A movement that I've been keeping an eye on...

For those topics that don't have a place in any of the other forums.

Moderator: Aitrus

User avatar
ArrieS
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 10:56 am

Re: A movement that I've been keeping an eye on...

Post by ArrieS »

Aitrus wrote:Arries,

The problem is that it's not 100% environmental and not 100% genetic - each plays a large role in IQ.
Wrong, each can't play a large role. Each can't both contribute 80% or 60%. You can't claim a large role by both, it's a false claim. However, from previous studies and the large changes it is easy to see that it is environment and not genetics. As I had said, genes don't adapt that fast but the environment does.

Now if you want to actually claim genetics playing a larger role than environment than you have to show a difference in genetics. Which hasn't been found. Have you noticed none of your evidence involves genetic difference from genetic studies? We have mapped the whole human genome and a significant number of the population. I have had my DNA sequence.

Yet with all of the analysis were is the data that points to DNA difference that can account for it?
Aitrus wrote:However, we don't know how much for each side - but the conclusion is that there is absolutely a genetic link as well as an environmental one.
Yea, there is always an absolute link. But genetics could be just 1%.
Aitrus wrote:As discussed in The Bell Curve, environment does play a role. However, per the authors themselves, if environment was 100% responsible for IQ differences, then there would need to be a deviation of at least 1.5 between the environment of whites and that of blacks in order to make up the difference - and that's nowhere near the case.

In regards to the question regarding test scores in 1932 versus today, the current understanding of the answer to that issue is that it is twofold: The Flynn Effect, and nutrition is better now than it was then.

My grandfather was arguably much smarter than I in many areas - such as math, carpentry, and manners / social graces.

Source for both conclusions regarding environment impact on IQ and Flynn Effect and nutrition - from a podcast interview with the authors of The Bell Curve (listen from 13:05 - 20:15): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YfEoxU82us&t=1415s
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Your defence is I have a podcast. That's it, all you said comes down to, I have a podcast.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Your podcast is with Charles Murray about his book The Bell Curve which he wrote with Richard J. Herrnstein.

How about you read about the scientific criticisms of the book.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve#Criticisms

The largest and most damning criticism is of course their book relies on their own data and methodology that wasn't publish for peer reviewed. So it wasn't reviewed for scientific validity.
OCTOBER: This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in. The others are July, January, September, April, November, May, March, June, December, August, and February. - Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar

User avatar
Aitrus
Moderator
Posts: 2391
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 5:03 pm

Re: A movement that I've been keeping an eye on...

Post by Aitrus »

*shrug* I figured it would be easier to let you listen to the words of the authors themselves as they discuss the topic we're discussing ourselves, rather than quote the whole book to you. My apologies for trying to not inconvenience you.

Yes, I've seen those criticisms. So? As far as I'm aware, no real work of science is without criticism from some facet of academia - especially in the realm of the social sciences and genetics. And peer review is losing it's luster: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review#Criticism

Then there's the instance of three researchers who wrote up fake studies with absurd conclusions and got them through the peer review process in order to see if the peer review process was unbiased and kept out nonsense (spoiler alert: it didn't). Rather, they found that that anything "peer reviewed" in certain realms of study (social science, race studies, etc.) should be viewed with skepticism due to bias. For a quick overview: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-real-fake ... rnals.html
Video of the subjects of the same story relating their experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k

TLDR: If the data is truthful, solid, and presented with sound reasoning, then criticism is just whining. If the gatekeepers want a certain narrative presented, then they will criticize even the truth because it doesn't fit their narrative, and will instead promote falsehood because it fits their narrative.

What about the other links I've provided in this thread - the ones from psychologists, professors, and more. Do those also not merit consideration toward my arguments? Or are you just cherry picking this single instance of me quoting somebody who actually studied the issue (as opposed to you and I, who haven't) and wrote a book on it?

At this point, I think I've said all that I'm going to say on this. I've stated my case, laid out the evidence that supports it, and I've read the counter-arguments and counter-evidence presented to me. I've been given some things to think about and research - although not on the topic I had originally hoped for. Learning continues - for me, at least, the search for truth never ends - and life goes on.

Be well guys. Hope you had a great Independence Day weekend. I know I did.
Seasonal Musings 2022: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=19005
Recommended Reading: http://tspcenter.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=13474
"It's not what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters" Epictetus

User avatar
ArrieS
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 10:56 am

Re: A movement that I've been keeping an eye on...

Post by ArrieS »

Aitrus wrote:*shrug* I figured it would be easier to let you listen to the words of the authors themselves as they discuss the topic we're discussing ourselves, rather than quote the whole book to you. My apologies for trying to not inconvenience you.
Oh really, someone defending their work and opinion doesn't lend support to the validity of their argument. I can listen to people defend their position on how Islam is the true religion.

Can you quote the book to me? Have you read the book?
Aitrus wrote:Yes, I've seen those criticisms. So? As far as I'm aware, no real work of science is without criticism from some facet of academia - especially in the realm of the social sciences and genetics. And peer review is losing it's luster: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review#Criticism
Yes, yes, yes every bit of work can be criticized. But the contents of the criticism is what matters. The fact someone takes issue doesn't invalidate the result automatically. It's the content of the criticism itself.

You fail to address the content of the criticism.

Oh and genetics.... I'm sorry did you provide something based on genetics? I must have missed that. So please, show me that DNA specific study because what you offered is speculation on the affects of genes, not evidence of a difference in genetics.
Aitrus wrote:Then there's the instance of three researchers who wrote up fake studies with absurd conclusions and got them through the peer review process in order to see if the peer review process was unbiased and kept out nonsense (spoiler alert: it didn't). Rather, they found that that anything "peer reviewed" in certain realms of study (social science, race studies, etc.) should be viewed with skepticism due to bias. For a quick overview: https://phys.org/news/2018-10-real-fake ... rnals.html
Video of the subjects of the same story relating their experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k
Nice try, but no. This is an example of one of the papers they wrote "What if we write a paper saying we should train men like we do dogs—to prevent rape culture? Hence came the “Dog Park” paper. What if we write a paper claiming that when a guy privately masturbates while thinking about a woman (without her consent—in fact, without her ever finding out about it) that he’s committing sexual violence against her? That gave us the “Masturbation” paper."

That type of paper wasn't written based on statistical analysis. The nature of the articles they faked to get reviewed didn't rely on the same type of evidence Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein required for their book.

There was no hard data to evaluate. So no, sorry, your example doesn't work. Show me the fake paper that got published showing the US population was 60% black and 20% white. That would be the equivalent of what you are trying to claim.
Aitrus wrote:TLDR: If the data is truthful, solid, and presented with sound reasoning, then criticism is just whining.
Yea, IF, if in that statement is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Aitrus wrote:If the gatekeepers want a certain narrative presented, then they will criticize even the truth because it doesn't fit their narrative, and will instead promote falsehood because it fits their narrative.
And if someone wants a certain narrative to be true they will not honestly evaluate the criticism and instead say it's a conspiracy. See what I did there. You are offering speculation instead of hard science.
Aitrus wrote:What about the other links I've provided in this thread - the ones from psychologists, professors, and more. Do those also not merit consideration toward my arguments? Or are you just cherry picking this single instance of me quoting somebody who actually studied the issue (as opposed to you and I, who haven't) and wrote a book on it?
Okay, what's your best argument from these other sources?
Aitrus wrote:At this point, I think I've said all that I'm going to say on this. I've stated my case, laid out the evidence that supports it, and I've read the counter-arguments and counter-evidence presented to me.
Whoa whoa whoa, you have failed to actually address any of my points past other peoples criticism.

For example from the last post;
Wrong, each can't play a large role. Each can't both contribute 80% or 60%. You can't claim a large role by both, it's a false claim. However, from previous studies and the large changes it is easy to see that it is environment and not genetics. As I had said, genes don't adapt that fast but the environment does.
At most they would both contribute an equal amount of 50%. But as we we can see from IQ test scores over the past century and their drastic rise that environment seems to be an out sized contributing factor.

Not to mention anything from an actual genetic study instead of statistical analysis that is used to infer a supposed genetic component.
OCTOBER: This is one of the peculiarly dangerous months to speculate in stocks in. The others are July, January, September, April, November, May, March, June, December, August, and February. - Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar

User avatar
userque
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 5:43 pm

Re: A movement that I've been keeping an eye on...

Post by userque »

Tomanyiron wrote:I just watched this, and think it's good to hear a little wisdom once and a while.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rRHmpCq3z4
Hearing no response from Aitrus to my question, and in light of recent discussions, I assume this thread will continue to include the topic of racism.

After the way the most recent discussion here went, I expect I'll now get a response. Not a response to my previous unanswered, simple, debate question (or the two simple, unanswered one's before that one), but to my last question regarding the purported intent of this thread.

That said, Tomanyiron, are you willing to sincerely, and actually enter the debate, and defend whatever your position is,

Or is it your interest to enter into an other-people's-opinion video posting contest with someone? I'll open up a new thread for that purpose, if so.

Same goes with meme posting, if you prefer that instead.

I've noticed in the past, when I would post a lot of memes; you were always at the ready, with a counter meme ... or two. You left no meme un-answered LOL.

Now, I haven't posted much of that stuff lately, but we all see you still post political memes included with your TSP fund posts, outside of the Anything Goes forums.

Having dedicated, properly roped off Anything Goes forums is truly the way to go with those posts, imo.

Hence, my offer. Let me know (or not ... again ... used to that sort of thing here)
"In the land of idiots, the moron is King."

User avatar
Tomanyiron
Posts: 4973
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:39 am

Re: A movement that I've been keeping an eye on...

Post by Tomanyiron »

userque, I bet you like arguing more than eating. What do you weight 85-90 lbs? :lol:
"A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers." Plato
"Perfect numbers like perfect men are very rare." Rene Descartes

Locked

Fund Prices2024-03-28

FundPriceDayYTD
G $18.15 0.05% 1.05%
F $19.08 -0.06% -0.74%
C $82.21 0.11% 10.55%
S $82.43 0.30% 6.92%
I $42.57 -0.24% 5.95%
L2065 $16.38 0.02% 8.37%
L2060 $16.39 0.02% 8.38%
L2055 $16.39 0.02% 8.38%
L2050 $32.73 0.01% 6.95%
L2045 $14.91 0.02% 6.58%
L2040 $54.38 0.02% 6.22%
L2035 $14.34 0.02% 5.79%
L2030 $47.67 0.02% 5.38%
L2025 $13.15 0.03% 3.43%
Linc $25.61 0.03% 2.82%

Live Charts

Pending Allocations

Under development. For now, you may view Pending Allocations by going to "fantasy TSP" and selecting "Leaderboard sort" of "Pending Allocations".