Hahahaha, does GT have an IQ field to fill out on the application? More over, they state the purpose of the episode within the first two minutes. You didn't watch the whole thing obviously.Originally Posted by fcman
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arch&plindex=0
Last edited by The12lber; 01-31-2008 at 02:48 AM.
Maybe it's because that wasn't the video posted earlier. See how important context is...
You apparently think you're much smarter than you actually are. GT does in fact have an IQ field, also known as SAT scores from which IQ is a mathematical derivative. You need to sit back, open your ears, and close your mouth.
IA Rules doesn't allow these images in sigs
- IA Mgmt
Wow, you are INSANELY stupid. Not only is the SAT NOT A DETERMINANT OF IQ. If you've ever taken an IQ test, it differs dramatically in important areas from the SAT. In academia, the idea of the two sharing an absolute and direct relationship is about as widely accepted as James Bond in Harlem. There are numerous criticisms of why the SAT is a bad test of anything to begin with. Go search for criticisms of SAT on Google, or Wiki SAT.
More over, I'd like to add that if you feel comfortable with the notion that SAT and IQ share a direct and absolute relationship, you're also comfortable with the notion that as a whole certain racial groups have lower IQs than their asian and white bretheren because these groups have lower SAT scores on average (and therefore their race is inherently less intelligent). So I hope you're cool with that.
In other news, I'm still in disbelief you're that dumb that you couldn't use your logic to figure this out for yourself.
Last edited by The12lber; 01-31-2008 at 03:06 PM.
Where did I say SAT and IQ are absolute and direct relatives? I said derivative. Meaning you can derive and approximate IQ level based on a person's SAT score. If you don't believe that they are related in any way you may want to give up on life. As for whether I've taken an IQ test, first one was in 5th grade, led to an SAT the summer after which then put me in Calculus at UCF, when I was 14.
As for whether or not some races have higher IQs than others, statistically speaking yes. But we all know the problem with statistics. Why wouldn't I be cool with that?
As for logic, you seem to be the one that's lacking.
But let's try to get back on topic. I'm done arguing with high schoolers.
IA Rules doesn't allow these images in sigs
- IA Mgmt
There is, but if it isn't an absolute and direct relationship why even reference it in relation to your IQ?
And yes, that's the point. There are problems with statistics. So don't build arguments around them alone. That is all.
It's what we like to call using logic. x+3=5 vs. 2=2
See the difference. We use proofs and logic to determine relationships. A direct relationship only requires your senses.
I don't believe I ever brought statistics into this. I think you might be confusing logic with statistics.
BTW, you should try laying off the personal attacks. It might result in you being taken seriously.
IA Rules doesn't allow these images in sigs
- IA Mgmt
I just realized that the tone is this thread is way to intense for a car forum.
Listen, we may not all have the same religious beliefs, but I know onw thing we ALL have in common... our passion for out automobiles.
Jesus, Muhammed, God, Alah,...Science... yeah, it's important, but lets not let these differences fortify and type or form religious biggotry.
Com'mon... group hug! (no homo)
One thing remains true. We all want to know the answer to life. If everyone was trying to get somewhere by taking the same path, if they got lost, there would be no alternative and we would all be up shiit creek. Maybe there is a reason that humans are gifted with our curious intellect... the more ways we use to try and find the key, the more likely we are to actually find it.
Trend settin'
As a side note, both equations were examples of items that share a direct and absolute (!= absolute value btw, absolute also means complete, unwavering, entirely consistent, etc) relationship. You might as well have written "2=2 vs 2=2, see the difference?" seeing as how there was only one variable. You couldn't even get that right, so don't insult my logic.
The reality is too complex for a math problem. What you're doing is only approximating IQ, which you yourself said. Let substitute a connotative synonym for "approximating", guess, in its place.
You can use math to guess, with varying degrees of accuracy, what someone's IQ is. Its that simple. Its not a reliable method, so calling the SAT field the "IQ field" is a plainly false.
Basically, you were wrong and you were a condescending ******* whilst being wrong.
Last edited by The12lber; 01-31-2008 at 05:32 PM.
I apologize, I didn't know that the poster was too incompetent to post the entire episode but instead some butchered one minute version of it. You on the other hand probably should have been able to figure out it was an over edited abomination so I don't feel too guilty.
Based on everything you've said so far, lets come back to this.
Obviously, there's a relationship. But there are tens of other factors that will determine your SAT score.
Your statement was that SAT scores and IQ scores are indeed directly and absolutely related.
Your statement is the logical equavilent of saying "GT does in fact have a weight field, also known as height". The two are related, obviously. A tall person is likely to weigh more than a short person. But who knows how much each one eats, works out, or what health issues they have?
Except if height and weight in this statement share the same relationship as in yours, they'd be the same thing... they are obviously not.
I hope that makes it easier for you to understand what this discussion stems from and why you are wrong, smart guy. That is all.
Interesting Thread
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote