God vs. Science

[man]

There is, but if it isn't an absolute and direct relationship why even reference it in relation to your IQ?

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.

And yes, that's the point. There are problems with statistics. So don't build arguments around them alone. That is all.

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.

[TheChosenOne]

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.

[The12lber]

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.

Except what you were trying to state was more like (variable IQ) + 3 = SAT score...

When in reality its more like variable IQ + what level of math you took + what level of english you took + how much you read on your off time + whether or not you paid attention in class + how competent your teacher was + what the curriculum was like + how much you prepared for your SAT + etc = your SAT score.

What you were trying to state was that IQ was the ONLY variable.


I don't believe I ever brought statistics into this. I think you might be confusing logic with statistics.

IQ and SAT scores are both statistics, sir.

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.

[man]

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.

LOL Alright kiddie. Now I'm being condescending. This is worthless. In no way will you be able to prove your intelligence or mine. This is the internet. YOU were the one who started by being condescending, even though you have nothing to show other than moronic thoughts. YOU are the one who clearly doesn't understand logic. I merely put the simple equation to show the difference between that which is blatantly obvious and that which requires logic (btw you're a moron if you don't think x+3=5 requires logic) You clearly don't understand what is going on here and are trying to bring me down to your level. Your demeanor alone confirms any doubts that you are a weak individual. Calling people out over the internet. Someone states a fact that you think is wrong, tell them, don't act like a buffoon.

Get back on topic.

[The12lber]

LOL Alright kiddie. Now I'm being condescending. This is worthless. In no way will you be able to prove your intelligence or mine. This is the internet. YOU were the one who started by being condescending, even though you have nothing to show other than moronic thoughts. YOU are the one who clearly doesn't understand logic.

Clearly, I don't understand logic because I disagree with you and I thought your example was stupid and pointless given the topic of discussion.

I merely put the simple equation to show the difference between that which is blatantly obvious and that which requires logic (btw you're a moron if you don't think x+3=5 requires logic) You clearly don't understand what is going on here and are trying to bring me down to your level. Your demeanor alone confirms any doubts that you are a weak individual. Calling people out over the internet. Someone states a fact that you think is wrong, tell them, don't act like a buffoon.

LOLOLOL HYPOCRISY MUCH?

Get back on topic.

Quickly, its clear that I was wrong from the beginning, GET BACK ON TOPIC SIR. zzzzz.

I notice you don't care to address anything I said about how you can't reliably calculate someone's IQ from their SAT score because of the myriad of other factors that determine said final score. My logics and maths are ironclad, bye.