Another (yawn) date

[d!ckmojo]

Serg, did you read the other two links I posted or not? It is accepted fact that men's I.Q.'s are higher than women's. I asserted the fact, backed it up with 3 different and unconnected pieces of evidence, and all you have done is ad hominem attack me and the subject of one of the sources I listed!

DO you have any evidence that the accepted facts I have posted are wrong, or are you just reacting in a knee-jerk fashion from a position of ideological delusion rather than solid science?

 

[d!ckmojo]

And yet again, I strenuously object to you screaming the "racist" card, Serg.

If I'm allowed to acknowledge that black men are better basketball players, why am I not allowed to acknowledge that white men are better chess players (which anecdotally, to me, they seem to be, when you look at the list of Chess GrandMasters).

 

[loveshogun]

And yet again, I strenuously object to you screaming the "racist" card, Serg.

If I'm allowed to acknowledge that black men are better basketball players, why am I not allowed to acknowledge that white men are better chess players (which anecdotally, to me, they seem to be, when you look at the list of Chess GrandMasters).

You're not a racist, for what it's worth. Just really loud. And trying to be right about something on the internet.

For every study you can come up with that says one thing, there's another study that says the exact opposite.

Let it go, champ.

 

[d!ckmojo]

More evidence: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v442/n7098/full/nature04966.html

Serg, admit it, you are WRONG. The scientific evidence PROVES men are smarter than women.

END OF STORY

 

[d!ckmojo]

You're not a racist, for what it's worth. Just really loud. And trying to be right about something on the internet.

For every study you can come up with that says one thing, there's another study that says the exact opposite.

Let it go, champ.

Thanks loveshogun, I appreciate you saying that.

But you ought to know that I don't accept being shamed by anyone, even some anonymous person on the internet. I ALWAYS attempt to defend myself, that's just part of my persona. I never accept some other clown trying to AMOG me, even if its just a douche-bag on a forum. So I'll always try to defend myself and fight back as vigourously and strenously as possible. Maybe I've got a chip on my shoulder, but I don't intend to change.

 

[loveshogun]

More evidence: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v442/n7098/full/nature04966.html

Serg, admit it, you are WRONG. The scientific evidence PROVES men are smarter than women.

END OF STORY

By 4-6 IQ points on average. Ooooh, scary. That's like, the difference between Einstein on a good day, and Einstein on a slightly not as good day.

 

[loveshogun]

Maybe I've got a chip on my shoulder, but I don't intend to change.

And that's the problem. You come off as a bigger douche. I've known Serg longer, stranger he may be. And to me, he makes better points than you.

If you want to sound logical, convincing, and reasonable (like a man?), stop screaming about how you're right (like the stereotypical woman).

Leave that "I always have to be right" attitude on the playground with the 8-year-olds where it belongs.

 

[d!ckmojo]

And that's the problem. You come off as a bigger douche. I've known Serg longer, stranger he may be. And to me, he makes better points than you.

Oh. So you think I should just roll over and accept his shaming of me? That's not very Alpha, infact that's a typical beta behavior, which I will not be submitting to.

And what are these "better points" he has made than me?? Seriously? Wtf are you talking about? His point was, verbatim, that I am "an uninformed, Grade A moron." (Who) "makes a grand conclusion by citing one study done by a discredited racist crackpot."

That's not a point! That's an ad hominem attack! And its objectively wrong, in every single way, as I have shown with evidence.

He then further goes on to say that I "obviously" have not done any research in this area, "since no self-respecting informed person would actually make the claims (I am) making", whereas infact, if you'll just look at the evidence, ALL informed, self-respecting thinkers in this area make the claims I am making.

SO tell me, dude, what are these "better points than me" that he has made? Honestly, do you even know what you're typing?

If you want to sound logical, convincing, and reasonable (like a man?), stop screaming about how you're right (like the stereotypical woman).

Leave that "I always have to be right" attitude on the playground with the 8-year-olds where it belongs.

Dude, I don't care about how you think I sound. You're obviously incapable of being logical and rational yourself (as evidenced by your irrational defense of the manifestly incorrect Serg), so I hardly care if you don't think that I'm "logical".

I don't "always have to be right", but in this case, the objective fact is that I am right, and its pathetic of you to try and shame me into not prosecuting my case and defending myself from the scientifically false arguments of Serg.

When a man is right, and another person disagrees with him, is it manly for that man to back down? No, it isn't, and you know it, so stop trying to shame me into doing so with your ridiculous slurs of me being a "stereotypical woman" or "an 8-year old".

 

[loveshogun]

When a man is right, and another person disagrees with him, is it manly for that man to back down?

Well, see, it'd be one thing if you were right about something that actually matters.

If you really must know what the study you cited is actually saying, your big conclusion is that the average man is "smarter" than the average woman by 4-6 IQ points. Also, the definition of "intelligence" between various standardized measures is hardly agreed upon. I'm not one to reject tests outright - tests are important. But their results aren't the be-all end-all.

Anyone who works in the real world and has to manage people/create things/make money/not be an idiot knows this.

Finally, the statistical irrelevance of the study's conclusion.

The IQ scale is centered around 100 being average, with a standard deviation of 15 points. The Raven method is by definition statistical, already having factored in pools of data from all races, genders, etc.

That means that the difference between men and women, 4-6 points, is less than 1/2 of a standard deviation.

What does that mean?

For anyone who hasn't studied statistics, it means, if this were college - let's say a top tier engineering school - that the 4-6 point difference isn't even large enough to turn an A- into an A.

So again - what is this grand point you're making? Some conspiracy theory about how some cabal of women are congregating to castrate the male half of the population?

Is THIS how you spend your 130+ IQ?

Sh*t, Mojo. I won't even list my IQ because it's just a number. But it's high. I know lots of women who are 4-6 points below me. And above me. And all over.

Again. What is the real-world ramification?

 

[sighsigh]

D!ck, it's very short-sighted to claim that one sex or race is more intelligent than another when all evidence presented is incredibly inconclusive. Although, to be fair, claiming the opposite - that there is no difference - is equally careless.

Ok, sure. Males score higher than females on some specific IQ test (which is what the links you posted state). But where do you go from there?
- You don't know if the IQ test is constructed (either purposefully or accidentally) to favor males getting higher scores over females. This has been done countless times in the past before feminists stepped in.
- You don't know if the IQ test score measures intelligence accurately (or even if intelligence can be accurately measured).

Even if you overcome these hurdles:
- You don't know how much the difference in intelligence is due to environmental differences and not genetics.

I don't oppose your view because I am scared of being politically incorrect. I oppose your view because I am scared of making a really weak argument.

 

[d!ckmojo]

Actually, sighsigh, if you would just read the evidence which I linked, you would find that what you are saying is rubbish. In fact, when you say "You don't know if the IQ test is constructed (either purposefully or accidentally) to favor males getting higher scores over females", you ought to know the situation is exactly opposite.

The orthodoxy in intelligence research for the second half of the 20th century had been that men and women had the same average intelligence, but men had greater variance in their distribution than women. Most geniuses were men, and most imbeciles were men, they said, while most women were in the normal range. This conclusion, however, was manufactured out of political expediency. Not wanting to discover, or a priori denying, any sex differences in intelligence, psychometricians simply deleted from the standardized IQ tests any item on which the performance of men and women differed.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...ist/200901/why-men-are-more-intelligent-women

Regarding your other points, we have to accept I.Q as an accurate measure of intelligence, because it is the accepted standard.

I mean, why do we measure length with a ruler? Because centimeters are the accepted standard. Sure, its arbitrary, but we need some sort of accepted standard, and we need to apply it consistently.

And regarding whether the difference is due to genetics or environment, its irrelevant. The only relevant factor is the actual result. You can speculate all you want about whether its genetic or environmental, or a combination of the two, but if you're doing so *ONLY because it would be ideologically unpalatable for you to accept that genetics solely are responsible, then you are approaching the issue in bad faith.


@loveshogun, the difference is statistically significant. That is key. There are also more above-average intelligence men than there are above-average intelligence women.

That implies that if a man is of above-average intelligence (compared to other men), then it follows that he is far more intelligent than women of mere average intelligence (for their gender).

The real world ramification is relating to the OP's original observation! He said that a lot of his date's are intellectual duds, and I'm saying that, yes, we should expect this if we are men of above-average intelligence, because women in general are stupider than men, let alone above-average intelligence men. No conspiracy theory, just telling it like it is.