Brazil84 doesn't get what's wrong with the claim that majorities of sub-saharan africans are retards

[QuickSilver]

@brazil84

So you believe that improvements in nutrition and education (e.g. iodization of salt) played no role in any increase in IQs in the United States between the 1930s and the present?

No, what are YOU talking about?? Jesus, you’re a fucking retard. :smack:

[running_coach]

@Bryan_Ekers

I’m not sure you have that great a handle on statistics.

He doesn’t have a great handle on anything.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Is brazil now recognizing that environmental factors play a larger role in IQ measurement than genetics? That would be quite an improvement for him.

[armedmonkey]

I seem to remember that some Brazilian scientists did work with artificially increasing IQ using “reverse phrenology”. The idea being that if phrenology can measure IQ by looking at the bumps on someone’s head, you ought to be able to increase IQ by creating the bumps artificially through hitting somebody repeatedly in the head with a hammer. There was also something about test subject 84, but I’ll have to look up the study.

[brazil84]

@truthSeeker2

Yes, it is nearly equal.

For ex. If a million poor kids from south asia are taken and raised in any host country, you will find their average IQ when they grow up will resemble the average IQ of the host country.

That’s an answer to a different question from the one I asked. I’m not asking about what would happen in some hypothetical – I’m simply asking if Rickjay’s position is that the average IQ in all countries is the same.

[brazil84]

@runner pat

Cognitive improvement, not native intelligence.

Does that mean yes or no?

If you’ve had a bad night’s sleep, has your actual IQ gone down?

Well it would depend on how one defines “IQ.” I’ve been presented with a claim that the average IQ in the United States in the 1930s was 80 and now it’s close to 100.

It sounds like you are saying that things like iodization of salt and improvements in education did not play a role in this increase. Or did I misunderstand you?

Or is that possible in your case?

Lol, nice ad homenim.

[brazil84]

@armedmonkey

I seem to remember that some Brazilian scientists did work with artificially increasing IQ using “reverse phrenology”. The idea being that if phrenology can measure IQ by looking at the bumps on someone’s head, you ought to be able to increase IQ by creating the bumps artificially through hitting somebody repeatedly in the head with a hammer. There was also something about test subject 84, but I’ll have to look up the study.

Lol, I guess that means you are unable to cite this mythical prior post in which you specifically stated that a particular cite provided that US IQ in the 1930s was about 80. And in which you specifically stated that the United States was far from non-functional at the time.

Looks like you are the one with the reading comprehension problem. Actually it’s probably more of a wishful thinking problem.

[sylmar]

snip

@magellan01

Yes, I do. BUt the question is, how do you know they are lying? And “knowingly lie” is redundant. Lying is knowingly relating an untruth. If you don’t know/believe it to be untrue, it is not a lie, it is simply a wrong statement. So, do you have some new device to determine who on the internet is lying, i.e., knowingly relaying a falsehood?

Come one, come all! And witness Mags~ Pointless, long winded, bombastic hair splitter extraordinaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiire!!

snip

@magellan01

I hope you’re able to realize how wrong you are now. If not, I won’t be surprised.

Yeah Karrius! What’s with the bigotry against bigots?

I love you Mags… Don’t ever change.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Did anyone claim the IQs were “the same” ? I see a few reasonable qualifiers like “resemble”, but expecting an exact match is unsupported - not because of any particular ethnic or racial difference, but just because of the random variation of sampling. It’d be pretty improbable to measure one population and get a number, then measure another and get the same number. Heck, it’d be pretty improbable to measure a population, get a number, measure the same population a week later and get the same number.

[armedmonkey]

@brazil84

Lol, I guess that means you are unable to cite this mythical prior post in which you specifically stated that a particular cite provided that US IQ in the 1930s was about 80.

It was in my post, you dumbass. It’s post #101, the very first post on the third page. I’ll quote the relevant part

@armedmonkey

I wonder if the Flynn Effect is in play here.l

You see how the words “Flynn Effect” are a different color? That means it’s a link. That means it’s a cite. The cite is right there, you fucking moron. I’ve already pointed this out to you once. If you follow the link, you will see that the second paragraph under the subheading “rise in IQ” says

Ulric Neisser estimates that using the IQ values of today the average IQ of the United States in 1932, according to the first Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales standardization sample, was 80. Neisser states that “Hardly any of them would have scored ‘very superior,’ but nearly one-quarter would have appeared to be ‘deficient.’” He also writes that “Test scores are certainly going up all over the world, but whether intelligence itself has risen remains controversial.”

[brazil84]

@armedmonkey

It was in my post, you dumbass. It’s post #101, the very first post on the third page. I’ll quote the relevant partYou see how the words “Flynn Effect” are a different color? That means it’s a link. That means it’s a cite. The cite is right there, you fucking moron. I’ve already pointed this out to you once. If you follow the link, you will see that the second paragraph under the subheading “rise in IQ” says

Nice attempt at weaseling.

There was nothing in your post where stated that the 80 IQ estimate came from your cite. You provided a link, and a couple paragraphs later in the post stated the following:

Measuring IQ has its uses, but (Brazil84, you need to pay attention to this) it’s less a measurement of intelligence than it is of skill. People in the 1930’s score about an 80 on IQ tests, as we measure it today. That’s functionally retarded.

Thus, it was completely reasonable for me to ask for a cite.

Subsequently you paraphrased yourself as follows:

[cite] says ABC.

That’s simply not what you said. Rather than apologizing, you doubled down by hurling insults.

Anyway, I have no interest in engaging with someone who insists on misrepresenting what he said earlier.

Goodbye, liar.

[armedmonkey]

@brazil84

Goodbye, liar.

I think I’m on his ignore list, now. That’s made me so happy.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@armedmonkey

It was in my post, you dumbass. It’s post #101, the very first post on the third page. I’ll quote the relevant partYou see how the words “Flynn Effect” are a different color? That means it’s a link. That means it’s a cite. The cite is right there, you fucking moron. I’ve already pointed this out to you once. If you follow the link, you will see that the second paragraph under the subheading “rise in IQ” says

Now you’ve done it. He’ll put you on his banned list, so now he will never see the link!

ETA: Ohhhhh Just saw page 4! Called it!!!

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@RickJay

There’s a Shell station advertising “V-Power” gas, just like they do here. People are driving well-maintained cars (almost all the cars are white, for some reason.)

I think Brazil would explain that by maintaining that they are all Smart Cars.

[The_Second_Stone]

How can I get on this ignore list of honor?

Let me give it a try. IQ testing seems to infer literacy and an education. For someone to score 85 on such a test without literacy and formal education would make them a freaking mind boggling genius. Why are us internet posters so much more stupid? With our literacy and educamations, shouldn’t we be all well over 200 compared to these dummies?

[GIGObuster]

And now **armedmonkey **joins the club!

Really, the brazil nut is a willful ignorant, so much so that any supported contradictory information will be dismissed by him just because it is not presented in the way he demands.

[Dissonance]

@Bryan_Ekers

@brazil84

If every last person were mentally retarded, you might have a point. However, even in a country with an average IQ of 70, there will be a lot of people of high intelligence.

I’m not sure you have that great a handle on statistics.

What are you talking about? Of course he does. Why, for every person of normal intelligence, there would only have to be another person with an IQ of 40. And for every person of high intelligence, say 140, you’d just need one person with an IQ of 0 to offset it.

What bothers me is that I’m still not on Brazilnut’s list even after insulting him repeatedly. I know this because I accidentally summoned the beast by mentioning his name, which he found on a vanity search. I think calling him a white supremacist is giving him too much credit; he’s just delusional and incapable of basic logic. He could be a racist as well, but the vanity search on his own name that summoned him was when I was pointing out that contrary to the old saw that you can’t criticize Israel here without being called an anti-Semite, when called on to provide examples of this the only one to be found was by our own Brazilnut, saying in the BBQ pit that he thinks criticism of Israel is motivated by anti-Semitism. Jews are pretty high up there on the list for white supremacists. So I’d have to say delusional, racist and a fucking imbecile, but probably not a white supremacist. With how often he uses ‘lol’ I’m not sure he’s even gone through puberty.

[septimus]

First let me apologize for ignoring this Pitting until now. When the thread got up to almost 160 posts, I finally clicked to see what all the fuss was about. Naturally I started at the end.

@brazil84

Nice attempt at weaseling.

There was nothing in your post where stated that the 80 IQ estimate came from your cite. You provided a link, and a couple paragraphs later in the post stated the following:…

Anyway, I have no interest in engaging with someone who insists on misrepresenting what he said earlier.

Goodbye, liar.

The post in question was:

@armedmonkey

Sub-saharan countries score lower on IQ tests, but I wonder if the Flynn Effect is in play here.

The sentence mentions a lower IQ score and links to a possible reason. To imagine that this was not an intended cite and to make a pompous wrong-headed response without even clicking the link shows arrogance and no desire to learn or even understand opposing viewpoints.

There was no misrepresentation; there was no lie.

I’m afraid brazil84 has always been “beneath my radar” – just too ignorant and pompous to bother reading, let alone Pitting – but let me make amends now.

You really are a pretentious dolt, brazil84. Since the thread is about IQ levels, I’ll guess yours probably is a full 100. That’s what’s so sad: If you were a clinical moron, you’d have an excuse. Instead you’re just another bitter old fool, with verbal diarrhea compensating for mental constipation.

[running_coach]

@brazil84

There was nothing in your post where stated that the 80 IQ estimate came from your cite. You provided a link, <snip>

And you never thought to read the link.

[brazil84]

@septimus

The sentence mentions a lower IQ score and links to a possible reason. To imagine that this was not an intended cite and to make a pompous wrong-headed response without even clicking the link shows arrogance and no desire to learn or even understand opposing viewpoints.

Lol, here was my “pompous wrong-headed response”:

That’s an interesting point; do you happen to have a cite for the claim that the average IQ in the US in the 1930s was about 80?

i.e. a polite request for a cite.

Looks to me like you are engaged in projection, i.e. you arrogantly dismissed my polite response as “pompous” and “wrong-headed” because you reject what you presume to be my position without the slightest desire to understand what I am actually saying.

You really are a pretentious dolt, brazil84. Since the thread is about IQ levels, I’ll guess yours probably is a full 100. That’s what’s so sad: If you were a clinical moron, you’d have an excuse. Instead you’re just another bitter old fool, with verbal diarrhea compensating for mental constipation.

More projection, I imagine. Sorry that you feel that way about yourself.