It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Intelligence genes discovered by scientists

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


Your whole post is nonsense

Lmao, I think you've made this comment in almost every single response you've ever written to me.


you bring ero evidence to the table

I'm sorry this isn't wikipedia and I'm not going to provide citations for everything I say. If you question any of my statements then do some research and show I'm wrong. I never say anything without having a very solid reason for saying it and if I wanted to I could find citations for 90% of the claims I make but I simply don't have the time, especially when it's a debate with you because I know there's simply no winning regardless of what I write.


If there is biological inheritance of IQ, then the relatives of a person with a high IQ should exhibit a comparably high IQ with a much higher probability than the general population. In 1982, Bouchard and McGue reviewed such correlations reported in 111 original studies in the United States. The mean correlation of IQ scores between monozygotic twins was 0.86, between siblings, 0.47, between half-siblings, 0.31, and between cousins, 0.15.[57]

Well I was never denying genetics plays a role in intelligence, but there could be several other reasons for higher correlations between relatives. For one thing children who have successful parents often follow in their footsteps for one reason or another and they often have access to better education. The fact the correlation score almost halves for siblings living apart compared to siblings living together also shows that growing up together gives them many of the same life experiences and they will have very similar thought patterns due to spending a lot of time together. It also proves my point that genetics isn't the entire foundation of intelligence because if it was then it shouldn't matter if they grow up apart. This isn't a "you're wrong, I'm right" argument, we are both right, because there are many different factors which affect intelligence, and that's kind of my whole point, it can't be distilled down to a single "intelligence gene" and I hope you can see that.
edit on 22/12/2015 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

You said:

I'm sorry this isn't wikipedia and I'm not going to provide citations for everything I say. If you question any of my statements then do some research and show I'm wrong.

You don't provide evidence for anything you say. This isn't wikipedia, this is the science forum where your opinion is meaningless unless it's accompanied by some actual evidence. This is why they have a Philosophy forum wear you can wax poetic about anything. If you're going to try to refute years of research you need to provide more than just an opinion. It's not anyones job to show you that your opinion is wrong because you provide zero evidence to support anything that you're saying. You can say the Moon is made of green chesse but it's meaningless unless you provide some evidence that the Moon is made of green cheese.

Secondly, you seem to have a lack of understanding of genetics yet you feel your opinion should mean more than years of research.

This study is very important because it identifies the genes associated with intelligence which could help millions of people with learning disabilities. This is how genetics works. It isn't a panacea, at least not yet. If gene editing keeps advancing the way it has over the year, it will be like a panacea for just about everything.

What's a learning disability?

a condition giving rise to difficulties in acquiring knowledge and skills to the level expected of those of the same age, especially when not associated with a physical handicap.

If you were right, then these people can just "exercise the brain" and become Einsteins. All they have to do is read a bunch of books.

Here's more:

Is there a cure for learning disabilities?

Learning disabilities have no cure, but early intervention can provide tools and strategies to lessen their effects. People with learning disabilities can be successful in school and work and in their personal lives.


www.nichd.nih.gov...

Again, if you were right, people with learning disabilities can just "excersise the brain" and be cured.

What will happen is medications and studies like these because it's genetic. Studies like this can actually lead the way to solving some of these problems because they might be able to diagnose earlier if children are predisposed to this and they can develop a treatment and with gene editing maybe even correct it.

I remember growing up, my cousin used to eat ccandy and drink pop a little more than everyone else and people thought he was just greedy. Today we know he was genetically predisposed to developing diabetes and if his parents were equipped with that knowledge back then they could have helped him control his diet and environment. This doesn't mean he wouldn't devolp diabetes but knowledge is power and allows you to make better decisions. This is why the Authors of the paper said this:

Report author Professor Robert Plomin believes that children should be genetically screened at the age of four so that an individualised curriculum could be tailored to their needs.

“Understanding the specific genetic and environmental factors influencing individual differences in educational achievement - and the complex interplay between them - could help educationalists develop effective personalised learning programmes, to help every child reach their potential by the end of compulsory education,” he said.


This is where genetics is taking us and they will do the same thing with Medicine. So people will be prescribed different medicines and different dosages based on their genetic makeup. Some children may need different curriculum based on their genetics.

Studies like these are very important and knowing the genes associated with intelligence could give millions of people better lives despite your opinion.



posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
You have to love this forum. Someone posts an interesting topic to discuss and someone always needs to toss in "their" opinion, confuse it for fact. Then asks to prove that THEY are wrong?

What?

Sounds like someone has a case of the speghetti genes
hahaha

But in all seriousness. The OP shared a documented, researched, proven study. Its not an opinion. Its a discovery. Its there. This appears to be how it works. You either "get it", or you "dont".

/fin



posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Triton1128


You have to love this forum. Someone posts an interesting topic to discuss and someone always needs to toss in "their" opinion, confuse it for fact.

I'm sorry, I thought this forum was for debating issues, not just discussing them. If you don't agree with my opinion that is fine but don't act like I have no right to share my opinion.


But in all seriousness. The OP shared a documented, researched, proven study. Its not an opinion. Its a discovery. Its there. This appears to be how it works. You either "get it", or you "dont".

Any discovery can have multiple different interpretations. For example the discoveries made in quantum mechanisms have a plethora of different interpretations and we still don't know which is correct. You can either accept scientific discoveries at face value or you can maintain a healthy skepticism and question the controversial claims made by scientists. And don't be mistaken, claiming there are "intelligence genes" which control everything about intelligence is a very controversial claim. I'm not denying it plays some role in how well our brain develops but that doesn't mean there's also a huge number of other genes and the external environment we must also take into consideration when it comes to healthy brain development. Furthermore, an intelligence gene implies the ability to increase intelligence by tweaking the gene(s), which they claim should be possible but shouldn't be believed until it's actually demonstrated. I don't see how tweaking this gene will improve intelligence, the gene can either be corrupted or in the correct sequence, in which case it will operate optimally.
edit on 23/12/2015 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2015 @ 11:39 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


Again, if you were right, people with learning disabilities can just "excersise the brain" and be cured.

Well clearly there is a point of no return where the brain is malfunctioning too seriously for the problem to be fixed. Once again I'm not denying the fact genetics plays a role in brain power. But it should also be pointed out there are people who have done exactly that, managed to cure serious brain conditions through dedication to learning and exercising their brain. Take for example Barbara Arrowsmith. She grew up with a serious brain condition which caused her to have serious difficulty with temporal and spacial concepts, and just about any complex concept. Now she appears to be a perfectly normal person because she has been able to rewire her brain.

A key quote from her talk in case you don't have time to watch it:

So now at the age of 25, in 1977, I knew the source of my problem. It was a part of my brain in the left hemisphere that wasn't working. And then I came across the work of Mark Rosenzweig, and he showed me a solution. Rosenzweig was working with rats and he found that rats in an enriched and stimulating environment were better learners, and then when he looked at their brains, he found their brains had changed physiologically to support that learning. This was neuroplasticity in action. Neuroplasticity simply put: the brains ability to change physiologically and functionally as a result of stimulation. So now I knew what I had to do: I had to find a way to work and exercise my brain to strengthen those weak parts. And this was the beginning of my transformation and of my lifes work.


Another good example is that of Jacob Barnett, a true child prodigy who was diagnosed with autism at a young age. His parents were told he would never talk or socialize like a normal child. Now he is basically just like any kid except for the fact he's a super genius who's exceptionally gifted at math and physics. He seems to particularly enjoy astrophysics and quantum mechanics. In the following talk he explains how he was able to overcome all the odds by applying himself, learning university level subjects, and never stopped thinking even when he was placed in special ed which taught him nothing.


Honestly I could easily find another half a dozen of these recovery cases without much effort because it's a fairly common thing. If only more people realized they have power to physically alter their brain maybe many people with mental conditions wouldn't feel so powerless. The brain has an almost scary ability to adapt to unforeseen circumstances and it's a mistake to underestimate that malleability/plasticity potential.

edit on 23/12/2015 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 12:18 AM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

This is completely irrelevent to the study.

Again, you're all over the place.

There's no evidence that any of the people you mentioned had the genes in this study in the wrong order. Again, we're talking about the study not your hyperbole.

Everyone who has these genes in the wrong order doesn't have brain damage. A person with brain damage who has these genes in the right order should be able to overcome these things by rewiring their brains.

This is why this study is so important. Because there's even more kids like Jacob or women like Barbera who excersise their brains until the cows come home and nothing changes.

A study like this can tell you why. Some people have brain damage but may have these genes in the right order so it's a matter of rewiring the brain vs. those who have these genes in the wrong order and they can't get better if they read every book in the library. This is why the article said this:

In the study, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, the team of researchers looked at samples of human brain from patients who had undergone neurosurgery for epilepsy.

They analysed thousands of genes expressed in the human brain, and then combined the results with genetic information from healthy people who had undergone IQ tests and from people with neurological disorders such as autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability.

They conducted various computational analyses and comparisons in order to identify the gene networks influencing healthy human cognitive abilities. Remarkably, they found that some of the same genes that influence human intelligence in healthy people were also the same genes that cause impaired cognitive ability and epilepsy when mutated, networks which they called M1 and M3.


What you're saying has nothing to do with the study or the implications of a discovery like this. It could explain why some kids can never be like Jacob no matter how hard they study.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 12:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Triton1128
You have to love this forum. Someone posts an interesting topic to discuss and someone always needs to toss in "their" opinion, confuse it for fact. Then asks to prove that THEY are wrong?

What?

Sounds like someone has a case of the speghetti genes
hahaha

But in all seriousness. The OP shared a documented, researched, proven study. Its not an opinion. Its a discovery. Its there. This appears to be how it works. You either "get it", or you "dont".

/fin




Exactly!!

These researchers should just stop all scientific inquiry into this subject because someones opinion on a messageboard. It's just silly.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 12:32 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


There's no evidence that any of the people you mentioned had the genes in this study in the wrong order.

Considering they both had mental problems since birth it's pretty obvious they had some sort of genetic defect which affected genes related to their brain development, whether or not they were in this study. You damage any gene related to the brain and it will probably affect intelligence in some way. Sure there is a level of damage which cannot be recovered from but this study doesn't point-point the exact genes which cannot be damaged under any circumstance. It simply shows a correlation between a network of genes and a spectrum of different intelligence levels which can result from damaging those genes. More importantly, there is no evidence that many of the people studied would not be able to improve their brain power if they make a serious effort to exercise their brain.


These researchers should just stop all scientific inquiry into this subject because someones opinion on a messageboard. It's just silly.

If you think that's the point I'm trying to make then you are just silly. Research like this is very enlightening, but there's no reason to accept it at face value and not debate the implications.
edit on 23/12/2015 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 05:10 AM
link   
I can see both sides of Neoholographic's and ChaoticOrder's POVs and, IMO there is merit to both. However, it seems to me that Neoholographic is just being a nit-picking, holier than thou hard ass considering that this is merely the science section of a conspiracy forum meant to entertain and not a vetted website forum meant for serious science.

It is the attitude expressed by Neoholographic that I see far too much of on ATS and is one of the reasons that has caused me to post very little here anymore these days. What ChaoticOrder is presenting is not unreasonable at all and I think you should give the bashing a break, it's not impressing me at all and probably not too many others either. If you were any nastier in your posts I'd be tempted to complain about it.

Frankly I'm fairly impressed with ChaoticOrder's cool headed responses considering how you are acting Neoholographic. Why don't you both just agree to disagree and let the thread move along without the childish one-up-manship.
edit on 23-12-2015 by MichiganSwampBuck because: typo



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Again, you're post supports exactly what the research is saying about genetics. You said:


Considering they both had mental problems since birth it's pretty obvious they had some sort of genetic defect which affected genes related to their brain development, whether or not they were in this study. You damage any gene related to the brain and it will probably affect intelligence in some way.


Again, you make these statements in a vacuum without a shred of evidence to support anything you say. You said you damage any gene related to the brain and it will affect intelligence but again there's no evidence to support what you're saying and a study like this can point this out.

Maybe you can have genes related to the brain that's damaged that don't affect intelligence. Therefore people like Barbera and Jacob in the videos you posted can overcome their brain problems like they did vs. the thousands of other people who can't overcome it no matter how many books they read.

So by identifying intelligent genes you can cater medicine and therapy based on those who are brain damaged and have these genes still ordered in the right way vs. those who are brain damaged and don't have these genes ordered in the right way.

When you make these ridiculous statements without any evidence or anything to support what you're saying in a scientific debate that's not really a debate. It's just your opinion. There's a big difference there.

Disagreeing with the article is one thing but trying to refute the research and years of research on IQ and heritability without a shred of evidence to support what you're saying is another.

Go back to what I just quoted you saying. You said if you damage any gene related to the brain it will probably affect intelligence in some way. This flies in the face of the Researchers in the article and years of research on heritability and IQ. So you can have people who are brain damaged but there's no effect on intelligence so they can rewire the brain and learn differently vs. others who can never learn differently because genes related to intelligence are damaged or ordered differently.

So when you make statements that fly in the face of current scientific understanding and years of research, is it too much to ask for some evidence to support what you're saying in a scientific forum?

Here's another recent study that refuts what you're saying and again, that's why I keep asking for some scientific evidence when you try to use your opinion to refute years of scientific research.

Preservation of General Intelligence following Traumatic Brain Injury: Contributions of the Met66 Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor

Abstract


Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) promotes survival and synaptic plasticity in the human brain. The Val66Met polymorphism of the BDNF gene interferes with intracellular trafficking, packaging, and regulated secretion of this neurotrophin. The human prefrontal cortex (PFC) shows lifelong neuroplastic adaption implicating the Val66Met BDNF polymorphism in the recovery of higher-order executive functions after traumatic brain injury (TBI). In this study, we examined the effect of this BDNF polymorphism on the preservation of general intelligence following TBI. We genotyped a sample of male Vietnam combat veterans (n = 156) consisting of a frontal lobe lesion group with focal penetrating head injuries for the Val66Met BDNF polymorphism. Val/Met did not differ from Val/Val genotypes in general cognitive ability before TBI. However, we found substantial average differences between these groups in general intelligence (≈ half a standard deviation or 8 IQ points), verbal comprehension (6 IQ points), perceptual organization (6 IQ points), working memory (8 IQ points), and processing speed (8 IQ points) after TBI. These results support the conclusion that Val/Met genotypes preserve general cognitive functioning, whereas Val/Val genotypes are largely susceptible to TBI.


journals.plos.org.../journal.pone.0088733

So after traumatic brain damage individuals with certain genes preserved still regained cognitive abilities after brain damage vs. others who had a different set of genes damaged but the same brain damage but cognitive abilities were degraded.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

What?????

I'm nit picking because I want to debate scientific evidence in a scientific forum?

You then said, it's merely the science section of a conspiracy forum. That's very condescending of you to act like people who post in a scientific forum on a conspiracy website are just here for entertainment. That's just silly. I have been posting on this forum and the Physics forum for many years and there's some really good if not better scientific debates in this forum even though it's just a forum on a "conspiracy website."

You come in and you don't provide a shred of evidence to support anything about the subject at hand. You're just throwin ad hominems and being condesending about this forum and this website. If you think it's just for entertainment, I suggest you actually read the posts in this forum and the good scientific debates people have.

There's a reason posts are moved from the science forum to the philosophy forum because ther's a difference between opinions and a scientific debate.
edit on 23-12-2015 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: breakingbs
a reply to: neoholographic


Pleeeease not a race of "einsteins" tho.


:/


Or anyone ELSE.

why not. MS needs some more of the hoax GR hypotheses



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 06:20 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

as a former idiot, well one in transition, I can assure them that being smart is not based exclusively on genetics. Some of us just have farther to travel than others. We do slip back into barbarism without mental upkeep though. That could be genetic. Some people seem like they are just cemented in awesomeness.

As far as intelligence goes, when they can describe what it is I will listen. We still cant even determine what it is or how to even measure it accurately. Until then its all just what WE THINK is smart behavior....we idiots that is. We have "very important" opinions we respect for some reason.





edit on 12 23 2015 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


So you can have people who are brain damaged but there's no effect on intelligence so they can rewire the brain and learn differently vs. others who can never learn differently because genes related to intelligence are damaged or ordered differently.

The point you appear to be dismissing is that just because they are unable to learn doesn't mean they must have damaged their "intelligence genes". They could have damaged some other gene which is crucial to how the brain develops. The brain is an extremely complex mechanism and messing with one important gene could stop it working completely. The gene doesn't even need to be directly related to the brain. It might be the gene which is involved in regulating blood flow through the brain or the gene responsible for replication of brain cells. Damaging any gene like those would cause the brain to have serious problems and probably prevent learning completely. But it wouldn't exactly be logical to call them intelligence genes... or maybe it would, I guess it depends on your interpretation of what an intelligence gene is.



posted on Dec, 24 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Yea, I'm sure your right. I have no doubt that the greatest scientific minds of the world rush to a website called "Above Top Secret" to have their latest scientific discoveries peer reviewed and vetted. I'm sure that is the first thing on their minds is to go to the most popular conspiracy website on the net with 104 forums populated by the lunatic fringe of the internet to get the best possible input on their studies.

You don't fool me in the least with your reply, I've got your type pegged. IMO, it seems like you just like to hang around here, harp on other people and try to drive them away from what you consider to be your forum. Have at it then.
edit on 24-12-2015 by MichiganSwampBuck because: Removed statemsnts that could be considered insulting. Merry Christmas.

edit on 24-12-2015 by MichiganSwampBuck because: another adjustment



posted on Dec, 24 2015 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Maybe there really is a true Limitless pill out there that we don't yet know about... We, being the public.



posted on Dec, 24 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Hi SwampBuck,


and is one of the reasons that has caused me to post very little here anymore these days

I know what you're saying. But I figure that the best that a couple of guys like us, who've been around for a few years, can do is to try to interject a little wisdom into these debates and allow the young 'uns to figure it out on their own.

I remember a time when I knew it all. Now a few decades later I know that I really didn't know diddley squat.


-dex



posted on Dec, 24 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: DexterRiley
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Hi SwampBuck,


and is one of the reasons that has caused me to post very little here anymore these days

I know what you're saying. But I figure that the best that a couple of guys like us, who've been around for a few years, can do is to try to interject a little wisdom into these debates and allow the young 'uns to figure it out on their own.

I remember a time when I knew it all. Now a few decades later I know that I really didn't know diddley squat.


-dex



Ain't that the truth.

Get a thick skin and pick and choose who you want to communicate with.

Just cuz someone posts, does not mean you have to engage with them. But, often you come to an understanding of each other.


edit on 24-12-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 03:30 PM
link   
When a trend is noticed among different races that is when the existence of this gean will be hushed up.
edit on 25-12-2015 by zinc12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   
This kind of science won't be used to make us all smarter, it will probably be used to retard large portions of the population...unfortunately.

A new caste system of physically and mentally superior "engineered" humans at the top. Once that happens, the rest of humanity will be physically and mentally unable to ever retake control.

Who needs robots and AI to do all the crappy/dangerous/dirty jobs...just engineer stupid people with large muscles and docile personalities to do it.

edit on 25-12-2015 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join