I saw this and Laughed

BobLeeSwagger

Sexy Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Posts
1,455
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Pretty dubious. I believe snopes.com debunked that one a long time ago. Even then, it assumes that you think an IQ test proves something.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,611
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
There is nothing like facts to prove a point. So Kerry supporters appear to have a higher IQ than
Bush
supporters.

That is not surpirising to me. Bush compaigned to the lower levels of of our society. Will he be able to break 90 % of his campaign promises? I think so. Marriage Amendment won't happen. Abortions wiil still be happening. The Balanced Budget Amendment isn't even being disucssed now, dropped as soon as the Republicans gained conrol of the Congress. Iraq will remain a quagmire.

But Bush will be able to bankrupt America. He will succeed in destroying America's reputation around the world. Under his inconpetent leadership most of our manufacturiing machine willl have been moved to other countries. The dollar will plunge and many Americans will lose everytihing as interest rates rise and prices on imported goods soar.
 
1

13788

Guest
hung_big:
Originally posted by aloofman@May 15 2005, 10:01 PM
Pretty dubious. I believe snopes.com debunked that one a long time ago. Even then, it assumes that you think an IQ test proves something.
[post=311485]Quoted post[/post]​

Of course, an IQ test doesn't prove political prowess, but the same can be said for other things. It's just like driving: Having two hands doesn't necessarily mean you are a good driver. It does vastly help, however.
 

jonb

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2002
Posts
7,578
Media
0
Likes
67
Points
258
Age
40
Even the source is dubious. Richard Lynn is all too happy to list a Japanese or South Korean IQ, but doesn't mention any statistics of the IQs of Koreans living in Japan. Also note that Mongolia and most of the -stans are absent from Lynn's stats. I found that strange, since the current thesis put out by the "race and IQ" types is that cold climates favor a higher IQ.
 

D_Barbi_Queue

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Posts
2,102
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response

jonb

Sexy Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2002
Posts
7,578
Media
0
Likes
67
Points
258
Age
40
Now look at class. So much for right-wing populism. There's also a study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes which proves just how ignorant Bushies are.

But I HAVE noticed red states tend to have lower age-of-consent laws. In fact, no blue states have AOC laws less than 16, but three red states do: Missouri, SC, and Iowa. Of them, Missouri's is reasonable (It's 17 if you're over 18.), but SC's and Iowa's are actually that retarded "14 unless married" shit. Actually, I was surprised how many red states suspended AOC laws for married couples. Alaska actually suspends all laws against sex offenders if the couple's married.
 

BobLeeSwagger

Sexy Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Posts
1,455
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Originally posted by jonb@May 16 2005, 01:21 PM
Alaska actually suspends all laws against sex offenders if the couple's married.
[post=311763]Quoted post[/post]​

This is almost surely a legacy law that's been left on the books. For a long time almost every state's rape law had a marital exception: a wife was assumed to consent to sex from her husband at any time. As far as I know, no state has tried to enforce such a measure in decades, even the ones that still technically keep it as a law.
 

dickbulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Posts
209
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
163
Age
74
Location
Utah
Just glancing at that IQ chart shows how fake it is.

States such as Utah may be the redest of the red and very deluded but lack the usual indicators for low IQ's in our culture such as large, poverty stricken, poorly educated, under classes. And don't think rural hick either. Utah is very urban because of the geography of the region.

Always read things like that carefully and use YOUR intellegence.

Its really sadder when intellegent people settle for medocrity.
 

madame_zora

Sexy Member
Joined
May 5, 2004
Posts
9,608
Media
0
Likes
52
Points
258
Location
Ohio
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
I got curious about this and looked for some sort of realistic information on the average IQs of the different states. I didn't find anything, does anyone know if this information is even available? It would be easy enough to compare the IQs of the states to how they voted if we could get some decent info.
 

dickbulge

Experimental Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Posts
209
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
163
Age
74
Location
Utah
Originally posted by madame_zora@May 16 2005, 09:06 PM
I got curious about this and looked for some sort of realistic information on the average IQs of the different states. I didn't find anything, does anyone know if this information is even available? It would be easy enough to compare the IQs of the states to how they voted if we could get some decent info.
[post=311915]Quoted post[/post]​

Interesting thought but I bet the schools would not share the info and if they did the state governments wouldn't publish it.

Too many careers depend on the perception that our collective IQ's are high or at least not falling.

Bet the Mid-west and New England have the highest IQ's and the South the lowest.
 

jay_too

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2002
Posts
789
Media
0
Likes
5
Points
236
Age
44
Location
CA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
TAG...

I thought this thread was about IQ and not educational attainment. However, since you brought it up, perhaps you did not scroll down far enough or lacked the interest in interpreting the numbers.

To my eye, the data would indicate the better educated college graduates voted for Kerry. Why so? Apparently when you add in post graduates with those who just graduated from college, Bush got 49% and Kerry, 49%.

Do you see an alternative explanation?

Perhaps, you overlooked that among non-college grads, Bush easily won with 53% to 47%. Thus, it might be argued that Bush attracted the less intelligent and poorer educated.

jay



VOTE BY EDUCATION BUSH
KERRY NADER
TOTAL 2004 2000 2004 2004

No High School (4%) 49% +10 50% 0%

H.S. Graduate (22%) 52% +3 47% 0%

Some College (32%) 54% +3 46% 0%

College Graduate (26%) 52% +1 46% 1%

Postgrad Study (16%) 44% +0 55% 1%



VOTE BY EDUCATION BUSH
KERRY NADER
TOTAL 2004 2000 2004 2004

No College Degree (58%) 53% n/a 47% 0%

College Graduate (42%) 49% n/a 49% 1%
 

D_Barbi_Queue

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Posts
2,102
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Jay -- I did notice that and had even pointed out in my original post that Kerry won the majority of post-grad voters.

As far as IQ vs. Education, I read somewhere a couple months ago when I first ran across this bogus chart, that the state "IQ" was derived from SAT scores and college education, hence my association of the two.

I merely brought the CNN data up to show that in general, Bush supporters aren't all the red-necked, uneducated idiots that we keep getting referred to. There are a good percentage of us out there that have our college degrees and still voted for the man.

Personally, I'm started to get sick and tired of being considered a moron just b/c I voted for the guy. I don't knock down Kerry voters, but constantly feel like the butt of jokes and comments about the idiots/morons that voted for Bush. Granted - that's probably my fault for being on an overwhelmingly liberal board, but I actually like the people here, regardless of who they voted for or how much they bash Bush supporters.

But, to get back on topic: The non-college grads still include those that have some college education, but just haven't completed their degree. Nearly 1/3 of the voters fit in that category. Perhaps that's the explanation that you are looking for.

The "better educated" (those that have finished their college degree and those that also have done post grad study) voting population is split down the middle, ie. Bush supporters aren't all idiots afterall.
 

D_Barbi_Queue

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 15, 2004
Posts
2,102
Media
0
Likes
4
Points
258
Sexuality
No Response
Originally posted by madame_zora@May 16 2005, 11:06 PM
I got curious about this and looked for some sort of realistic information on the average IQs of the different states. I didn't find anything, does anyone know if this information is even available? It would be easy enough to compare the IQs of the states to how they voted if we could get some decent info.
[post=311915]Quoted post[/post]​


MZ - here's one I found. There was a better one that I ran across a couple months ago that cited all of his sources. I'll keep looking for it. http://www.zombietime.com/iq_of_2004_voters_by_state/

And without further ado, here are the results (feel free to do the computations yourself to confirm them, if you choose to):

Kerry voters: IQ 100.96 ~> 101
Bush voters: IQ 98.73 ~> 99

Kerry supporters have an average IQ of just under 101; and Bush supporters have an IQ of just under 99. For simplicity's sake, we'll round them both up to 101 and 99.

So, the evidence seems to show that the average Kerry voter has an IQ of 101, while the average Bush voter has an IQ of 99. While this 2-point difference may appear significant to partisan advocates, in truth the difference between 99 and 101 is negligable, so statistically insignificant as to be meaningless. If the average IQ is 100, it is not possible to tell the difference between someone who is 1 point above average and someone else who is 1 point below average. In fact, in casual conversation, you couldn't distinguish between someone with an IQ of 95 from someone with an IQ of 105.

edit: here's another - http://www.sq.4mg.com/IQpolitics.htm
 

jay_too

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2002
Posts
789
Media
0
Likes
5
Points
236
Age
44
Location
CA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Originally posted by TexAssgirl@May 17 2005, 01:14 PM
But, to get back on topic: The non-college grads still include those that have some college education, but just haven't completed their degree. Nearly 1/3 of the voters fit in that category. Perhaps that's the explanation that you are looking for.

The "better educated" (those that have finished their college degree and those that also have done post grad study) voting population is split down the middle, ie. Bush supporters aren't all idiots afterall.
[post=312032]Quoted post[/post]​
TAG,

Sorry that I stepped on a sensitive area. However, I and most statisticians would conclude from the CNN data that among college grads Kerry supporters had higher educational attainment. As I remember in your original post, you implied that among college educated Bush captured the majority of the vote: 52 to 46%. This is not the case, and that was the point I was making.

jay
 

cypher13

Experimental Member
Joined
May 26, 2004
Posts
108
Media
0
Likes
8
Points
238
Age
69
Location
Phoenix, Arizona
I was surprised to find that the mean of these numbers is 97.36. While that is not too much of a deviation from the expected mean, I am still surprised. It was not so long ago, i.e., when I was in university (1974), that the mean IQ of the United States people was established as 104.5.

This is a good reason to question the validity of the data used, assuming an adequately large sample was involved.

Just remember, as with penis sizes, it has never been demonstrated, let alone proven, that human intelligence follows a normal distribution. Yes, you can make the scores fit a normal distribution - and this is what psychometricians do - but that is akin to Sherlock Holmes' warning that it is a capital error making the facts fir the theory, rather than vice versa. It's only value is in saying "Hey, you're two standard deviations above the mean."

jonb mentioned Richard Lynn. Richard Lynn was involved with a journal of exceedingly dubious scholarship: The Mankind Quarterly. Sadly, this publication, often distributed free of charge to academic libraries to give it the patina of scholarship, has a thinly veiled agenda that is - at best - disenheartening and at its worst downright dishonest. And yet, I can take you romping through academic libraries all over the map where you will find the lovely matched buckram bound sets of this rag - may its name be spoken with a bad taste in one's mouth forever.

Anyone can compile anything and give it enough "polish" to lead most people into thinking that it is scholarly - witness the recent spate of nonsense papers that are finding their way into "respectable," peer-reviewed journals. Some of these papers are written by computer programs. I have long believed that Richard Lynn and his henchmen did this with far more flash and style than any computer can manage.

A long time ago, I wrote as novel in which an addict to drugstore fiction himself wrote a computer program called "Schlock 86" into which you put in names of characters, settings, and the basic plot and the result was appropriately turgid prose in whatever vein you chose, be it science fiction, detective, western or romance.

Now, life imitates art, yet again.

So, are Americans getting dumber, even if only in terms of whatever IQ tests purport to measure?

Is academia going down the tubes in obsessing over falsely profound questions of racism, political correctness, and whether, at bottom, we are all animals with the blessings of an opposable thumb and hand to eye coordination?

Is the United States in some stage of cultural de-evolution?

Is "evolution" a now bad word - even in that connotation?

Alas, I fear that the answer to each of these four is becoming a resounding yes.

Sad....so very, very sad.