do well on them. "He's got to be one of US!"

I'd be less skeptical of the idea of IQ ~ Intelligence, if it weren't for the fact that the subject is the realm of psychologists and political fanatics.
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/14/05 01:21 AM

I just remembered: I did have an IQ test given at my last job at a small engineering (robotics) firm. They never told me the score, but did say that I had scored very much higher than anyone who had ever worked there previously.
Posted by: Arrogathor

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/14/05 11:59 AM

I am disappointed that Al has not responded. He stated that he knew of no scholarly work on IQ which did not recognize the difference between average black and white IQs.

I purposely misinterpreted his remarks to include an endorsement of the idea that this difference was due to genetic factos.

The left and right both make this misinterpretation routinely. The left proced to then attack the idea of the existence of IQ. The right generalize that IQ is almost entirely genetic and the difference must be racial, I.E. genetic.

Strictly speaking Al did not say anything about the genetic origins of the difference. Ergo, strictly speaking I did not really address what he said. I was trying to force him to make his position clearer with regards to either a genetic or environmental origin of the difference or the idea that no one at this point could say due to insufficient data.

Obviously, from the various posts in this forum, the question of the existence and nature of IQ is so politically charged that it is never discussed independent of race issues. Al's post was the first in this thread to raise that issue as I recall.

Jensen is the most famous advocate of the idea that the difference is genetic in origin. His argument runs.

Proposition: The difference in IQ between whites and blacks is quite significant.

Proposition: Such a significant or major difference could only be caused by significant or major environmental factors.

Observation: No such radical environmental features are present.

Conclusion: The difference must be genetic.

This is a very good argument. However, in order for it to be valid, the various points must be true. A difference of 15 points in average IQ must be so radical that only a radical difference in environment could account for it.
This requires a valid scientific knowledge of what is a radical environmental difference and what is a radical difference in IQ.

Neither of these exist. Jensen, and the authors of TBC base their conclusion on what might be called an intuitive belief about what these are. Now given the science of a few decades ago, and that when Jensen was young, this a very reasonable argument, and one which does not in any way suggest that Jensen is now or ever was a racist.

Now, if you look at feral children, you can see how radically the phenotype can be changed by truly radical differences in environment. Compared to these changes, a 15 point difference in IQ is almost microscopic. Relatively minor and can plausibly be induced by relatively minor differences in culture.

Second, IQ studies in Europe have shown an average difference between Polish and French of about 12 or 13 points. About the same as the difference between blacks and whites in the US.
Poles have the highest average IQ in Europe the French have the lowest, at least at the time the book I am referring to was written.

Apparently the cultural differences between Poland and France are sufficient to produce the level of IQ variation that exists between blacks and whites in the US.

The Flynn effect shows an incraese in raw scores on IQ tests over time a little more than 3 points every ten years. Apparently the cultural differences between one generation and the next are sufficient to produce a difference equal to that between whites and blacks in the US every 40 years or so.

It follows that based on available data of other equivalent differences in IQ between various groups, the difference in IQ between whites and blacks in terms of phenotypical variation is relatively small and can be easily explained as the result of relatively small differences between white and black culture.

Thus, Jensen's argument does not stand up when compared to data relating to other IQ differences between groups.

No one with serious credentials in Psychometry denies either the existence of the difference, or the existence of IQ. The arguments denying these two scientific facts originate entirely in political and dogmatic areas. There is real debate on whether the origin is genetic or environmental. Jensen is the acknowledged authority on the genetic side, Flynn is the acknowledge leader on the environmental side.

Flynn proposes a phenomenon he refers to as recipricol reinforcement. http://www.nathannewman.org/log/archives/000805.shtml

The URL above discusses the idea.
Posted by: Rusty Rockets

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/14/05 04:51 PM

Could you explain "Psychometry". By the way you have used the term I think that my definition of the term differs from your own.
Posted by: YOGI

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/15/05 01:20 AM

http://www.cherylsmeed.com/psychometry.html

http://www.cherylsmeed.com/main.html

Psychometry

Have you ever touched someone or something and gotten some kind of message ? such as ideas, pictures, or words? While shopping in an antique store, do you pick up impressions about certain pieces? You are experiencing psychometry.

Psychometry is the art of interpreting the psychic vibrations contained in objects. Sometimes referred to as "psychic touch," it is the ability to read an object's history or the history of those who may have handled it. While it deals most often with the past, it may often reflect present states as well. It is often used in cases of missing persons. The reader can touch an object the person has worn or touched, usually an article of clothing, to get impressions of the person?s whereabouts.

Some common items used in psychometry are rings, bracelets, necklaces, earrings, and watches. Any of these items will hold information about the wearer, such as thoughts, their emotional state, and sufficient events affecting the person?s life. Through psychometry, a story unfolds that describes not only the events of a person's life, but also how the person is feeling, thinking and reacting to these events. In order to receive clear information, the object should belong to and have been worn only by the person getting the reading.

The following exercises are very basic, but they will help you learn to develop your psychometric abilities, individually and in groups. Everyone has this ability to some degree, but most of us don't focus on it consciously. With practice, you may become proficient in a very helpful tool. And as I always say, only use your gifts for your highest good. Any attempt to intrude on someone?s life without their permission is an invasion of privacy and is very inappropriate.

Which Hand To Use

The hand you use to get impressions from objects of very important. Your dominant hand gives or relays information, while your non-dominant or receptive hand receives information. Your receptive hand is the correct hand to use.

The following a simple test to find out which hand is most receptive. It is very important that you do this, as you will always use this hand to receive impressions, at least until you have become so accurate that you can use either hand.

For most right-handed people, the left hand is the receptive hand. For left-handed people, the right hand is likely to be the receptive hand. If you are in doubt, or were changed from a left-hander to a right-hander as a child, the following test can be used to discover which is which.

1. Hold both hands at chest level with fingertips pointing up and palms facing each other.
2. Rub hands together very lightly to stimulate the energy flow.
3. Move your hands closer together, then apart, feeling the flow of energy.
4. Whichever hand feels stronger, or that it is emitting stronger energy, that is your dominant hand. The other is your non-dominant or receptive hand. Always use your receptive hand in psychometry.

When you are beginning your work in psychometry, always pick up or touch an object with your receptive hand. If you pick up the object with your dominant hand, you may inadvertently transmit an impression as you do.

Form a habit of using your receptive hand to take things from others, and to pick up something you may intend to use. This will be a challenge, as you are probably used to picking things up and holding things with your dominant hand, but this practice will help you to remember to use your receptive hand for psychometric work.

How To Practice Psychometry

As we have already learned, all objects carry an energy frequency connected to the person they are most in contact with. You can learn to interpret these energies with the exercises that follow.

The first exercise is for the individual, but it is best performed with a friend from whom you can receive feedback.

1. Sit relaxed with your eyes closed and your hands in your lap, palms up.
2. Instruct a person to place an object that they have had in their possession for a long time in your receptive hand.
3. Relate everything that you see in your mind, think of, hear in your head and any feelings that you have while holding the object.

You may pick up some thoughts, feelings, and symbols that seem meaningless to you but keep talking as much as possible about what is in your mind and you may be amazed at how much is relevant to the owner of the object. This technique develops your gift of feeling. It gives you the experience of learning to tune into another person's vibrations to discern what you are feeling.

Sometimes, while practicing psychometry, the feelings associated with the object are vague and don't seem to bear much relevance to anything recognizable to the owner of the object. On other occasions, the opposite is the case and intricate details can be discerned. Some people are more relaxed and trusting and so they get many messages immediately. Some people are afraid they will say or do it incorrectly so they get nothing. Don?t worry. You can?t do it wrong!

The following exercise is for a group of people. Group practice is best because you can all put an object into a bowl without knowing which object belongs to whom. In a new group setting such as this, try not to say anything that might make someone uncomfortable. Be tactful and diplomatic, but as descriptive of your thoughts, feelings, or symbols as possible for feedback from the owner of the object.

1. As discreetly as possible, everyone puts an object of theirs in a bowl.

2. Each person then reaches in and takes out an object that it is not their own.

3. Hold the objects in your receptive hands until you receive an impression.
Sometimes I ask specific questions such as, "Will this person change their job or career?" "Will he or she find love?" "If so when?" "Who?" What lesson does this person have to face at this time? ... etc.

4. Each person then takes a turn describing his or her impressions. Relate everything that you see in your mind, think of, hear in your head and any feelings that you have while holding the object.

5. Everyone should give some kind of feedback. Feedback is what helps us to develop your skills.

Dermo-Optic Perception

Another area of psychometry is dermo-optic perception, or "sight through touch." It refers to ?seeing? by touching the skin?s surface. Some people have developed this sensitivity quite naturally, especially those who are sight impaired and must rely on touch.

Everyone emits electromagnetic energy. When we tap into this energy, we can see as well as if we were using our eyes. But regardless of continuing proof that such a thing as dermo-optic ability is present in many people, arguments still abound that relate dermo-optics to telepathy and clairvoyance. Therefore, it should be mentioned that in many cases where dermo-optic perception ability was found evident in a certain person, that person was separately tested for telepathic and clairvoyant abilities, and in most of the cases, no such ability was present!

Some people can distinguish colors and patterns through dermo-optic perception. Various colors have different feeling. Some have described black as "sticky" or "clinging" to the touch, while yellow was "slippery" and blue was found to be "still more slippery, but cool to the touch, like delicate ice." Red causes great, bold radiation, and according to some, is so hot that the subject immediately draws his hand away, as though from searing heat.

It seems that small children are sensitive to colors, and can easily distinguish them merely by feel. One young mother reports the case of her six-year-old daughter?s ability to distinguish colors by touch. She shared that on day while she was wrapping Christmas presents, she asked her six-year-old daughter to give her the bolt of red ribbon. Her daughter immediately pulled the right color ribbon out of the bag, and repeated this with green, gold, white, and blue ribbon. She never pulled the wrong color out of the bag.

With practice, we can all master the ability to read by touch. Here is an exercise to help you develop your sense of touch.

1. Prepare a bowl of lukewarm water.

2. Close your eyes and gently dip your fingers into the water.

3. Repeat this exercise for about five minutes at a time.

At first, you may have some difficulty knowing exactly when your fingers make contact with the water, but after a short amount of practice, you will feel the tips of your fingers becoming more sensitized.

Feeling textures is also a helpful means of developing dermo-optic perception. Place various specimens such as salt, sugar, sand, or other granular substances into small separate envelopes and touch each substance through the envelopes. Don?t reach in and touch the substance directly. First, try to distinguish it through the paper of the envelope. At first, it may seem impossible to detect exactly what your fingertips are touching through the paper, since all of the substances are similar in texture. Here is the point of the test where you must not doubt! Trust your instincts. With patient practice, you will be able to detect through your fingertips the substances in the envelopes.

Various objects have different feelings, not just in texture, but because everything radiates its own specific energies, and trained fingertips can sense these differences. Awareness of this speeds the process of your own development in dermo-optical attempts.

Feel the difference between wood and paper, plastic and metal, wool and silk, china and glass, or hair and fur. This method will help to enhance your sensitivity to feel the varying objects and textures.

Such practice raises your vibration so that eventually you will be able to "read" someone just by touching him or her, as you learned psychometrically.
Posted by: Rusty Rockets

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/15/05 05:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by YOGI:
Psychometry

Psychometry is the art of interpreting the psychic vibrations contained in objects. Sometimes referred to as "psychic touch," it is the ability to read an object's history or the history of those who may have handled it. While it deals most often with the past, it may often reflect present states as well. It is often used in cases of missing persons. The reader can touch an object the person has worn or touched, usually an article of clothing, to get impressions of the person?s whereabouts.
Mm, that's what I thought.
Posted by:

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/21/05 02:44 PM

I have taken several "IQ" tests. Each with different results. Given that fact alone how much creedence can be placed in any one IQ test? Your score will merely reflect what you can discern from that material on that given one test at that one time. Genius, superior, average, does it matter how well one can rotate on object in one's head if they are unhappy or have mental illness? I think what we do with our intelligence is the real test.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/22/05 10:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MrMung:
I think what we do with our intelligence is the real test.
I agree.
Dr Sarah with her 160 IQ doing "research" on the weed. How much more stupid one can get?

e laugh s
Posted by: hugomoly

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/23/05 02:06 PM

Dear Doctor Sarah,
interesting findings, the relation between using dope and IQ. Is there any URL or other link from where these findings can be viewed in more detail?

It is my experience that one can train oneself to improve on IQ tests, furthermore, now even you can pump it up by smoking weed, wow!

All the more reason for me to find that showing off with one?s IQ is just as bad mannered as boasting about the size of your private parts or the height of your income.

On the other hand, more attention should be paid to the really smart children, for they are often bored to death on regular schools, being interpreted as stupidity, resulting in even more waist of talents, anyway, that is the situation in Western Europe, in the US maybe there is more pro-active anticipation towards the education of smarter people.

But to comply with your request, mine is about 135.

Hoping to hear from you soon,
Posted by: Planko

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/30/05 03:08 AM

My IQ is 160 but I am as dumb as a rock with no ability to foresee the future, learn from mistake, or any ability to comprehend reality.
Posted by: Planko

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/30/05 03:45 PM

Uncle Al:


But blacks are not dumb enough not to fight for their rights and freedoms, are they? So I guess that places you in a bit of a dilemna:

Apartheid at Wikipedia

The principal apartheid laws were as follows:

* The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act (1949)
* Amendment to The Immorality Act (1950)
o This law made it a criminal offence for a white person to have any sexual relations with a person of a different race.
* The Population Registration Act (1950)
o This law required all citizens to register as black, white or coloured.
* The Suppression of Communism Act (1950)
o This law banned any opposition party the government chose to label as "communist".
* The Group Areas Act (27 April 1950)
o This law barred people of particular races from various urban areas.
* The Reservation of Separate Amenities Act (1953)
o This law prohibited people of different races from using the same public amenities, such as drinking fountains, restrooms, and so on.
* The Bantu Education Act (1953)
o This law brought in various measures expressly designed to reduce the level of education attainable by black people.
* The Mines and Work Act (1956)
o This law formalised racial discrimination in employment.
* The Promotion of Black Self-Government Act (1958)
o This law set up nominally independent "homelands" for black people. In practice, the South African government had a strong influence over these bantustans.
* Black Homeland Citizenship Act (1971)
o This law changed the status of the inhabitants of the 'homelands' so that they were no longer citizens of South Africa, and therefore had none of the rights that came with citizenship.
* The Afrikaans Medium Decree (1974) required the use of Afrikaans in schools

[edit]

The apartheid system
[edit]

Apartheid in South Africa from day to day


Apartheid was implemented by the law. The following restrictions were not only social but were strictly enforced by law:

* Non-whites were excluded from national government and were unable to vote except in elections for segregated bodies.
* Non-whites were not allowed to run businesses or professional practices in any areas designated as being for whites only. Although this was theoretically a prohibition applied symmetrically to blacks and whites, every significant metropolis and practically every significant shopping and business district was in a white area.
* Black and white transport and civil facilities were segregated.
* Blacks (except for a few who had "Section 10" rights), who comprised over 60% of the population, were excluded from living or working in white areas, unless they had a pass. Whites required passes in black areas.
o A pass was only issued to someone who had approved work; spouses and children had to be left behind in the non-white area.
o A pass was issued for one magisterial district confining the holder to that area only.
o Being without a valid pass made a person subject to immediate arrest and summary trial, often followed by "deportation" to the person's "homeland". Police vans containing sjambok-wielding officers roamed the "white area" to round up the "illegal" blacks.

The interior of a black man's pass book.
Enlarge
The interior of a black man's pass book.

Black areas rarely had plumbing or electricity. Hospitals were segregated: the white hospitals being the match of any in the western world while black hospitals were seriously understaffed, underfunded and far too few in number to match the white hospitals. Ambulances were segregated, forcing the race of the person to be correctly identified when the ambulance was called. A "white" ambulance would not take a black to a hospital. Black ambulances typically contained little or no medical equipment.

In the 1970s each black child's education cost the state only a tenth of each white child's. Higher education was practically impossible for most blacks.

Trains and buses were segregated, with third-class carriages reserved for black travellers. Black buses stopped at black bus stops and white buses at white ones.

Public beaches were racially segregated, with the majority (including all of the best ones) reserved for whites. Public swimming pools and libraries were racially segregated but there were practically no black pools or black libraries.

Sex and marriage between the races was prohibited.

Cinemas in white areas were not allowed to admit blacks. Restaurants and hotels were not allowed to admit blacks, except as staff.

Although trade unions for black and "Coloured" (mixed race) workers had existed since the early 20th century, it was not until the piecemeal reforms of the early 1980s that trade unions for black workers were recognised by the government, and strikes remained banned. The minimum yearly taxable income for blacks was 360 rand (30 rand a month), while the white threshold was much higher, at 750 rand (62.5 rand per month).

Apartheid pervaded South African culture, as well as the law. The perception of non-white South Africans as second-class citizens was reinforced in many media, and the lack of opportunities for the races to mix in a social setting entrenched white attitudes of superiority - often demonstrated in hostile, rude or patronising behaviour.



Anyway Uncle Al, aren't you a bit of an anachronism? Shouldn't you be bemoaning the lack of segregation by IQ rather than griping over the differences in average IQ of countries/races? Wouldn't that be more scientific?
Posted by: Andy

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 09/01/05 04:41 PM

IQ testing is somewhere between a cop-out to legitimize failure and a way of making yourself feel big because of pretty numbers... Depending on your pretty numbers, of course.

138 last tested (1998). Although I did hear someone say once that IQ could go down so who knows, maybe I'm teetering on remedial by now, eh?

It doesn't matter, really. If you do your best (without settling for it) I guarantee you'll be a success... Whether you give mensa $40.09 per year or not.

Yogi, very impressive tale chief.
Posted by: Sparky

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 09/10/05 04:49 AM

I.Q. was meant to be Mental age divided by physical age and so was meant to be a measure of the speed at which we learned. Obviously that also requires opportunity, and a lack of opportunity will throw off the results.

Genius on the other hand is the ability to see the connections when others don't. Of couse that is similar to the definition of insanity, which is what many of us plead.

As I posted elsewhere we have been breeding for book learning and math intelligence for a relatively short time. China has been doing it for about 2000 years, Europe for about 500, and African only in the last 100 years. On the other hand, China stopped breeding for physical ability 2000 years ago, Europe 500 years ago, and Africa is still celebrating the runner/hunter. Come to the States and see our hybrids.

The mechanism of breeding is simple. Women who want to be mothers consider the ability of the suitors to be able to provide for their families. Those at the low end of society will pick men with potential upward mobility.

In the Middle Ages in Europe, a peasant would choose a large strong man who might succeed in battle and be made a knight. In China, a fast learning young man might be invited to go to school to become a scribe. They would both be considered very eligible by all the pretty girls.

That the native African is not smart, I don't believe. He has been trained for a different kind of learning. That the NBA is 80% black has nothing to do with racism, it has everything to do with 2000 + years of breeding.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 09/26/05 12:01 AM

I have tested my IQ 2 times online and both times it was less than 100. Last time it was 91. According to information found on the internet, I could not even graduate a high school. But I somehow managed to graduate a university in applied mathematics, though I haven't received top scores. Maybe those tests are a bit synthetic and depend on education system, so people graduated different education system have different thinking mechanism? In my country we never solved logical tasks like those in the IQ tests (a few similar pictures and alike) maybe I simply don't know how to solve them? In our country it's known that american high school level is much lower than in eastern european countries, but universities are much stronger in this point of view.
(I'm sorry for my broken English)
Posted by: jjw

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/04/05 01:03 AM

DoctorStrange, how you indulge!

I think Sparky has a great response to your issue but there is going to be controversy. From my stand point it only takes a 25 IQ to know that I would look like holy hell in spandex.

I will give some information you probably do not want or need. I grew up under happy circumstances that were not conditioned to better education. What I had was very good but I was a drop out in the 10th grade of high school and never had an IQ test that I can recall until I went into the Army. I am aware your POST was likely motivated by your pride of having a 169 IQ and then letting us know Albert Einstien had an IQ of 200, close I suppose to yours?

Over the years I have taken a number of IQ tests and I have always wondered how society can lump all catagories of people into such yests. Pasty has hit the point on the ability to leanr as a criteria but that is less than the tip of the iceberg. Learning itself improves the ability to learn, education provides the basis to grasp the meaniong of words, the feeling knowledge has for words depictions- like what is Sheakspere saying with his mumble jumble, in short extremely concise depictions of emotions and actions.

Being a high school drop out I feel keenly about this. Every IQ test I have had, starting from 120 entering the Army has gone up ever since. The end result is not germain - the point is that, in my opinion, the ability to learn is a factor but the excercise of learning makes a powerful addition.

Congratulations on your 169.
Posted by: jjw

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/04/05 01:06 AM

I meant SPARKY not Pasty, lower my IQ.
Jim Wood
Posted by: jjw

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/04/05 07:03 PM

Hi YOGI:

We have something in common, we were both dropouts. Mine was by choice yours possibly not.

They should devise a test for common sense. It has seemed to me over the years that some people that were otherwise intellegent had no common sense in every day matters.
JW
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/04/05 07:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by jjw004:
Hi YOGI: We have something in common, we were both dropouts.
Well, this is really a country of dropouts. We are doing all that heavy lifting, that stupid smart people pay to learn how to.

With educational system in shambles, it may be smart to drop out.

e smile s
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/05/05 08:29 PM

I do not know my IQ and I am not interested.

I find it no surprise that many of you know your IQ. Presumably this enables some of you to make up for your woefully inadequate lives. - 'Ah, I may be socially inept and a complete freak who has a fixation with gathering knowledge to help feel superior, but screw you - my IQ is 4000 you chimp.'

It is also very similar to the whole celebrity & media industry. You're special if you are beautiful and have the right things and wear the right clothes. Substitute IQ for image.

IQ is, for some, yet another form of snobery.

***I imagine it will be quite high as we are of an intelligent breed!*** -Point proven?

Taking an IQ test to rate yourself is a peculiar form of intellectual masterbation. I have always stayed away from that kind of prideful activity.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/06/05 09:17 PM

Woah!! Did I really write that? Must have got out of the wrong side of bed yesterday. I apologise for insulting people I don't even know.

Please disregard my comments.....

.....although I have seen enough people who do use IQ as a form of one upmanship.

Apologies,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/06/05 09:20 PM

Sorry - it's one-upmanship.

Will I get into trouble for triple posts?

Blacknad.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/06/05 09:20 PM

Well - I'll soon find out I presume.

Blacknad.
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/14/05 11:50 AM

Blacknad, do you have schizophrenia?

IQ tests only test your abilities with logical problems.
Is there a test that examines the right side of the brain?
(By ?right? I meant the opposite to left, and I?m not implying that logical reasoning is unimportant.)
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/14/05 03:45 PM

Rob asks:
"Blacknad, do you have schizophrenia?"

Blacknad ... this is the second person here, in the short time we have known you, that has thought this out loud.

You really should seek competent psychiatric intervention.

I don't say this as an insult but because you are, even in this controlled environment, causing people to question your mental health and successful treatment is quite common.

If what you've said of your past is true, and I've no reason to doubt you, your self assessment of your situation should not be trusted. Least of all by you.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/14/05 10:50 PM

Dan - Well, it wasn't the best foot to get off on but after reading as many posts as I have and seeing how people are sometimes talked down to with barely concealed contempt, (and I am not talking about people talking down to me), I am even more convinced that knowledge, (whilst positive and essential), can have a detrimental effect upon some people?s ability to relate with others, if they do not approach it with humility.

As for needing psychiatric help - I live a very stable life, am a married Father with a beautiful, well balanced daughter (who has a secure and confident personality). I hold down a challenging job and have a good social life. So quite balanced and stable in that area.

I can be impulsive at times and I get passionate about stuff (no bad thing) and this is the first proper forum I have bothered to post in, so forgive me for taking a little time to learn the etiquette.

I was upset at first when I came here. I had this idea of science types that was probably a little too romantic, and when I saw people trading insults in a way that I have not come into contact with in adult life, I felt angry - and responded negatively (of course my feelings were further impacted by the sheer amount of religion bashing that was going on - I am not used to that - if you actually knew me you would know that I am actually quite moderate and do not go around pushing my views down people's throat, in fact far from it - so I don't encounter anything like the stuff here that I thought was almost tantamount to hatred).

I suppose the anonymity of forums contributed somewhat, and it didn't really feel like I was insulting anyone. I would never say anything like it in my natural social interactions.

When I came back to it in a more chilled out mood the next day I was embarrassed at what I had written, so I apologised.

I am not too small to admit to having the ability to behave like a child on occasion - most men do - and there is certainly a fair amount of it here.

I hope that explains why I do not need psychiatric help and I am certainly not schizophrenic, although I used to be a counsellor, counselling schizophrenic teenagers - the closest I have come to schizophrenia.

Also I have apologised on more than one occasion for my comments ? I have not seen another apology in this forum so far, although one or two are definitely due.

And I think I trust my stability, by other's assessment surrounding me, as well as my own.

Dan, you misunderstand me.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/14/05 10:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Blacknad:
...
Do not take seriously what is being said out here. Besides, those who have something to say, will not waste typing time on insults.

Best,

es
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/14/05 11:04 PM

Thanks ES,

It's something my wife's always telling me - 'Don't take things so seriously'.

smile Blacknad
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/14/05 11:08 PM

Thanks ES,

It's something my wife's always telling me - 'Don't take things so seriously'.

smile Blacknad
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/18/05 01:07 PM

dude, you just wrote nine paragraphs explaining yourself and convincing us all that you're normal. Now you've posted the exact same message twice!! What are we to think?!
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/18/05 02:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Rob:
dude, you just wrote nine paragraphs explaining yourself and convincing us all that you're normal. Now you've posted the exact same message twice!! What are we to think?!
Don't rag the man, Rob. It's no big deal. Nothing serious, no harm done. Don't be so quick to be harsh on someone. You're gonna give the guy a complex. Anybody can have a bad day and make a double post. Nobody's perfect. He can delete one of them if he wants to edit the message himself.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/28/05 11:12 PM

Funny enough, you know the guy who invented the TV, had an IQ of 90. Is the measurement of an IQ actually accurate? I mean if one does the same test every year surely there will be an increase in points at least. Incidently, when only 12 years old, my official government monitored IQ was 160 (not that funny test you find on the internet, no the real IQ test, the ones with symbols and stuff.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 12:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
Incidently, when only 12 years old, my official government monitored IQ was 160
How old are you now? What career did you choose? Were you successful in it? Have you been disappointed, and had to change the direction? Sorry asking questions, but I am very interested, and it is impossible to get those answers without asking - unless you are a person of that high IQ.

e smile s
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 01:11 AM

When Richard Feynman was in high school his IQ was measured at 125.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 11:19 AM

How old are you now? What career did you choose? Were you successful in it? Have you been disappointed, and had to change the direction? Sorry asking questions, but I am very interested, and it is impossible to get those answers without asking - unless you are a person of that high IQ.

e s

To answer your many questions. I am 48 years old. I chose accountancy and was very successful. Yes I have had to change direction due to circumstances in my home country of Zimbabwe. However, does success measure one's IQ? I don't think so, if you go to countries like India and Pakistan (Where incidentally the first computer virus was actually invented) there are geniuses walking naked in the streets, some of these guys have IQs so high that they even seem stupid. Even their eyes are squint and their feet pigeon toed! Yet they can perform marvels with their minds. Unfortunately, due to circumstances I grew up in an orphanage. The nuns who ran the school which was private refused to allow the government to remove me from the school and put me in a special institution for 'intelligent' children. I never used to study at all and would come first or second (If I chose to). Some years ago the UN was running a competition where they wanted the result of a formula which was left half done. This was circulated to all the schools throughout the world. My daughter came and showed me the formula, I took one look at it and told her the answer is equivalent to Pythagoras's theorem. She laughed at me. I then proved it to her by calculation. She still didn't believe me. Well nine months later we read in the newspaper, that some guy in the States after years of research and with a fat book full of calculations had arrived at the same answer. My daughter was bashful. There you have it, what took an mathematics Graduate two years to calculate, took me two hours to work out. Can you spot the difference?
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 02:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
if you go to countries like India and Pakistan (Where incidentally the first computer virus was actually invented) there are geniuses walking naked in the streets, some of these guys have IQs so high that they even seem stupid.
Can you, for example, calculate 9673x9673 without computer and paper?

es
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 02:12 PM

Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 04:36 PM

Don't make me laugh, ofcourse I can, using logical ways of calculating such trivial amounts are easy to calculate. By the way, I worked with a guy from India, would could add millions in his head, and his IQ was onlt 128. When I go shopping for groceries with my wife, I always tell her exactly what the total of her groceries is, ofcourse because I am not under obligation sometimes I am a couple of pence out. Tee hee!
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 05:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
Don't make me laugh, ofcourse I can
Have you ever studied probability theory, or any higher Math at all?
Here is a little probability problem:
There is small bench that can accomodate two, overseeing a pond - in the park . Three ladies decided to come and sit there for 10 minutes, between 1pm and 2pm. They come there independently. What are the chances, that one of them will have to wait because bench is occupied by other two?

e smile s
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 10:15 PM

One in 6^3
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/29/05 10:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Amaranth Rose:
One in 6^3
Are there any other opinions?
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 12:28 AM

p = 1/216
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 01:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
p = 1/216
it is the same as 1 in 6^3

Ok, this is very low estimate.

The answer I come with is 16/216.

If one assumes that the ladies want to leave before 2pm, it is even higher, 13/125

So, did you study probability theory?

es
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 01:34 AM

What about if one lady arrived at 1:00pm and the second at 1:01 and the third at 1:12, none would have to wait. Yes I did study probability theory, however I know that it is actually wrong!
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 04:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
Yes I did study probability theory, however I know that it is actually wrong!
Sure, what other theories are actually wrong?

e smile s
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 12:54 PM

I would like to see Dr Sarah to try this probability problem
e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 04:17 PM

Because if you try to apply the theory to actual events you find it is way out. Do you agree that in a lottery where there are six balls out of forty-nine drawn according to the probability theory all have a one in 49 chance of coming. However after the first ball is drawn, it cannot come again, therefore the next probabilty becomes one in forty-eight, after the next one in forty-seven and so proceed ad infinitum. You even admitted when you worked on the three grannies that the probability changed if the grannies wanted to leave before 2 pm. That is the problem there are two many ifs and buts!

How many theories have been challenged and proven wrong. One day you'll see many of these proved wrong. We humans tend to think that just because some High IQ individual works out something its has to be true. If we look a little deeper we might find that actually it is a load of crap.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 06:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
That is the problem there are two many ifs and buts
You are a good example, that IQ brings individual only so far. Then one have to think and to learn and so forth.

e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 06:57 PM

To extrasense 'You don't say whether or not you agree with me in my viewpoint on probability.'
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 08:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
don't say whether or not you agree with me in my viewpoint on probability.
You have no say in the matter, since you are unable to solve the small problem I have suggested. It was a test, and you have failed.

e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 10:10 PM

I consider that you have failed!
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 10:15 PM

What about p = 6/216 is that better!
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 10:16 PM

or 1/36
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/30/05 10:17 PM

or P= 1
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 10/31/05 10:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
or P= 1
OK, I guess now you have cooled down a bit.

Let's say that there is only two ladies, and a bench just for one

What are the chances that one of the ladies will have to wait?

e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/01/05 12:49 AM

I guess my IQ is not as high as it used to be! Are the other factors still the same?
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/01/05 04:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
I guess my IQ is not as high as it used to be! Are the other factors still the same?
Yes, they are.
Posted by:

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/01/05 05:30 AM

"Some years ago the UN was running a competition where they wanted the result of a formula which was left half done. This was circulated to all the schools throughout the world. My daughter came and showed me the formula, I took one look at it and told her the answer is equivalent to Pythagoras's theorem. She laughed at me. I then proved it to her by calculation. She still didn't believe me. Well nine months later we read in the newspaper, that some guy in the States after years of research and with a fat book full of calculations had arrived at the same answer. My daughter was bashful. There you have it, what took an mathematics Graduate two years to calculate, took me two hours to work out." - "Philege"

Prove this claim. laugh
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/01/05 11:31 AM

Interesting problem, but it has a lot more to do with specialized training than intelligence.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/01/05 12:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheFallibleFiend:
Interesting problem, but it has a lot more to do with specialized training than intelligence.
Not at all. It needs just definitions, which are known to anybody who attended the first lecture on probability theory.
So, what is your answer?

e smile s
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/01/05 01:07 PM

Absolutely it has more to do with specialized training than intelligence. Knowing definitions IS specialized training, but even this is only part of the problem.

As you have already posted the correct answer I can only believe that you found this problem in a book which provided the result for you. It seems unlikely in the extreme that you could have figured it out yourself.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/01/05 01:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheFallibleFiend:
It seems unlikely in the extreme that you could have figured it out yourself.
You are not only fiend, you are deranged fiend.

e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/02/05 12:30 AM

I am still working on this one, I have already used five fullscaps!
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/02/05 12:32 AM

By the way, are you using a book?
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/02/05 01:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
By the way, are you using a book?
No, this is a problem our prof has brought up in the first lecture on probability.

He has shown us a solution for 2 ladies, and suggested we found solution for 3 ladies problem.

If you want, I can give you a solution for 2 ladies, and you would try to solve the 3 ladies case.

e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/02/05 09:03 PM

Okay, fire away.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/02/05 10:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege: Okay, fire away.
.....I.........................5/6
.....+-----------------------+
.....|........................./:::::|
.....|....................../:::::::|.5/6
.....|.................../:::::::/...|
.....|................/:::::::/......|
.....|............/:::::::/..........|
.....|.......,/:::::::/..............|
.....|..../:::::::/..................|
1/6.|./:::::::/.......................|
.....|::::::/........................|
.....|::::/...........................|
.....+----------------------+II
.........1/6
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/02/05 10:53 PM

Quote:
fire away.
So, the square represents all the possible combinations of arrival time for the ladies.

Only the figure in the middle marked with ":" symbols has one of the ladies waiting.

Its area is 1x1 -(5/6)x(5/6), which is 11/36.

es
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/05/05 12:20 AM

This does not quite compute, these cannot be ALL the possible combinations, surely even you can see that! How do you come up with the dimensions of the square and the possible combinations which are so obviously wrong. Can anyone else see this? Also what about if the other woman arrive 10 minutes and one second later in each of the possible ten minutes this would represent at least 5.4 possibilies in addition to any other combinations. So I don't quite agree with your answer. Please explain in more depth. Either that or I must be really thick!
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/05/05 12:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
Can anyone else see this?
Lets say the first lady came at 1:11 and the second one at 1:25

It would be represented by the point ( 11/60 , 25/60 ) inside the 1x1 square.

Let us ask the public, if anyone agree with me?

e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/05/05 11:26 PM

Well? We're waiting?
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/05/05 11:27 PM

Where are ALL the fat IQs out there?
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/05/05 11:28 PM

Doctor Sarah, Help!?
Posted by: Count Iblis II

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/07/05 06:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by extrasense:
Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
Don't make me laugh, ofcourse I can
Have you ever studied probability theory, or any higher Math at all?
Here is a little probability problem:
There is small bench that can accomodate two, overseeing a pond - in the park . Three ladies decided to come and sit there for 10 minutes, between 1pm and 2pm. They come there independently. What are the chances, that one of them will have to wait because bench is occupied by other two?

e smile s
2/27
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/08/05 12:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Count Iblis II:
2/27
This is correct. Congratulations!

How did you solve it?

e smile s
Posted by: Count Iblis II

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/08/05 12:35 AM

Here is how I did it (I tried to post this before but I got an error message due to the symbol for ''smaller'' or ''larger'' being recognised as an illegal HTML command.):

Write the probability as an integral over the arrival times denoted as t1, t2 and t3 for the three ladies, respectively. Imposing an ordering t1 smaller than t2 smaller than t3 would reduce the probability by a factor of 6 by symmetry so you can solve theproblem using this ordering and then multiply by 6. Then you split the problem for t1 below 5/6 and t1 between 5/6 and 1. In the first case t2 goes from t1 to t1 + 1/6 and t3 goes from t2 to t1 + 1/6 and in the second case t2 goes from t1 to 1 and t3 goes from t2 to 1.

To simplify the calculations you partially undo the imposed ordering that led to the factor 6. If you allow t2 to be come larger than t3 (i.e. you add contributions in the two cases for t2 and t3 interchanged), then you must replace the factor 6 by a factor 3 and the two cases become:

1) t2 goes from t1 to t1 + 1/6 and t3 goes from t1 to t1 + 1/6

2) t2 goes from t1 to 1 and t3 goes from t1 to 1.

The first case yields a probability of 5/6*1/6*1/6*3

The second case yields 1/3 (1/6)^3 * 3

Which gives the result of 2/27
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/08/05 02:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Count Iblis II:
Write the probability as an integral over the arrival times denoted as t1, t2 and t3 ...
This is a solution that requires, oh horror! eek , integrals!
Nevertheless, it was not that bad, was it?

Best,

e smile s
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/08/05 10:43 PM

Ehem! But extrasense you said you would show me the solution for this, what happened?
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/08/05 10:45 PM

Thanks count Iblis II.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/09/05 12:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
Thanks count Iblis II.
What is good about count's solution, is that it can be easily extended to 4, 5, .. ladies. And the gents too

e :p s
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/09/05 09:07 AM

Hi, can anybody say me, if programs and sites for IQ training are really useful?
I've just downloaded software for iq training from http://www.soft32.com/download_125585.html ,
however i don't know, if it is really possible to increase IQ up to 40% as they say.
I mean the following- if my current IQ is 100 (for example), after 3 months of training it will be 140. Ok, I'll start training again, and my IQ will increase up to 196. I'll train more and more- and finally my IQ score will be more than 1000 smile
How large IQ score scale actually is, does anybody know?
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/09/05 11:29 AM

I think it's limitless
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/09/05 10:50 PM

I think it's limitless


I don't think so, once you go over the brink, your IQ starts to reverse, and you know what that means.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/09/05 11:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Sam:
i don't know, if it is really possible to increase IQ up to 40% as they say.
It is a hoax, in a sense that your score might change a little, but not your IQ

e smile s
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/10/05 02:02 AM

Your score IS your IQ. But your intelligence probably hasn't increased - just your awareness of those kinds of problems.

IQ is probably not a good reflection of intelligence - any more than knowing how to solve problems in probability.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/10/05 11:24 PM

extrasense, Isn't it funny that you and I have the same rating on this forum?
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 11/10/05 11:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
extrasense, Isn't it funny that you and I have the same rating on this forum?
and some sense of humor too wink

es
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/14/05 05:56 PM

it's not funny. You are both worthy of your rating. Philege, why should you believe that "once you go over the brink, your IQ starts to reverse"?
Posted by: Lenore

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/15/05 12:29 AM

Perhaps Einstein was conducting the same experiment!
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/15/05 10:34 PM

it's not funny. You are both worthy of your rating. Philege, why should you believe that "once you go over the brink, your IQ starts to reverse"?

Well Rob, if you carry on trying to boost your IQ, you may find yourself getting stupider by the minute. Try it and see, you're half way there already.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/16/05 12:10 AM

Pot <=> Kettle <=> Black
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/16/05 01:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
Well Rob, if you carry on trying to boost your IQ, you may find yourself getting stupider by the minute. Try it and see, you're half way there already.
I like this

e wink s
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/17/05 02:55 AM

Well Rob, if you carry on trying to boost your IQ...

- How is he trying to boost his IQ?

...you may...

- Oh, so I take it he may not.

...find yourself getting stupider by the minute...

- What? Actually by the minute. What doesn't happen by the minute, or fraction of a minute? Or are you saying that he ratches up another couple of IQ points loss on the minute, every minute?

...Try it and see, you're half way there already.

- If he is half way there already, then obviously he has already tried it. Whatever IT is. And halfway to what? Oh, you mean halfway to getting supider by the minute - so he hasn't as yet become any more stupid - he still has another half to go, of doing whatever it is that he's doing - and then the stupidness will start to kick in.

Rob, I don't know what it is you are doing to boost your IQ, but you need to stop it now, because once you hit the point where your IQ starts to reduce, it's going to happen pretty quickly by the looks of it - by the minute. If we surmise that the loss will run at one point a minute, within a couple of hours you could be down to the IQ of a dog and if you're stupid enough to persist, (which I presume you now will be), you will rapidly progress to the point where you literally have no IQ.

But that won't be all bad. You too will be able to compose statements like this:

'Well Rob, if you carry on trying to boost your IQ, you may find yourself getting stupider by the minute. Try it and see, you're half way there already.'


Philege, try to stop insulting people. You do it often and it says more about you than the person you insult. I presume you are still young, and you will hopefully learn that there are better ways to communicate.


Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: bradp

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/20/05 08:39 PM

It is easy to learn words, its easy to use words to your advantage but to think those words are your own is stupid.AD morgan has a problem with his/her iQ(not so clever,smart ect..)I would put money on Rob but I dont bet. sorry if english is not so good.
Posted by: bradp

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/20/05 08:46 PM

the last time I did a IQ test I had every quest. correct and way within the time since I have been invited to think tanks.Just goes to show spend a little time studing IQ test and everyone thinks your smart.How many dumb people are there out there.If your believe in Einstein(IQ 104 1898) you are one of them.just made these words my own
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/21/05 10:07 PM

Philege, try to stop insulting people. You do it often and it says more about you than the person you insult. I presume you are still young, and you will hopefully learn that there are better ways to communicate.


Regards,

Blacknad.

Oh Blacknad, the knight in a [content deleted of shining armour, Rob has insulted me several times without a squeak or even a [content deleted] from you, I presume then that you have also been spending minutes trying to boost your IQ so you are also approaching the dog level that's why you can't see further than your nose. By the way you have insulted many other persons on this forum and in more ways than one especially with your views on Atheism. Rob asked me a silly question so I gave him an even sillier answer!
Posted by: jjw

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/23/05 12:00 AM

There is a need for more tolerance on some topics. I am not a selected arbitrator here but such an appointment seems to be called, for some one to help.

I recall in my youth young men that were not as yet educated that had innate talents comprising much of geometry. They were pool sharks. I was a pool player trying to avoid being pool bait. The multiple angels and potential contortions of a sphere when propelled from ball to ball and cushion to ball would be enough to make Newton hesitate. A few of these friends of mind could take one glance at the layout and then execute the proper position from which to put the entire sequence into action. They had the potential for winning almost all the time but the field had ingredients that were beyond anticipation. Some balls are not perfect spheres, some cushions were more resilient than others and humidity might affect the resistance of the table cloth.

I do not think my competitors had the same IQ that I had to start with but they had intelligence which, because of where they applied it made them winners. I was a hustler of some merit but not up to their skills.

The point here is that being courteous may be more important than either innate intelligence or a high IQ. You may find that more thoughtful replies will enlarge your image. None of my business but I had nothing else to do.
jjw
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/23/05 07:48 PM

Dear jj,

There is a substantial population of people who demand respect and refuse to give it; who are eager to give offense and eager to take it; who praise in themselves what they abhor in others; and who cherish above all else the right to be obnoxious with impunity. It is inevitable that some number of them will find their way onto The Net, that great soapbox upon which anyone might shout into a passing and indifferent crowd.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/24/05 12:56 PM

Blacknad.

I apologise for the foul remarks, please forgive me and I will try never to do it again. It was very unchristian of me.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/24/05 08:44 PM

"very unchristian" ... what a fascinating phrase.

Apparently intended to indicate that Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Animists, and others are free of all civil constraints and can behave in as foul a manner as they wish? Hey they're all going to hell anyway so what the .....

The self-serving hypocrisy of self-proclaimed Christians never fails to amaze me. But what the hell ... just pray for forgiveness and you will be forgiven to misbehave again and again and again and again. What a wonderful world.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/24/05 08:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DA Morgan:
"very unchristian" ... Apparently intended to indicate that Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, Animists, and others are free of all civil constraints and can behave in as foul a manner
You certainly are missing civil constraints, twisting Philege words.

I guess you are Jew-Animist laugh

ES
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/26/05 10:59 PM

"Pot <=> Kettle <=> Black"

REP: Pot <=>/ Kettle <=>/ Black

Legend:
<= :is implied by
=> :implies
<=> : implies and is implied by

*any of the above followed by a / means does not...
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/27/05 09:49 AM

Philege,

No problems - thanks for the apology - especially when I was without grace as well.

I think you meant UnChristlike - He exemplifies the way in which we should relate to each other, (not exclusive to Christians) - my mocking of your IQ statements was hardly in line with that.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Lenore

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/29/05 09:56 PM

Hey, where can I sign up to take part in this experiment?!?
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/30/05 09:05 PM

I make no claims that the invisible purple rhinoceros forgives anyone or anything.

But Christlike? Now there's another turn of a phrase. An entire church created to glovify the suffering of one man who had a really bad day.

But not nearly as painful as that experienced by the average cancer patient, day-after-day, for a period of years.

When the lazy self-aggrandizing [content deleted] wishes to make another appearance I'd like to suggest a real opportunity for suffering for him. How about bone cancer?
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/30/05 09:23 PM

I make no claims that the invisible purple rhinoceros forgives anyone or anything.

But Christlike? Now there's another turn of a phrase. An entire church created to glovify the suffering of one man who had a really bad day.

But not nearly as painful as that experienced by the average cancer patient, day-after-day, for a period of years.

When the lazy self-aggrandizing [content deleted] wishes to make another appearance I'd like to suggest a real opportunity for suffering for him. How about bone cancer?

I warn you D A Morgan, remember what happens to those who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete. Please do not offend us Christians by referring to our saviour in that way. May [content deleted] forgive you.
Posted by: extrasense

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/31/05 08:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Philege:
remember what happens to those who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit
It can not be worse than what has had already happen to mr Morgan: he lost his mind and decency.

es
Posted by: bradp

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/31/05 01:16 PM

Maybe Morgan is commenting from the frustration of experience. I am very sorry if that is the case. It would be silly to agree (with the obvious).
its obvious !!!!! Morgan 1 - Jesus 0
Posted by: bradp

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/31/05 01:22 PM

Blaspheme, Blaspheyou, Blaspheverybody! (E.Izzard)
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/31/05 10:17 PM

Dear Philege:

You really do need to get into contact with reality.

Your entity, according to your beliefs, killed every person on an entire planet save one family, many of those drowned innocent just born infants. Then for an encore slaughtered every male in an entire country, innocent as well as guilty. And then, to get its sick pleasure, it invented painful diseases like AIDS, malaria, leukemia, and bone cancer. Summing it all up in a book in which it boasts of its evil and sadistic behaviours.

What Philege would be the punishment we, as a civilized society, would visit upon one of our own that did such things? A trial at The Hague? Conviction? :ife in prison without possibility of parole or probation? I think so. Though personally, should we ever catch the deceitful genocidal maniac, I would not only suport the death penalty ... I would personally stand up and volunteer to carry it out.

So help me out here Philege ... in warning me ... are you throwing your lot in with the biggest master of sadism and genocide known to the entire universe? Seems that way to me.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/31/05 10:30 PM

I warn you D A Morgan, remember what happens to those who blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete. Please do not offend us Christians by referring to our saviour in that way. May [content deleted] forgive you

Amaranth Rose, how come you deleted what I wrote, which was not offensive but you leave D.A. Morgans filthy swearing [content deleted]on the site. He is referring to Jesus, how can you allow this?
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/31/05 10:40 PM

By the way do you give candy to your children when they disobey you (If you have any)
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 12/31/05 10:41 PM

Beware lest the [content deleted] allows the wicked one to consume you. You have been warned!
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/01/06 12:31 AM

To all forum netizens:
You have been warned before. Comments that are off topic will be deleted. Comments that contain certain alpha strings will be edited and/or deleted. If you wish to make comments on those matters there is ONE thread for all of that and this is not it.

You can cut out the threats and the namecalling too.

I will defend to the death your right to express yourselves WITHIN THE GUIDELINES OF THIS FORUM. NO EXCEPTIONS.

"Amaranth"
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/02/06 11:30 AM

Chris Maxwell,
Do you get as annoyed when people insult Sherlock Holmes, Ganesh, Homer Simpson, your intelligence?
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/02/06 07:28 PM

Chris ... I'm not insulting anyone dead or alive. I am stating the truth ... and telling the truth is neither an insult nor a sin in any relgion or culture.

This is a science forum ... and now that you have been sufficiently baited ... as in any other game of poker ... I call.

Did the entity you believe in murder every living person on the planet with the exception of members of a single family ... including innocent new-born children ... Yes or No?

Did the entity you believe in murder every first born male in an entire country ... including innocent new-born children ... Yes or No?

Did the entity you believe in, as creator of the universe, also create bone cancer? How about childhood leukemia? How about AIDS? Malaria? ... Yes or No?

Hypocrites are welcome to expound at length about what is wrong with me. Those with integrity are welcome to attempt to justify the murder of new-born infants.

Commit genocide?
That you defend!
Point out that the emperor has no clothes?
Oooooh that is an insult indeed.
Posted by:

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/03/06 03:17 PM

Those with great IQ's have less concentration
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/03/06 05:39 PM

I saw the movie the "Silence of the Lambs" ... what methinks we have here is the silence of the hypocrites.

Come on now Philege. Won't you stand up and defend the intentional, wanton, and senseless act of killing newborn children? Or the creation of every disease in the universe? Surely, as a true believer, you can do it. Don't be shy now ... surely it is your calling as defender of the faith.
Posted by: mark5

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/03/06 07:09 PM

DA,

At the risk of incurring your wrath, do you honestly believe you know what the truth is?

I have an excellent magnet on the refrigerator in my garage that says:

'Believe in those who seek the truth. Beware those who claim to have found it'

As an instructor of non-major Biology I have taught a general form of evolution for the past 5 years and only recently was questioned by a collegue (not associated with the particular community college) about my views on intelligent design.

At first I was vehemently against such a suggestion as it struck close to my athiestic leanings. But since I have cooled down I have had to ask myself if it is at all possible that ID was the way things happened. And I have concluded that it is unknown, just like the roots of evolution.

So, in my next set of lectures I imagine I will allude to ID as a possibility but not one that will be concentrated on in this class and leave it at that.

Also, even though I espouse athiestic beliefs, I know when the **** hits the fan, deep in my soul it is very hard not to reach out for some sort of helping hand (imagined or not).

In sum, I'm on your side of this discussion, but without the phlegm.

cheers,

mark
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/03/06 08:44 PM

I saw the movie the "Silence of the Lambs" ... what methinks we have here is the silence of the hypocrites.

Come on now Philege. Won't you stand up and defend the intentional, wanton, and senseless act of killing newborn children? Or the creation of every disease in the universe? Surely, as a true believer, you can do it. Don't be shy now ... surely it is your calling as defender of the faith.

Okay Mr. Morgan, I will defend the faith. What is the common denominator in both the events you write about. In both cases the people who incurred the wrath of the Almighty were warned again and again of the consequences of disobedience to the Word of God. They chose to defy Our Heavenly Father and received just punishment. This is the Creator we are speaking about. If you create something that becomes worthless to you what do you do. God created us for His purpose not for our own. Therefore if He wants us to do anything, I mean anything, we are obliged to do this. To understand why things are this way we must go back to the beginning. Man was under sentence of death due to Adam and Eve's disobedience, but God sought a way for us back to Him. The earth and everything in it was divorced from the heavenly realms due to Adam and Eve. Now to understand who causes the destruction and death on earth we must understand who is ruling the earth. Remember when satan took Jesus to the top of a High mountain and showed him all the kingdoms. He claimed that he would give all these to Jesus if He bowed down and worshipped him. Satan claimed that the earth was under his control. So now you can see who is the destroyer of men, giving God all the blame. But God will restore and can restore everything once the devil and his angels have had all their chance to prove they can rule this earth better than God. Then the day of Judgment will come, and those who have continually proved to be worthless will get their reward. Pharoah of Egypt chose to defy God, therefore he is to blame not God. If he had rightly let God's people go, nothing would have happened to him. He chose to kneel before stone idols and cry for help to them. No can you Mr. Morgan deny that when you do something wrong it affects you. If you deny that then you are a liar, inherently all men know deep inside what is wrong and what is right, and they know they have a choice, and they know that the choice has consequences, either favorable or not favorable. It is like the law of men. You know it is wrong to be a pedophile, or a thief or a murderer. If you commit these acts what do you expect to happen to you. It is no different with the Laws of God.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/03/06 08:50 PM

As for disease, the health laws prescribed in the Bible have been proven to be the best for mankind. God told His people how to avoid disease and unhealthy living. Man has chose his way and again with obvious consequences. Read the law of Moses, and you will see that God put in place healthy practices to avoid disease.
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/03/06 10:54 PM

Thanks Amaranth.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: protonman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 12:01 AM

Has it ever occurred to any of you that ID (intelligent design) could refer to design of human beings by a god or gods other than the Judeo-Christian god? There are many references in ancient writings to "gods" coming down from the sky.
The Great Pyramid at Giza looks exactly like a nuclear breeder reactor if the interior is studied closely. The ancient Egyptians could not have built it. We don't have the technology to build it today. So, could it have been engineered by "someone" from off planet? Someone that would have looked like "gods" to the ancient people? Someone who could have used the product of a nuclear breeder reactor?
I am an atheist, but I believe in the possibility of Intelligent Design.
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 12:39 PM

"I am an atheist, but I believe in the possibility of Intelligent Design."
...But to believe in ID as the origin of all life is preposterous -right?
Posted by: mark5

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 02:18 PM

Beliefs are not preposterous. But each set has fallacies, just as the belief system of SCIENCE has.

Anyone worth their salt will at least acknowledge the possibility of their belief system being off base for another individual.

But I don't think that is the point. In my opinion, as long as the belief system is working for that individual (without doing outright harm to others) then it is right for that person.

It is the act of believing that gives a lot of folks peace.

For myself, I believe that there are many things I will never understand, and coming to grips with the uncomfortable feeling of not having all the answers is a foundation for my athiesm.

I also think the word athiesm conjures up a lot of negative imagery involving evil. But not believing in gods includes not believing in a god of evil.

Although I disagree with almost everything Philege said previously, I do feel that nature drives the acts of man and he begins early to naturally assess right and wrong (and of course that changes over time and with circumstances).

I don't think the need and drive to survive has changed very much which, in my mind, results in some examples of the 'evil' we see.

regards,

mark
Posted by: Justine

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 03:50 PM

Posted by: protonman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 07:24 PM

The conventional, current Christian belief is that "God" created the entire Universe. This is pretty big order, and in my opinion, ridiculous. The Old Testament does not claim that "God" created the Universe, just Earth. That is possible.

Conventional Darwinism is that life originated on Earth and all life forms came into being by natural evolution. We do not know that. This Darwinism is as self centered as was the Roman Catholic Church in 1600 AD.

I held an absolute belief, for 40 years, that UFOs are impossible. I could argue the subject all day long. All of this came to an end in April, 2001, when astronomer Tom Van Flandern presented - in my mind - absolute proof of artificial structures on Mars. (Go to www.metaresearch.org). My belief and argument went into the waste basket.

I have not seen a UFO or had an encounter higher than the zeroth kind, but I must accept that UFOs are possible. Any reader, please tell me when in official human history did we go to Mars?

The possibility exists that we were "created" or designed or engineered by others. From our viewpoint they would appear to be gods. We could be a colony "seeded" for reasons not known to us.

Our history is truncated. Any reader, please show me official history records prior to about 4,000 BC.

Gregg Wilson
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 10:46 PM

Although I disagree with almost everything Philege said previously, I do feel that nature drives the acts of man and he begins early to naturally assess right and wrong (and of course that changes over time and with circumstances).

Mark5 Please eleaborate why?
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 10:48 PM

The conventional, current Christian belief is that "God" created the entire Universe. This is pretty big order, and in my opinion, ridiculous. The Old Testament does not claim that "God" created the Universe, just Earth. That is possible

Gregg Wilson

I beg your pardon! The old Testament in Psalms tell us that God created all the stars in the sky and can name them one by one. Read and see for yourself.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 10:58 PM

I held an absolute belief, for 40 years, that UFOs are impossible. I could argue the subject all day long. All of this came to an end in April, 2001, when astronomer Tom Van Flandern presented - in my mind - absolute proof of artificial structures on Mars. (Go to www.metaresearch.org). My belief and argument went into the waste basket.

I have not seen a UFO or had an encounter higher than the zeroth kind, but I must accept that UFOs are possible. Any reader, please tell me when in official human history did we go to Mars?

I have had encounters with aliens, and yet I still believe in God. Because even aliens were created by Him. If you read one of my earlier postings where there was a discussion on aliens I gave details about these encounters. In ancient times people mistook these for what we refer today to as angels. All other planets and habitations in the universe are in the spiritual realm of heaven. The earth has been removed from this realm and isolated till the end of time. Mars appears to us to be uninhabited, but on another dimension it is a vibrant planet full of life and much mor advanced than us. They live in accordance with the Laws of God and enjoy perfect harmony in Gods order of things. Read Jesus parable about Lazarus. When the wicked man was burning in Hell he asked Abraham if he could allow him to visit his relatives alive on earth to warn them that hell does exist. Abraham told him that there is a gulf between Heaven and the earth which cannot be breached.
Posted by: protonman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 11:04 PM

Wow! You have met aliens from other planets? My life is soooo.... boring.

Gregg Wilson
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 11:05 PM

I have not seen a UFO or had an encounter higher than the zeroth kind, but I must accept that UFOs are possible. Any reader, please tell me when in official human history did we go to Mars?

In the 1970s a man who used to work for NASA claimed he had a video tape of astronauts exploring Mars and that they found a primitive life form on Mar which burrowed underground. The mad was ridiculed by NASA. Unfortunately I don;t remeber any further details.
Posted by: Philege

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/04/06 11:07 PM

Wow! You have met aliens from other planets? My life is soooo.... boring.

Gregg Wilson

Certainly I can give you details of these encounters if you want.
Posted by: protonman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/05/06 12:24 AM

Testimony is not evidence. The scientific axiom is proof positive. Wait. I forgot...the is the religious forum...

Gregg Wilson
Posted by: mark5

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/05/06 03:06 PM

Philege,

There were two parts to my previous post: I disagree... & right vs wrong early. Which one did you want to discuss?

mark

ps Justine, thank you for your (edited?) comment.
Posted by: Justine

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/06/06 03:58 PM

Mark,

Sorry, that was a weird day for me. I posted something about how becoming comfortable with uncertainty would be the true path to serenity. . . but, when I tried it myself, my ego started to disintegrate...not a serene experience at all.
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/06/06 04:11 PM

" The scientific axiom is proof positive. "
No it isn't.
Posted by: protonman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/06/06 05:40 PM

TheFallibleFiend:

Okay. Let's have it your way. I say that there is a crater on the backside of the Moon and it is filled up with 75 Cadillac convertibles. That is the Truth. Jesus told me so. Now prove me wrong.

Gregg Wilson
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/06/06 06:10 PM

WARNING! ANYONE WHO HAS NOT SEEN VANILLA SKY SHOULD NOT READ THIS POST BECAUSE IT REVEALS THE ENDING. OR COVER UP THE MARKED AREA.

Protobon,
you're just copying dkv now. I say you are an idiot! Prove ME wrong.

It's impossible - because I may be an idiot myself, therefore any logical proof you give me I may ignore. Then you have all these definitions, ambiguities and misunderstandings to deal with... And finally,

STOP HERE!

there is always the possibility of a vanilla sky type situation in which nothing can be said to be truly real.

CONTINUE HERE:

Maths has limitations too. My maths with mechanics lecturer says that the statistics lecturers still argue over un-resolved methods of calculating certain things (I may have got the wrong end of the stick, if I have, please correct me)

My point: you can't give 100% proof of something being true or false. All you can do is weigh out the evidence for and against it, and BE LOGICAL in your final decision.
Posted by: protonman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/06/06 07:15 PM

This thread has degenerated to gibberish. Goodbye.
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/06/06 08:49 PM

Call it gibberish - If you can't admit it's true.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/24/06 05:51 AM

Good one Rob.
Posted by: TheFallibleFiend

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/24/06 08:40 PM

"Okay. Let's have it your way. I say that there is a crater on the backside of the Moon and it is filled up with 75 Cadillac convertibles. That is the Truth. Jesus told me so. Now prove me wrong."

That isn't "my" way. That isn't even remotely derivable from anything I said.
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/25/06 08:54 AM

"Okay. Let's have it your way. I say that there is a crater on the backside of the Moon and it is filled up with 75 Cadillac convertibles. That is the Truth. Jesus told me so. Now prove me wrong."

I could very easily prove you wrong by going to the moon and seeing, but since you are already there, could you spare me the trouble and just admit you were lying?
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/25/06 10:45 AM

Rob,

Explain to me how you, personally can get to the moon.

When did you join NASA's space program?

But I can save you the trouble - I can corroborate TFF's assertion, because Jesus told me about the Cadillacs as well - and I thought I was the only one who knew.

Blacknad.
Posted by: RM

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/25/06 12:56 PM

Stop picking out unimportant details.
I didn't mean I literally, I meant it as people in general...

You totally missed the point by the way?
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/26/06 06:47 AM

Explain to me how you, personally can get to the moon.
REP: Going to the Moon isnt easy if you wish to carry the bagage of Desires.
For NASA has accomplished something very commendable but they also realise that collecting dust isnt the only challenge before them when Sand Dune is beyond Human Comprehension of Yes and No.
Posted by: Justine

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/26/06 02:22 PM

DKV,
It's hard to interpret what you are saying here...but I wonder when you say, "Going to the moon isn't easy if you wish to carry the bagage of desires".

I wonder are you talking about how difficult it is to keep an objective mind when searching for truth?
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 01/27/06 03:22 PM

DKV: "Going to the Moon isnt easy if you wish to carry the baggage of Desires."

REP: DKV, you must realise that you are communicating with people who think in a Western Paradigm. We do not talk about scientific endeavour in terms of poetry and will simply not understand you if you continue to do so.

I find it very frustrating to read anything you post. The problem is that you use poetic language, which is fine for literature, but is way too obscure for conversations where you are trying to explore and reach conclusions. You can only communicate about such things by defining terms as precisely as you can. That is the beauty of language. The versatility of language is such that in its poetic form it can evoke a variety of feelings, meanings etc. from a few words strung together. But that is good only for poetry and literature. Dreamspeak is no good for reality.

Justine can make sense of what you say only because it is so very obscure. If I really wanted to, I could read things into it - as I can with the writings of Nostradamus. But its like art - sometimes its about what the viewer sees and not what the artist meant.

If you wish to engage with us and for people to engage with you, you must communicate in a more precise manner.

If not then we will continue to read all sorts of madness into your words - while Justine will see profound answers to life's great questions, and others will maybe just enjoy your poetry.

Regards,

Blacknad.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 03/08/06 04:05 PM

Dear DoctorSarah,

Assuming that your data (effect of cannabis on intelligence) has been peer reviewed, could you send me a link for it so that I might read the publication (I cannot find it on Pubmed?).

Just as a side note - perhaps you should talk to someone about the fact that you need to massage your ego on a public forum. I am a little embarrassed for you - and I am definately not the same breed as anyone in M*NSA - I let my work rather than my education or IQ (what ever that is?) do the talking

All the best

Charlie Farley
(Neuroendocrinology)
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 03/08/06 10:44 PM

Blacknad wrote about dvk:
"The problem is that you use poetic language, which is fine for literature, but is way too obscure for conversations where you are trying to explore and reach conclusions."

You think his nonsense poetry? I think it a lack of cognitive ability.

But if poetry it is it reminds me of a great Robert Heinlein quote:

"A poet who reads his verse in public may have other nasty habits."

For more Heinlein:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Robert_A._Heinlein
Posted by: Blacknad

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 03/08/06 11:27 PM

Hey, I didn't say it was good poetry, it just makes better poetry than it does science.

Blacknad.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 03/09/06 04:19 AM

And it makes a still better study of psychosis.

He's no poet and what you've read is not literary license. It is a cry in the dark for someone with a medical license.
Posted by: RichardS

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 04/03/06 02:49 PM

There is an interesting link about a machine that solves IQ Test, it does it quite well!
Have a look:
www.theiqchallenge.com
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 04/03/06 06:25 PM

Nice site. Though some of these, perhaps all, are being solved by brute force ... which is not the same as IQ.
Posted by: RichardS

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 04/04/06 07:56 AM

It doesn't seem to be brute force, have a look to their company's website:

www.kitbit.com

It's an AI company.
Cool...
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 04/04/06 05:20 PM

I did. But solving math expansions ...

1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ...

that is essentially brute force. Keep trying numbers and calculations until one fits.

Keep in mind the computer they have behind this site is not better than Deep Blue. It is not thinking.
Posted by: Rusty Rockets

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 04/05/06 02:23 AM

And the fact that it asks you for an answer to your problem when it cannot solve it only shows that it is building a database of possible answers, not working on some universally applied logical reasoning concepts.

I think that made sense...?
Posted by: Wolfman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 04/18/06 01:19 AM

I've seen too many lives wasted by pot smokers to dream about endorsing it. It seems to restrain ambition, an integral ingredient for a successful life.

I don't get caught up with IQ's, intellect is a resource, it's what you do with it that counts most. Having a brain IS a definite advantage. I've been in Mensa Canada and Isolated Mensa, but have let my membership lapse. For what it's worth, my own IQ is 141. A brain can also be somewhat of a disadvantage - nobody wants to watch "Jeopardy" with me.
Posted by: Anonymous

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 05/13/06 12:13 PM

Einstein said that education is what you have left when you forget everything you learned in school. Wasn't he a drop-out? There are some Charts and there are some statistics, but there are more of us than there are of them. I believe pigeon holes are for pigeons!
Posted by: Mysteron

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 07/17/06 07:36 AM

Wolfman, I love "Jeopardy"! I would gladly watch it with you.
About IQ and Intelligence, I think IQ tests are useless and inaccurate ways to measure a person's intelligence. I also think they are cruel and create a disturbing sense of superiority and inferiority in individuals with high and low IQ test scores, respectively. I fear society might one day end up like in the movie Gattaca (where people with the highest IQ's and superior genes are the elite ruling class).
I also think intelligence is relative and I think this quote really conveys my point:
"If the Aborigine were to craft an IQ test, presumably most of the Western world would fail it".
(Sorry I don't know the author, but it's a great quote.)
Thanks for reading.
Posted by: Wolfman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/18/06 08:20 PM

Mysteron, I'm serious about the "Jeopardy" comment. Countless times, I've had guests over and, as soon as they see Alex Trebek, they've gotta go!

Here's a little "Jeopardy" story from July, 2004 - An Engineer colleague and I were on a remote Island Group (I live in American Samoa) to do some Building Evaluations. We were staying at the only accomodations on the island, a B&B kind of thing. The only other guests were a pair of Marine Biologists who were doing a study of the Coral Reefs there. One had a Phd, the other was a Phd candidate. My Engineer partner has a Masters. The TV up there only receives one signal, a station that carries Jeopardy - a captive audience. It was great. I nailed around 90% of the Q's, including all three Bonus Q's and "Final Jeopardy", about average. The others got 5 between them.

As a much younger man, back in 1971, I spent some time at the Yirakalla Aboriginal Reserve in the Northern Territory of Australia. Let me tell you, I, for one, couldn't pass an Aboriginal IQ Test.

My two grown children were also Mensa members. Their experience was very similar to mine - other M's you meet at "Socials" are nice, smart certainly, but overall, pretty boring. They've led interesting lives; for example, when they were 13 1nd 15 respectively, I took them on a three month Mountain Bike Trip down the Yucatan Peninsula. The kids have also let their meberships lapse - too smart to shell out $40/year for a Newsletter.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/18/06 10:13 PM

Intelligence is not one thing.

Anytime you disagree consider the chance that Newton could have writen a Bach sonata.

It is very obvious looking at what is posted here at SAGG that a lot of people just are mentally incapable of understanding scientific concepts and the scientific method: They JUST DON'T GET IT.

It is much like in computer sci. where I teach. There are people that, try as they might, can not get Boolean logic. And yet they may be brilliant in their current careers.
Posted by: Wolfman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/18/06 11:46 PM

So right, DA. I remember reading a report that supported that line of thought back in the '60's. Some Socialogists had devised a non-verbal test that "measured" a person's Problem Solving Ability as well as Adaptability Level. Administered to various groups all over the Planet (Hey, I wish I was in on that study!) They determined that the ethnic group with the highest Problem Solving and Adaptability Quotient WAS.....the Inuit of Canada's High Arctic.

Years later, I damn near hit one of those guys while he Jay-walked right in front of me in Yellowknife, so I don't know how viable the test was.
Posted by: dehammer

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/18/06 11:48 PM

I agree with da here. i can proably run math circles around most here, but throw a few chemistry things at me and you might as well be talking ancient Sanskrit. i just cant understand a lot of them. dont know why, just cant.
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/19/06 08:30 PM

Wolfman ... it is about bell curves. The guy you almost hit ... far left. You'll note the other Inuits were smart enough to hide when they saw you coming. ;-)
Posted by: Wolfman

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/21/06 12:30 AM

I'm serious, it's the closest I've ever come to hitting a pedestrian. Broad daylight, a foot of snow on the ground, visibility was not a problem. I was backing out of a Parking Stall and he stepped right in front of me, looking the wrong way. A lot of Northern Inuit come down to Yellowknife, it's the administrative center for the NWT. Later, my aunt, a Social Worker up there, shrugged it off saying, "Oh yeah, you gotta watch those people from "Up North" they're clueless about traffic".
Posted by: DA Morgan

Re: IQ and Intelligence - 08/21/06 03:56 AM

Likely she was correct. No doubt that Inuit would have watched you approach a bear, camerca in hand, and thought ... well lets just say something remarkably similar.