Sarah Palin's Emails Written At 8th Grade Level -- Better Than Some CEOs

Call me paranoid, but it all seems as a campaign stunt to me.

I Think she is to be pushed by some powergroups as a (possible) answer to Ron Paul.

The difference is topdown versus grassroot.

As soon as "surprise(ing)" documents starts turning up, unquestioned by the subject or her team, it smells like programmed character building for mass view.

Originally posted by schuyler
The Flesch-Kincaid formula is this: Divide the total number of words by the total number of sentences and multiply by .39. Divide the total number of syllables by the total number of words and multiply that by 11.8. Take the result and subtract by 15.59. That's your so-called "grade level." So what are they doing here? Basically the formula asserts that longer sentences and words with more syllables can equate to a higher grade level. Rounding the score really hides the incorrect specificity of the score which, when you think about it, should make you instantly suspicious.

Does it take into account the audience that the speaker is communicating with? A good public speaker, even in the written form, will communicate in a manner that those that will read it can identify with the message immediately. That said, thanks. I don't think I've become a topic on ATS since my Introduction.

This post goes to show what a joke this two-party system has become. This is the best they can come up with? I guess they feel most Americans are so ignorant and uninformed that this kind of thing has significance. What a waste of time. Palin is a joke without having to go the the trouble of analyzing her writing skills.

However, I think if the liberals seek to attack the intelligence of conservatives, they would have more luck focusing on the fact that they voted in a Republican president so ignorant of the English language that he had to resort to making up his own words. He left the U.S. in a mess....and gave us "Bushisms."

What a legacy.

Originally posted by intrepid
Does it take into account the audience that the speaker is communicating with? A good public speaker, even in the written form, will communicate in a manner that those that will read it can identify with the message immediately. That said, thanks. I don't think I've become a topic on ATS since my Introduction.

IMO that's exactly the proper use of these formulas, to tailor the message to the audience's capabilities. The FOG Index (another one) was developed for use by journalists to use in newspaper articles. It tends to grade higher than the others. The Flesch-Kincaid was developed by the US Navy for use in designing curriculum material for enlisted recruits. Practically speaking, the formulas have been used by professional writers (journalists, textbook authors) who would normally write at a "higher" level to "tailor" (as in "dumb-down") their writing to the lowest common denominator of their audience. Having been a Navy recruit myself I can attest to the fact that the curriculum was dumbed WAY down. The irony of all this is that the formulas are now being used to judge the writers' abilities and even their intelligence, the exact opposite of why they were developed in the first place.

Having been immersed in these formulas I've grown not to trust them much except in a very general way.

reply to post by schuyler


I am like a top 20%'er and the 120 - 160 crowd is top 35%. The median and average iq is between 100 - 120 which accounts for at least 45% of the populous. Anyone between 200 - 250 is like top 5%!

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

I am like a top 20%'er and the 120 - 160 crowd is top 35%. The median and average iq is between 100 - 120 which accounts for at least 45% of the populous. Anyone between 200 - 250 is like top 5%!

Your iq is nowhere near 170, not with your dismal verbal iq. You are constantly trying to sell your iq as being high, which is nothing more than puffery. As I said, use some of what you do have and get some English lessons.

reply to post by mishigas


As I've said here it doesn't really matter so I choose not to be a know it all as some people obviously find it offensive when someone knows more then then on any particular topic.

I can run circles on intelligience around a whole lot of people here.

Originally posted by mishigas
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1

 

I am like a top 20%'er and the 120 - 160 crowd is top 35%. The median and average iq is between 100 - 120 which accounts for at least 45% of the populous. Anyone between 200 - 250 is like top 5%!

Your iq is nowhere near 170, not with your dismal verbal iq. You are constantly trying to sell your iq as being high, which is nothing more than puffery. As I said, use some of what you do have and get some English lessons.

200/250?

WTF are you talking about? That would be 36/86 points above the highest class on the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test.

That would be 70/120 points higher than the highest class on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale.

These are the only scales that I've ever heard of.... Care to enlighten us what the name of this scale, that your numbers supposedly back, is?

Mmmhmmm... That's what I thought.

People who score high on I.Q. tests, don't brag about it... There is no point in doing so... ever!

Smart people don't have to convince others they are smart... Stupid people have to convince others they aren't. [stupid, duh.]

Think about that... you can quote me on it.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by schuyler

 

I am like a top 20%'er and the 120 - 160 crowd is top 35%. The median and average iq is between 100 - 120 which accounts for at least 45% of the populous. Anyone between 200 - 250 is like top 5%!

I'm sorry, but that is a completely ignorant statement that absolutely proves you don't know what you are talking about. IQ scores, by definition, are on a bell-shaped curve where, as we all know, the average IQ is 100. This score of 100 is both the mean, median, and modal score meaning it is the arithmetic average, is exactly in the middle, and occurs most often, hence it is at the top of the bell shape. In general terms (not going past the decimal point) 66+% of the population has an IQ between 85 and 115. The other 33+% are scattered evenly on both sides of this large middle portion, about 17% less than 85 and about 17% greater than 115.

15 points is one "standard deviation," another property of the statistical method used. If you take TWO standard deviations, that's between 70 and 130 and is composed of 97% of the population. That means 1.5% are less than 70 and 1.5% are greater than 130. Therefore, if you have an IQ of 130, then you're "smarter than" 98.5% of the population.

NONE of your statements quoted above are anwhere near reality. If you claim to be a "top 20%er" then your IQ could be 115 and make that cut. The average IQ is NOT "between 100 and 120; it is EXACTLY 100. IQ scores are not valid above 170 and a score of "200 to 250" is not even measurable. If it were it would be a small fraction of 1%, several places past the decimal.

I quite realiuze that the traditional concept of IQ is fraught with controversy and arguments over cultural bias, among other issues. There have been many variations, and even THIS one has a variation where the standard deviation is 16, not 15. This was the 'original' attempt at measuring IQ and as such we can consider it dated. But it does no good to make up stuff like this and pass it off as knowledge. If you tried to pass this stuff off in an academic setting you're grade would be "E" for "Epic Fail."

Look, bud. I've got nothing against you personally, but stop with the B.S. It's too easy to get caught.

reply to post by schuyler


Good post. I wonder what makes some people brag about their alleged high IQ's? What would make somebody dwell on that? Insecurity? Ego?

reply to post by Laokin


Marilyn vos Savant has a recorded 228 and Hawking is about 240. William James Sidis's iq was estimated between 250 - 300.

My 170 is because I had the basics of quantum physics explained to me in detail and fully understood it. Less then a million people can do that globally. I passed 2 courses in Shelby County Alabama School District in less then 4 months combined. Geography (11.94 - 01.95) and Alabma History (01.94 - 02.95) and it allowed me to finish all my morning homework by lunch time and handed in after lunch because I had nothing to do in that class for like 3 months, Geography is still a state record. I was ready for algebra by the time I was in the 6th grade but the school I was in did not offer it. I was reading on a collegiate level by the time I was 14. I learned to read and write by the time I was 3.

The chart is as follows :
Mentally deficient - less then 75
Below Average - 75 - 90
Average - 90 - 115
Mildly Gifted - 115 to 129
Moderately Gifted - 130 to 144
Highly Gifted - 145 to 159
Exceptionally Gifted - 160 to 179
Profoundly Gifted - 180 - 200
SuperIntelligeint Genius - 200 - up

My iq is also shown in how by at least 95% or better of threads I post to ends and shuts them down cold as well as how I am rarely second guessed and challenged and have yet to meet my equal here on ATS.

If I said the following phrase would you understand what I said and meant :

"The paradigminic conjectural dichotomic absolutional pseudomonal diatribe is immoderately preposterous!"

Out of 1,000 people at least 950 would be asking "What did he say?" and have their jaws drop to the floor in either disbelief or think that they are being made fun of hence why I use simple phrases that everyone can understand.

Translated the previous means, "The way the division between us all is so much of a problem that two parts of the absolute fake disaster is so totally far out there that it is foolish!".

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Laokin

 

My iq is also shown in how by at least 95% or better of threads I post to ends and shuts them down cold as well as how I am rarely second guessed and challenged and have yet to meet my equal here on ATS.

You actually have, you just don't know it. Your English skills are marginal at best, for example. The sentence above isn't even grammatical and technically makes no sense. IQ scores like this are used for school children, not adults. The entire issue is so-called "mental age" divided by physical age (grade level) which is meaningless for an adult. The fact that you learned to read by age three is, well, very nice, but by the time you are in your twenties, most people know how to read. That advantage is lost to you. Nobody cares if you read Milton's "Paradise Lost" when you were five. IQ tests these days are used primarily for the identification of learning disabilities. In common terms, they aren't used to look for geniuses; they are used to look for idiots. Do you actually believe anyone cares that you scored high in an Alabama school district test? It's not as if Alabama is esteemed in its level of educational attainment.

That's one reason why a lot of the recent work on IQ revolves around social skills as a measure of intelligence rather than the ability to understand mathematics or spatial relationships. Also, intelligence has nothing to do with experience and knowledge. You can be very smart, but woefully ignorant, as you have demonstrated here. For example, you are obsessed with your own intelligence to the detriment of the actual topic of this thread, which is the proper use of readability formulas in analyzing writing. I really hope you are not this way, but you present yourself as a self-absorbed narcissistic little p***k. Nobody likes you. If you're so smart, why don't you understand that?

I actually feel sorry for people who are unusually intelligent. They often wind up weird. I was introduced to one young genius who had done something "special" so I congratulated him and told him what he'd done was cool. He proceeded to tell me the word "cool" was used to denote temperature and I had misused it. So I sat him down and we had a little discussion on the word "vernacular," which he had apparently missed learning, and the difference between a prescriptive and a descriptive dictionary. If he looked in Webster's Third, he'd find the word "cool" used exactly as I had and has been since the 1950's. If he was so smart, why didn't he understand that? It's a fairly simple concept, but his 'brilliant' mind was narrrowly focused on being literal. You miss a lot that way.

Have you ever been to a Mensa meeting? Those guys don't take much stock in personal appearance and apparently have never heard of deodorant. Oh, they are very smart, but they can't get dates. And THAT means, in the naturalistic world, their genes won't survive into another generation. To put it another way, throw a genius with a 170 IQ in the jungle with a US Navy SEAL and see who comes out alive. The definition of "intelligence" is quite circumstantial. Being successful in the school room does not equate to success in life. In many cases it's an inverse relationship.

I would think it's really not so much about how intelligent you are, but what you have done with the abilities you have been given. Also, intelligence without education is like a very powerful engine without fuel. It's not going anywhere. Somehow I think frittering away your time on ATS doesn't cut it.

reply to post by schuyler


Higher iq does equate to greater understanding and knowledge hence why most people with an iq better then say, 160 are those telling the suits what's good.

We can understand and see things from a much broader prespective as compared to the rest of the populous. Higher iq's also occur much more frequently in those with some type of either neuological or learning comprehension individuals. So for you to say that a higher iq does not equate with enhanced knowledge is dead wrong. We can also bring up viewpoints not previously thought of on a multitude of topics.

That friend of yours grew up in a very sheltered existance all throughout their lives which didn't allow him to associate with those of a lesser iq hence why he used the literate definition of the word cool as in temperature as they associate every word with the Oxford definition and sees words like cool, in "That's Cool!" as slang and are not traditonally taught the slang variants of words and phrases. That is all that was. Linguistically speaking that is what occured. It is never to be used, nor seen as a strike against him, his parents or his upbringing.

I've used my high iq to do backchannel and shadow work on behalf of the people as that is what got me on the radar of TPTB and have since used superior iq and linguistic skills to stop and cease alot of these draconian policies dead cold. I've met Mrs. Palin personally at least twice sometime between Q4 2007 - Q2 2008 and this is how I can pass my judgement upon her. She comes off as smart but the truth of the matter is she doesn't know beyond what is put on her cue cards and is currently being used by TPTB due to her "MILF" appearance. That is it, same goes for Rep. Bachman as neither has any real substance. She is being sold exclusively and solely on sex. To get the brain dead idiots to go gaga over the hottie from Alaska. Hence why she is always done up in full make up, has at least 1/2 of her cleavage shown at all times, traditional mid thigh high skirts, panty hose and high heels. Have you ever seen her wear a dress that goes half way down her calves or ankles and be dressed in a pantsuit? Nope, and you won't. She looks like your average high school milf teacher fantasy and nothing like a respectable political candidate.

This is what gives me legitimate license and near carte blanche to pass judgement upon her.

Heck, I've met Obama, Biden and those two alone and individually will run circles around Palin when it comes to intelligience. One of the master reasons why she is not VPOTUS is because she's an airhead and McCain has early onset Alzhiemer's which disqualifies both instantly from leading a nation.

reply to post by schuyler

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by Laokin

My iq is also shown in how by at least 95% or better of threads I post to ends and shuts them down cold as well as how I am rarely second guessed and challenged and have yet to meet my equal here on ATS.

You have never 'won' a debate on ATS that I can remember ever seeing. You are easily backed into a corner, and your standard response is "My iq is sooo high I can hardly breath up here!"

Your command of the English language is about an 8th grade level and not improving; you've reached your peak in that area and it's a pretty low peak. Verbal IQ is a key measure of intelligence, and when combined with Performance IQ, like the SEAL example below, puts you at somewhere around 90-110, imo.

But, back to Schuyler's post: very good summary of his persona, imo.

You actually have, you just don't know it. Your English skills are marginal at best, for example. The sentence above isn't even grammatical and technically makes no sense. IQ scores like this are used for school children, not adults. The entire issue is so-called "mental age" divided by physical age (grade level) which is meaningless for an adult. The fact that you learned to read by age three is, well, very nice, but by the time you are in your twenties, most people know how to read. That advantage is lost to you. Nobody cares if you read Milton's "Paradise Lost" when you were five. IQ tests these days are used primarily for the identification of learning disabilities. In common terms, they aren't used to look for geniuses; they are used to look for idiots. Do you actually believe anyone cares that you scored high in an Alabama school district test? It's not as if Alabama is esteemed in its level of educational attainment.

That's one reason why a lot of the recent work on IQ revolves around social skills as a measure of intelligence rather than the ability to understand mathematics or spatial relationships. Also, intelligence has nothing to do with experience and knowledge. You can be very smart, but woefully ignorant, as you have demonstrated here. For example, you are obsessed with your own intelligence to the detriment of the actual topic of this thread, which is the proper use of readability formulas in analyzing writing. I really hope you are not this way, but you present yourself as a self-absorbed narcissistic little p***k. Nobody likes you. If you're so smart, why don't you understand that?

I actually feel sorry for people who are unusually intelligent. They often wind up weird. I was introduced to one young genius who had done something "special" so I congratulated him and told him what he'd done was cool. He proceeded to tell me the word "cool" was used to denote temperature and I had misused it. So I sat him down and we had a little discussion on the word "vernacular," which he had apparently missed learning, and the difference between a prescriptive and a descriptive dictionary. If he looked in Webster's Third, he'd find the word "cool" used exactly as I had and has been since the 1950's. If he was so smart, why didn't he understand that? It's a fairly simple concept, but his 'brilliant' mind was narrrowly focused on being literal. You miss a lot that way.

Have you ever been to a Mensa meeting? Those guys don't take much stock in personal appearance and apparently have never heard of deodorant. Oh, they are very smart, but they can't get dates. And THAT means, in the naturalistic world, their genes won't survive into another generation. To put it another way, throw a genius with a 170 IQ in the jungle with a US Navy SEAL and see who comes out alive. The definition of "intelligence" is quite circumstantial. Being successful in the school room does not equate to success in life. In many cases it's an inverse relationship.

I would think it's really not so much about how intelligent you are, but what you have done with the abilities you have been given. Also, intelligence without education is like a very powerful engine without fuel. It's not going anywhere. Somehow I think frittering away your time on ATS doesn't cut it.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


You totally missed every point that Schuyler made, didn't you? Was that intentional?

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
reply to post by schuyler

 

Higher iq does equate to greater understanding and knowledge hence why most people with an iq better then say, 160 are those telling the suits what's good.

The "best and the brightest," eh? Every time we've allowed that to happen has been a complete disaster.

This is what gives me legitimate license and near carte blanche to pass judgement upon her.

You are not qualified to mow my lawn. You're very impressed with yourself, but you are the only one so inclined. The fact that you don't seem to get that proves the point. My guess is that you are quite young, are not particularly well educated, and are certainly not in a position to judge Palin, McCain, Obama, or anyone else. You have no evidence for your claims other than your own opinion. You haven't actually DONE anything to justify anyone's trust in any of your self-proclaimed abilities. Your obsession with such betrays a deep-seated insecurity. You certainly have adequately demonstrated that you are not familiar with the many controversial issues surrounding IQ tests, or even the technical and statistical issues involved. Cavlierly throwing around phrases like "say 160" about IQ is just funny to anyone who actually understands the issues. An IQ of 160 is 4 standard deviations above the mean and represents 0.003% of the population. These few thousand people in a country of 300 million aren't "telling the suits what to do"; they're in the basement.

Even if you accept the idea of IQ as 100% valid, it appears that the IQ score measures something with decreasing marginal value. It is important to have enough of it, but having lots and lots does not buy you that much. In other words, a very high IQ is inversely proportional to your success as an individual. If you were truly utilizing your gifts, you would be a Rhodes Scholar with a PhD by now. Instead, you're on ATS. What a waste.

reply to post by schuyler


I do backchannel and shadow work pro bono that allows me to gain more access in 5 minutes then most will ever know lifetime and has gotten me directly in contact with the highest offices in the world.

My most successful campaign that I am allowed to leak is Matchbox Toys International, Inc. who I've been in liasonship with since around 2003 and am a Charter Founder and Founding Member of The Matchbox Ambassador To Collector's who is charged with dissemination of any new information learned from it and took the company from near bankruptcy in 2003 to being a near $1 Billion dollar company nowadays.

My payment for it as I am on record on 4 different occasions declining it (One of the 10 rarest Manufacture made and issued diecast in the world):

Matchbox "Officer" Dudding Commemorative Ford Crown Victoria Police Car !




Photo copyright : 2006 - 2011 Mark Curtis/Matchbox Collector's Community Hall/Aluminum, Refrigeration, Engineering & Safety, Inc./DI Enteprises, Inc.
Model Copyright : 2006 - 2011 DI Enterprises, Inc/Matchbox Toys International, Inc./Mattel, Inc.
Copyright : DI Enterprises, Inc./Mattel, Inc./The Ford Motor Company, Inc.

I've met a literate who's who of celebrities, politicians, royals, news people, sports figures using my iq. My payment has never been in cash but in power and authourity of the last 15 years. When I speak multi billionaires and TPTB run scared because they do not know what I am going to to do next.

You are a clearcut reason and certification that you will never know beyond what is written for you based upon the fact you are so blatantly and evidently taking what I say as an attack but do trust it is not. If you were as smart as you claim you'd stop defending a reject like Palin and attack those douchewads trying to ruin us all and leave us intelligient people to figure out the world's problems and not be a distraction. By you continuing playing into the "Left-v-Right" paradigm tells me you clearly are not as smart as you claim because only us smart people can see totally past it.

Look at my posting history on ATS as I've chosen to post what I have learned and know to enlighten everyone the way I am enlightened today.

reply to post by mishigas


I hit the Birther's on every single thread they posted to the point whereas they are non existent. The Birther threads have died as I was very intricate in shutting each and everyone down.

The Tea Party threads have come to a screeching halt thanks in part to me. The claim Obama is a Muslim has been shot down by me.

I've shut down more then 200 threads.

Wait a second...in the US, grade 8.5 is considered good?

Either way, it's not the just grammar that's important, people should be more concerned about the content of the message...the very thing Palin fails so hard at, it's laughable

reply to post by Lionhearte

I honestly don't understand why people hate Palin in the first place.

The easy answer,

Michelle Obama: "Fortunately, We Have Help From The Media"

Schuyler rocks,

www.realclearpolitics.com...