Originally posted by monkeybus
I know there is such a thing as a property deed, im just saying that i dont believe that somone has the right to say right thats mine, thats mine, oh
ill take a peice of the moon too please.
Well the problem is that is Exactly what a property deed does. It says, this is yours. And to be frank I dont care if you dont beleive I have the
right to own the land my house is on. I do, by law, both governmental and natural.
It had been for quite a while because it was so eggregiously flawed in its assunmptions and metahdology. You would have known that if you had actually
done more than a cursory scan of the information. In other words, maybe you should have actually read it.
two points.
1) thier basic theory is not only flawed
The book argues that differences in national income (in the form of per capita gross domestic product) correlate with differences in the average
national intelligence quotient (IQ).
2) surprise surprise, they actually break thier own methadology in several cases (listed below) and also compeltly abondon thier theory in exactly two
cases.
The two most striking exceptions, however, may be Ireland and the United States. Ireland, whose average I.Q. is listed at 93, has the fourth highest
per capita GDP (PPP adjusted) of any country in the world (after tiny Luxembourg, Norway and the United States).[7][8] The United States, with an
average I.Q. of 98, has the third-highest per capita GDP (PPP adjusted), and is by far the most populous of the richest 10 countries. Both of these
countries have I.Q. averages considerably below those of countries such as South Korea, Taiwan, and Germany, but have per capita GDPs about 1.5 times
higher.
Interesting aint it? A pair of Professors from Northern Ireland and Norway just happen to break thier methadology when "determining" the average IQ
of The republic of Ireland and the United states.
Now what else do those two nations have in common? Very free market based economies. Which again is interesting since the professors seemed to beleive
that communist nations had substansially higher IQ to Percapita GDP correlations.
Hmm Now thats not even including the fact that the book was NEVER peer reviewed, has exceedingly sloppy "research"
Rather than do their own IQ studies (a potentially massive project), the authors average and adjust existing studies. For 104 of the 185
nations, no studies were available. In those cases, the authors have used an estimated value by taking averages of the IQs of neighboring or
comparable nations. For example, the authors arrived at a figure of 84 for El Salvador by averaging their calculations of 79 for Guatemala and 88 for
Colombia. Including those estimated IQs, the correlation of IQ and GDP is 0.62.
To obtain a figure for South Africa, the authors averaged IQ studies done on different ethnic groups, resulting in a figure of 72. The figures for
Colombia, Peru and Singapore were arrived at in a similar manner. For People's Republic of China, the authors used a figure of 109.4 for Shanghai and
adjusted it down by an arbitrary 6 points because they believed the average across China's rural areas was probably less than that in Shanghai.
Another figure from a study done in Beijing was not adjusted downwards. Those two studies formed the resultant score for China (PRC). For the
figure of Macau, the average IQ is 104 which is obtained from the score of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and in such a way
transformed into an IQ score [6].
In some cases, the IQ of a country is estimated by averaging the IQs of countries that are not actually neighbors of the country in question.
For example, Kyrgyzstan's IQ is estimated by averaging the IQs of Iran and Turkey, neither of which is close to Kyrgyzstan – China, which is a
geographic neighbor, is not counted as such by Lynn and Vanhanen.
Like I said, read a source, study it, and try to actually understand it BEFORE you try to post it as evidence, for your sake if not mine. Because I
can assure you, when you post soemthing this ridiculous as "proof" of your asinine claims, it only makes you look bad.
[edit on 7/7/2008 by Shazam The Unbowed]
