Yes, that list was part of the premise of the op. 26% of world total, 37% of US total of, in the case that you linked to, Nobel Prize Winners in Physics (you could do Economics and see 41% of world total, 53% of US total, even the least, the Peace Prize, has 9% of world total, 10% of US total). And the question of the op was: why percents that are so much greater than their representation in the world or in the United States respectively?
Your answer is that it is because the list includes those who are one quarter and half Jewish?
That’s not my answer, but if you say that high income has nothing to do with intelligence then winning the Nobel Prize hasn’t any relation with intelligence either.
Very high IQ has a correlation with middle-class income. My theory is that these scores are sometimes more an indication of focus on raw academic skills rather than an indication of pure talent.
On the other hand, mere high IQ does have a correlation with high income. My theory of course is that these individuals tend to be more well-rounded with people skills.
I would think that Nobel Prize winners would test very high rather than simply high for IQ (despite whatever their “actual” intelligence is), because IQ tests do tend to favor those with high academic knowledge.
Of 130 Jewish NP in for Chemistry-Physics-Medicine combined (one convert to Judaism discounted):
115 had two Jewish parents
15 had one Jewish parent
Another way of looking at it is that 94% of the parents of the 130 were Jews. I do not think that significantly
diminishes the statistical dominance of Jewish NP winners.
Richard Feynman is easily the last great scientist of the 20th century, yet his IQ was only 125. The number of Nobel Prize laureates is meaningless IQ-wise.
Okay, so your response to the op and the subject of this thread is not based on the ocassional non-Jewish parent of Jewish Nobel Prize Winners (or, I presume, of the 25% of Japan’s Kyoto Prize winners that have been Jewish, or the 38% of the winners of the U.S. National Medal of Science).
What is your response to the actual subject of this thread?
Is it now that winning these prizes “is meaningless”?
No, that merely suggests that IQ is, at best, a rather imperfect measure of a person’s intelligence.
Anyone, in your short time on this thread you have made reckless charges which you’ve repeatedly refused to provide citations for and when challenged responded with racial slurs.
You do little to inspire confidence in the idea that you’re here to engage in honest debate, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.
So, please provide a link to back you your claim regarding the family incomes of different ethnic groups and provide a link to show that low-caste Hindus are “genetically” different than high-caste Hindus.
Feynman’s Caltech colleague Murray Gell-Mann of “Quark” fame (look it up)
might take umbrage at that, and so might other NB luminaries such as
Steven Weinberg (Jew), Sheldon Glashow (Jew) and Abdus Salaam (Muslim).
Futhermore, any IQ test grading Feynman as low as 125 is invalid. Feynman
deserved more than that for his mathematical ability alone.
BTW, don’t know where you get that $150K bit and doubt you will come up with a cite for it, but here is some real information on salaries that scientists make. Solidly middle class.
As to the nature of the correlation between IQ and income. Well there have been “great debates” over that, many of them, but here’s one study of interest for you:
Among the individuals I have known, which have included many average, some bright and a handful of geniuses, there is only slight correlation. The most economically successful have not been the geniuses but the bright who place money as the single sign of success and who have good people skills; the very brightest are doing well but are often in academia or have self sabotaged by showing up bosses or other inter-personally stupid things along the way. That is of course just anecdotally. But, no, I would not take the fact that there is a larger percent of Jews who make over $100K a year in the United States than for any other religiously identified group (including Hindu), as evidence of Jewish intelligence. As you accurately (to my mind) point out: education, intellectual, and economic success are only explained by intelligence to some small degree; opportunity and culture are larger factors.
In high school, his IQ was determined to be 125—high, but “merely respectable” according to biographer James Gleick.[14] Feynman later scoffed at psychometric testing. By 15, he had learned differential and integral calculus. Before entering college, he was experimenting with and re-creating mathematical topics, such as the half-derivative, using his own notation. In high school, he was developing the mathematical intuition behind his Taylor series of mathematical operators.[15]
You will probably tell me that his IQ increased over time. That’s unlikely at best. It tends to stay the same. Actually, it decreases with age. You have to take into account that he studied hard all his life, so I really doubt his IQ increased significantly during his later years.
Maybe it will dawn on you that I was not denying the numerical results were 125,
I was denying they were an accurate measurment of Feynman’s intelligence.
The reasons I deny it are highlighted in the quote you kindly provided from Gleick,
whose bio Genius I have read.
That’s an utterly moronic comment which shows massive ignorance about the world.
Anyway please provide links for your asinine claim that low-caste and high-caste Hindus are “genetically different” and the link for your post regarding the median incomes of various ethnic groups in the US.
You’ve made too many errors for us to take your claims at face value.