Why black men have a bigger penis

**~~Nickelodeon~~** · 10-02-06, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by francois

There's a lot of evidence that IQ tests measure something very real in humans.

Yeah, it measures how good a person is at IQ tests.

**~~Roman~~** · 10-02-06, 04:51 PM

There's positive correlation between IQ tests and income.

**francois** · 10-02-06, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by Nickelodeon

Yeah, it measures how good a person is at IQ tests.

I'm amazed at how ignorant people are on these boards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq

Give this a good look, Nickelodeon. Read the section titled "practical validity." It lists a bunch of things that are correlated with IQ--many things you might not ever have thought of. One thing is generally true; the higher your IQ, the better.

**~~Satyr~~** · 10-02-06, 07:12 PM

Why do white men have such a fascination with black mens dicks?

**cole grey** · 10-02-06, 11:13 PM

Francois,
Look, I have said many times, on this very thread, that brain size is quite possibly a factor in possible intelligence levels, and/or IQ results, however, I have read about studies which find a correlation, and also studies which find no correlation, and this point is by no means settled. Most of the material which the racist websites point to has already been gone over and debunked by authors more informed than I, but that by no means shows that your example of a more recent study is not in fact a valid indicator of a correlation.

The fact remains that many other factors influence intellectual development: nutrition is very important; parental control; parental support; personal goal setting; availability of learning tools; the application of test-taking techniques; peer pressure (good and bad); societal goals for individuals; availability of personal teaching attention, tutors, and the like; pre-scholastic learning (like my mom teaching me to read); and a host of other negative and positive factors which are purpose-driven causative agents designed to increase intellectual abilities should be included.
Each of these influences can easily account for at least a tiny difference, if not, more realistically, a large difference, and when added up can account for differences in IQ tests, attributed by racists to brain size.

That is not even getting into the concerns people have posted about IQ tests being valid indicators of intelligence, g factor loading, and validity of other testing (for example, the famous book, "the bell curve" used a different test, AND eliminated one of the parts which did not help its case).
It also does not get into the problems people have raised about the validity of the test subjects used, and/or the application of various standards in examining data, which may or may not have been applied.

P.S. I am sorry I have acted so horribly at certain times during this discussion. I know that stupidity and meanness should not be given in kind, and I have failed to take this basic principle into account at all times, especially when dealing with racists. I apologize for my sometimes mean-spirited posts, which did not reflect a proper attitude towards all kinds of people.

P.P.S. This subject requires a more in depth discussion than what we have participated in to really explain the various ideas which are postulated by the people who have conducted these studies. When I have more than a few minutes in between other computer related tasks, I would be willing to go into it further with you, if you can accept my apology for being so rude.

**francois** · 10-02-06, 11:44 PM

Originally Posted by cole gray

I have read about studies which find a correlation, and also studies which find no correlation, and this point is by no means settled.

Could you please find some examples of studies which find no correlation?

Most of the material that the racist websites point to has already been gone over and debunked by authors more informed than I

Maybe you could be a little more specific. You mean, like the statistics have been debunked by other authors that are more informed that you?

The fact remains that many other factors influence intellectual development: nutrition is very important; parental control; parental support; personal goal setting; availability of learning tools; the application of test-taking techniques; peer pressure (good and bad); societal goals for individuals; availability of personal teaching attention, tutors, and the like; pre-scholastic learning (like my mom teaching me to read); and a host of other negative and positive factors which are purpose-driven causative agents designed to increase intellectual abilities should be included.

True, there are many environmental factors that influence and impact our development. But I'm willing to bet that they don't affect a person as much as you probably think. Obviously, environment can potentially have a huge impact on a person's development, especially in dire, adverse conditions, such as starvation or severe abuse. Children really are resilient little things. Extra coddling to a child isn't going to help it much. Reading to your child isn't going to make it smarter. Having your child listen to Beethoven while it's in the womb isn't going to make it smarter. These extra efforts aren't going to have any significant impacts on a child's development. For the average child to be physically changed in a big way, he must be abused or have suffered very hard privations. Ever read the book "A Child Called It"? Worst case of child abuse ever recorded in California (where the child survived, that is). And the kid remarkably grew up into a normal, even good, person. You can't say that kid grew up a wonderful man because he had a caring and nurturing environment.

P.S. I am sorry I have acted so horribly at certain times during this discussion. I know that stupidity and meanness should not be given in kind, and I have failed to take this basic principle into account at all times, especially when dealing with racists. I apologize for my sometimes mean-spirited posts, which did not reflect a proper attitude towards all kinds of people.

P.P.S. This subject requires a more in depth discussion than what we have participated in to really explain the various ideas which are postulated by the people who have conducted these studies. When I have more than a few minutes in between other computer related tasks, I would be willing to go into it further with you, if you can accept my apology for being so rude.

Apology accepted.

Why do you think brain size has very little to do with the racial differences in IQ? Is it that implausible?

**cole grey** · 10-02-06, 11:54 PM

Originally Posted by francois

Ever read the book "A Child Called It"? Worst case of child abuse ever recorded in California (where the child survived, that is). And the kid remarkably grew up into a normal, even good, person. You can't say that kid grew up a wonderful man because he had a caring and nurturing environment.

Remember what you said about exceptions?
You can't play both sides on that one, and you are going to have to come down very firmly on the "exceptions don't make the rule", to keep the brain size thing going .

Why do you think brain size has very little to do with the racial differences in IQ? Is it that implausible?

In the face of all the other factors? I think so.
But, I have to look up all the references I am talking about, and I don't have any time for serious pursuits right now. thanks for being understanding of my situation.

**~~Nickelodeon~~** · 10-03-06, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by francois

I'm amazed at how ignorant people are on these boards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq

Give this a good look, Nickelodeon. Read the section titled "practical validity." It lists a bunch of things that are correlated with IQ--many things you might not ever have thought of. One thing is generally true; the higher your IQ, the better.

Heights of parent and child = Medium Positive?

The discussion page for that item was interesting on "Race and intelligence 2"

**francois** · 10-03-06, 10:10 AM

Originally Posted by Nickelodeon

Heights of parent and child = Medium Positive?

The discussion page for that item was interesting on "Race and intelligence 2"

School grades and IQ 0.5
Total years of education and IQ 0.55
IQ and parental socioeconomic status 0.33
Job performance and IQ 0.54
Negative social outcomes and IQ −0.2
IQs of identical twins 0.86
IQs of husband and wife 0.4
Heights of parent and child 0.47

There's a lot more data where that came from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq

**francois** · 10-03-06, 10:12 AM

What does that exceptionally high correlation of IQ between identical twins mean to you, cole gray? Considering the correlation of IQ and siblings isn't nearly that high. Environment doesn't explain it since siblings grow up in the same environment. Intelligence is largely genetic. Einstein wasn't a genius because extra special care was given to him as a child. Same goes with any genius. A person will not be exceptionally smart because of any environmental factor.

**~~spuriousmonkey~~** · 10-03-06, 11:03 AM

IQ is not intelligence.

**francois** · 10-03-06, 12:24 PM

No shit. It's an intelligence indicator.

**~~spuriousmonkey~~** · 10-03-06, 12:35 PM

No, it is not.

It's a test to define how well you are doing at school. Or at least that is how it started.

Intelligent people will on average do better in school. That doesn't make the IQ test an indicator of intelligence perse, unless one keeps in mind the weakness of the test. That it is in fact largely cultural. I score lower on english IQ tests as on Dutch one. That didn't affect my brainsize, intelligence, or brain structure. It's just a cultural effect. Needless to say the average IQ test is designed for caucasian children raised under the western school system.

No shit.

**francois** · 10-03-06, 12:43 PM

You're incorrectly implying that culture and knowledge account entirely for a person's ability to score well on an IQ test. You're saying intelligence has nothing to do with it. Honestly, are you an idiot? Do you think the fact that Hume, Berkley and Bentham had IQs over 170 has nothing to do with their intelligence? nothing to do with it? at all?

Ugh.

**~~spuriousmonkey~~** · 10-03-06, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by francois

You're incorrectly implying that culture and knowledge account entirely for a person's ability to score well on an IQ test. You're saying intelligence has nothing to do with it. Honestly, are you an idiot? Do you think the fact that Hume, Berkley and Bentham had IQs over 170 has nothing to do with their intelligence? nothing to do with it? at all?

Ugh.

Are we starting like this again cocksucker first class?

We all know you are a fucking dumb piece of shit whose views are clouded by the putrid stinking worm you call your brain.

You dam well know what i am saying dildo face.

There are definitely cultural differences between ethnic groups in the USA which can easily explain the correlation between ethnic background and IQ test result.

However, since you seem to consist mainly out of biased biggotry you persist in your silly ideology. It must be race he screams with fire in his eyes.

You never even did my list. Because you can't. you can't prove anything. and now you have to result to insults.

You sir are indeed a first class piece of poo. One that smells of dead chipmunks and unwashed jockstraps.

**~~Count Sudoku~~** · 10-03-06, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey

No, it is not.

It's a test to define how well you are doing at school. Or at least that is how it started.

Intelligent people will on average do better in school. That doesn't make the IQ test an indicator of intelligence perse, unless one keeps in mind the weakness of the test. That it is in fact largely cultural. I score lower on english IQ tests as on Dutch one. That didn't affect my brainsize, intelligence, or brain structure. It's just a cultural effect. Needless to say the average IQ test is designed for caucasian children raised under the western school system.

No shit.

That explains why Japanese and NE Chinese people do slightly better on these tests.

**~~spuriousmonkey~~** · 10-03-06, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by Count Sudoku

That explains why Japanese and NE Chinese people do slightly better on these tests.

They study harder. dumbass.

**~~Count Sudoku~~** · 10-03-06, 02:22 PM

Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey

They study harder. dumbass.

Hmmm, so blacks study less then?

**~~spuriousmonkey~~** · 10-03-06, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by Count Sudoku

Hmmm, so blacks study less then?

Could well be.

Could also be that they end up in the shit schools on average more than others.

Could also be that they speak a language that is different from the white population.

So many possible reasons. Shame the shit in your brain prevents you from seeing more than one.

**~~Count Sudoku~~** · 10-03-06, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey

Could well be.

Could also be that they end up in the shit schools on average more than others.

Could also be that they speak a language that is different from the white population.

So many possible reasons. Shame the shit in your brain prevents you from seeing more than one.

I know you are, but what am I?

Anyway, hold on to your delusions. I believe this about sums up your position.

correlation vs. causation (also “correlation is not causation") ostrich tactic commonly employed by race-deniers when confronted by Occam’s razor or plain common sense