Who is ignorant? If I am, what don't I know? Enlighten me.

 

2009 Math SAT Scores Are In: Gender Gap Persists

SAT test scores for 2009 were released today by the College Board, and the male-female gender gap for the mathematics test increased to 35 points to the highest level since 2004, reversing the narrowing gender gap over the previous 4 years (see bottom chart above). The average male score for the math exam was 534 points compared to the average female score of 499 points (see top chart above). What should also be noted is:

1. The variability of male math test scores (standard deviation of 118) was significantly higher than the variability of female math test scores (standard deviation of 112).

2. For math test scores above 700, males outnumbered females by a ratio slightly greater than 2:1 (8.7% of males vs. 4.32% of females scored above 700).

3. Females have higher overall GPAs than males, 3.39 vs. 3.24, and females outnumber males at the highest GPAs: more than 60% of students with GPAs equivalent to A and A+ are female.

4. For mathematics courses only, female and male students both have average GPAs of 3.14.

Bottom Line: Based on both overall GPAs and GPAs for math courses, we would expect female students to perform as well as, or better than, males on the math SAT exam, and yet we find exactly the opposite: a gender gap on the math exam in favor of males that persists over time.
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/08/2009-math-sat-scores-are-in-gender-gap.html

 

.














As doggo has pointed out that we are all to scared to voice our true feelings I have left open the space above for our master of facts to fill in my true believes on the subject, as doggo obviously knows me better than I know myself

 

Do you know I really can't. Not can't be bothered, I Just can't..I can't prove you wrong, or show that you have mastered the subject and understand it fully..I just can't simply because whatever I or anyone else posts you come back with so much self importance in yourself and your self belief that you and you alone are right it's pointless to discuss, debate or even argue with you..

The real problem is you are just so dull, so boring,so desperately depressing it turns people off even bothering..

Thats a very sad reflection of a human being..

So take yourself as seriously as you like, believe your own hype and keep boring us to sobs..Plainly you are far more informed than anyone else here or in the known world that cares to post here..and keep on tap dancing between opinions and viewpoints..And dont bother asking me, I am not going to respond to you any further..Its not that I dont like you, I dont actually care, you have successfully turned me off and killed any interest in this subject as you back and forth between the goal posts..

You are death to the soul, you must be desperately lonely or lacking in some way and what's really sad is I honestly couldn't care less about you as a human being and that is the saddest part of all..

Really don't bother, but do think..

 

Fallacy: Straw Man

Because Charles Murray and others of like mind do not base their arguments on phrenology it is irrelevant.

Bringing up phrenology can probably be considered an example of the straw man fallacy.

-------------

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

Person A has position X.
Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
Person B attacks position Y.
Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

An anthology of efforts to refute The Bell Curve would make an excellent source book for a college course in logic and semantics.

Fallacies used in those efforts include ad hominem, appeal to authority (this is stumbler's favorite fallacy), appeal to consequences of belief, appeal to emotion, personal attack, the list continues.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

 

Fallacy: Personal Attack

You cared enough to post this thread which is a typical flame attack that is frequently directed against me by those who are unable to refute my arguments. Like the others who flame me you presented no facts, no insights, only childish insults.

Yours is an example of the personal attack fallacy.

-----------

A personal attack is committed when a person substitutes abusive remarks for evidence when attacking another person's claim or claims. This line of "reasoning" is fallacious because the attack is directed at the person making the claim and not the claim itself. The truth value of a claim is independent of the person making the claim.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/personal-attack.html

 

I didn't post this thread, somone else did, I posted in this thread..Secondly I didnt use childish insults that was your friend ballers talent, you really do bore me to sobs..and as I already said I can't refute or debate with you ..I said that three or four times fairly clearly..

Its not flaming..its honesty. you are just too intelligent to realise it...thats the trouble with clever people, they are just too caught up in their own genuis.

 

No, no, no. It is not a straw. That is not the point at all.

The point is that pseudoscientific attempts have been made, throughout history, to assign stratified levels of cognitive ability to groups. Phrenology is just a relatively recent example, and as theories go, it took several decades to conclusively debunk.

The statistics of Murray and Herrnstein are sound, and so the conclusions inferred by those statistics are more deeply entrenched, are more insidious, and will be much harder to conclusively debunk than phrenology.

Yet I am convinced that as the field of cognitive neuroscience advances, we will see a conclusive debunking of the notion that whites are "smarter" than blacks.

My reasons for this position are twofold.

First, I have an informed knowledge and appreciation for the developmental physiology of the brain. (My work in software languages crosses over into the field of artificial intelligence and neural modeling.) With that background has come an appreciation for the brain's complexity and its sensitivity to perturbation. (I.e., its parts are critically interconnected and interdependent throughout its development, and tampering with the formula is much more likely to render it entirely inoperable than to improve it.)

Second, the prior point implies that there has not been enough time, in evolutionary terms, for intelligence to have diverged on racial lines. Genetic mutation almost always renders the brain entirely inoperable (for instance, in cases of prosencephaly and the like). Certainly there has not been enough time for improvements to propagate and branch through entire populi, and as for the notion that intelligence could have improved among sub-branches, such as the Ashkenazi, who have only been around for 5,000 or so years, well that is utterly absurd.

I happen to think that the appeal to evolution makes a strong rebuttal. Yet I also concede that it does not prove that whites, blacks, and Asians have essentially equivalent intrinsic intelligence.

Proof requires a precise definition of the neural correlates of consciousness and cognition. (In the field of cognitive neuroscience, this essentially means that we need a precise schematic of how our brains are wired so as to make us be us.)

Phrenology was easy to debunk. The proof that you require is much harder, and will take decades at the current rate of progress. Yet I am saying that your use of the science of Murray/Herrnstein is qualitatively no different than the Victorian use of phrenology to justify the subjugation of women; the difference is only in terms of degree.

 

I have neither cracked a book nor consulted the Internet for a single word of any of the posts that I have made on this thread. (Apart from the popular article in the WSJ, of course, which I properly cited.)

It has all been my own words, from background knowledge.

I could, however, cite sources for you, if you want them. I have a great many cognitive neurosci books, and I have read them all.

And the stuff about phrenology and Harriet Taylor comes from Victorian Firebrand, by Reeves (the 2008 Mill biography, which I have recently read, greatly enjoyed, and have largely retained as a result).

BiSexManBud might be correct that you are beyond hope, but my glass is half full, and I am giving it the college try. You are not beyond redemption.

 

LMAO!!!!!!

Just caught this.

What? Because I happen to agree with Stumbler and Kimi on this topic, I'm kissing their asses?

Sheesh. You've stooped to a new low on that one!

 

The 10,000 Year Explosion

The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution, by University of Utah professors Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending, explains the evolution of superior intelligence, and racial differences.

http://the10000yearexplosion.com/

Because I read the book and understand it I will not tell you to read it. I will explain it in my own words. I have minor disagreements with it, but I think the central thrust of the book is valid.

During the past ten thousand years human evolution has accelerated for two reasons: first, the human population has grown dramatically, and a large gene pool provides more scope for beneficial mutations; second, agriculture, which began ten thousand years ago, and urban civilization, which began five thousand years ago, have exerted different population pressures than the paleolithic existence that shaped human evolution for at least five million years.

Agriculture requires the ability to plan for the future, to endure long hours of tedium, and to defer gratification, among other things. Urban civilization places a premium on superior intelligence because men who are more intelligent become successful merchants, government officials, artists, and so on, and can provide better for their children than manual laborers. Also, the criminal justice system of a civilized nation gradually removes those with criminal inclinations from the opportunity to reproduce.

However, different populations groups have practiced agriculture and civilization for different amounts of time. As a rule, those who have practiced both the longest have higher average IQs, and lower crime rates.

In ten thousand years there are about 400 generations. This is plenty of time for significant biological changes to take place.

As far as Ashkenazic Jews are concerned, professors Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending have pioneered the study of the relationship between genetic diseases that are found almost uniquely among Ashkenazim, and superior intelligence. Their argument is that the diseases are caused by genes that are dominant for superior intelligence, and recessive for the various diseases. If you have one of the genes you are more intelligent than you would otherwise be. If you have both, you are more intelligent, and you have the disease. In other words, the genes are passed the same way genes for sickle cell anemia are passed. Those genes provide resistance to malaria.

For about one thousand years Jews living in central Europe were excluded because of religious persecution from owning land, and from most trades. This required them to support themselves as merchants and money lenders. These fields require superior intelligence. Jews who could not learn the necessary skills either did not survive, or they left the faith. Also, periodic pogroms required Jews to survive by their wits, learning new languages quickly, and so on. Because the pressure for superior intelligence was so severe, evolution in that direction was partially assisted by dangerous genes. A slower process would have been genetically benign, because there would be more time to get the dangerous genes out of the gene pool.

 

I think Clarise wins this discussion. I want to talk more to her about physics problems, instead of this waste of time debate on race.

 

Thanks.

But DL is one of my few XNXX friends, and I have not given up on him.

 

You have 46 posters on your Friends's List.

Have you considered my most recent post yet?

 

If you want to discuss physics, start your own thread. This one is about The Bell Curve.

 

DL! Please! Accelerated evolution of the most complicated structure in the known universe, in 10,000 years? In four hundred generations?

Think, DL!!! THINK!!!!!

More than 400 generations are needed to produce a new strain of the flu. And you really believe the Ashkenazi developed into a super-intelligent race over that span?

It took the human race 50,000 years just to find America!

Cochran and Harpending are quacks. I'm sorry. I know that's cold and hard, but that's the only way to say it.

I won't even get into the dubiousness of their central premise- that any single gene could be responsible for intelligence, when dozens of genes are known to interact in highly interdependent fashion for every phase of prenatal development.

They're just quacks. Okay?

A good senior undergraduate level survey: Fundamental Neuroscience, ed. Squire, Berg, Bloom, et. al., Academic Press.

A great graduate level book on prenatal brain development: Fundamental Brain Development, Stiles, Harvard.

A great graduate level book on structural interconnectedness: Exploring the Thalamus and Its Role in Cortical Function, Sherman and Guillery, MIT.

An armchair (popular level) book on interconnectedness and consciousness (fluff, but the author is a Nobel Prize winner!!!): Wider Than the Sky, Edelman, Yale.

A great book for our friend Zen River Otter, or for anyone who might get into a bit of Kerouac with their brain science: Zen and the Brain, Austin, MIT.

Great graduate level books on the evolution of language and symbolics: Advances in Genetic Programming (series), Specter, Langdon, et. al., MIT.

Okay. And now, I really am done with this. I know we've done it to death when you tell me, in all seriousness, that the world might as well have been created 10,000 years ago. :excited:

 

DL has been assaulted by Black people. I think his mind has set up a barrier in order to quantify the actions of others. It acts a defence mechanism or an explanation to understand the why those things happened. If he can gauge black people to be on average intellectually inferior to him, it helps provide reasoning behind the attacks, and helps him cope with what happened.

Will be tough to change his mind. I don't think DL is a bad person, he's just damaged.


(Obviously this is just my opinion)

 

I know you have no use for my novels and poetry, and I am okay with that, but you are in the minority in that respect as well. My first e-novel (Nascent, the one you hate) is doing great on Kindle, Barnes & Noble, and will soon be going up on iTunes/iBooks!!

 

Animal breeders can do wonders with far fewer than 400 generations. Microorganisms are constantly evolving in order to counter antibiotics and human antibodies.

 

In 2005, offending rates [for murder] for blacks were more than 7 times higher than the rates for whites.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/race.cfm