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.

 

Obama Adviser Argued: Kids from Big Families Have Lower IQs

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 12:15 AM
link   
A book "Human Ecology", was published in 1973.

In that book it was suggested that The U.S. Government had the "responsibility" to "to halt the growth of the American population" !!!

Further suggestions were that children (5 or more) from larger families were in general, dumber !!!

John P. Holdren, the top science adviser to President Barack Obama, was a co-author of that book.


February 22, 2012

(CNSNews.com) - John P. Holdren, the top science adviser to President Barack Obama, wrote in a book he co-authored with population control advocates Paul and Anne Ehrlich that children from larger families have lower IQs.


The book—"Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions"—argued that the United States government had a “responsibility to halt the growth of the American population.”

“It surely is no accident that so many of the most successful individuals are first or only children,” wrote Holdren and the Ehrlichs, “nor that children of large families (particularly with more than four children), whatever their economic status, on the average perform less well in school and show lower I.Q. scores than their peers from small families.”

Dumber by the dozen ?


This book as well as others from the era, were widely accepted by many "experts" and social advisers for many years to follow.

However, in 2000, some studies from other experts seemed to debunk the notion.

Holdren himself claimed a different twist during his Senate confirmation hearing in 2009.
(I wonder how much he made off book sales and speaking engagements and in advisory roles)

I wonder how many average people believe(d) this theory ?



Do we really need or want these kind of "Experts"

running our life ??



Makes you wonder about this:

The Obama administration has issued a regulation, set to take effect on Aug. 1, that will require all health-care plans in the United States to cover sterilizations, artificial contraceptives and abortifacients without any fees or co-pay. Many American religious leaders, including all of the nation's Roman Catholic bishops, have denounced the regulation as an attack on religious liberty because it will force many Americans to act against their consciences and the teachings of their faith.








edit on Feb-23-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Obama Adviser Argued: Kids from Big Families Have Lower IQs


Personally I dont have a problem with people telling facts as they are best known at the time.
If the state of knowledge was, at the time, the book was written in 1973, that this statement was in fact true, then why the hell should it NOT be written about?



Originally posted by xuenchen
However, in 2000, some studies from other experts seemed to debunk the notion.


You cant go around saying that things shouldnt be said, based on the possibility that 27 years later, somebody might "seem" to find evidence against it.

It also shouldnt be seen as any kind of shame or embarrasment that you told the truth as it was known all those years ago.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
fact: talking head's like this guy spend most of their life offering unproven facts and baseless opinions than actually accomplishing anything in life.

they are also the first to scurry like rats and weasels to the very people they criticize when sh-t hits the fan.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


Perhaps the original book "Human Ecology" has some verifiable references and sources to at least show some merit.

I don't know.

The studies from 2000 I believe did.

If anyone has a copy, please share.









edit on Feb-23-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Perhaps the original book "Human Ecology" has some verifiable references ...



Well, I've just spent a bit of time reading about this topic. There is even a wikipedia page related to it.
The conclusion that I've reached is that the original statement from 1973 still holds, and that John P. Holdren was right the first time.
Larger families = lower IQ.

The problem is merely that of political correctness. Larger families are mainly from lower socioeconomic groups and certain races and this fact alone means that any statement pointing out the results of studies that they are lower IQ just means YOURE RACIST!!!!!!!

Nevertheless, it seems to be true.

Apart from the wikipedia page linked above, this page is a simple overview of the situation.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


That's interesting !

I never thought of any specific race having larger families.

I wonder if that is mentioned in Holdren's 1973 book ?







edit on Feb-23-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 01:41 AM
link   
Is this an attack toward Santorum, and Romney? Whats funny is we are unsure on how big Obamas family is.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 04:05 AM
link   
these so called experts spent the better half of the last 40 years coming up with tripe like this. now, we have all of their theories firmly set in our society. has the average IQ level gone up? nope, americans on average are getting dumber and dumber. and that is exactly what people like him want, they are playing for the other team from the inside of ours.
edit on 23-2-2012 by wingsfan because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 04:31 AM
link   
"Obama Science adviser publishes findings over 30 years ago that still hold true but the results are icky and play into our typical NWO population control paranoia so we do not like it even if it is true and accurate still."

What did I miss?



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   
When I saw the title, I knew it was CNSnews. They LOVE to associate Obama with "bad things" they can dig up.
As others have said, I think there's probably some truth to this. It only makes sense.

That doesn't mean that every kid from a large family is stupid (I'm the youngest of seven)
it's just a piece of data.

I am all for curbing the population. I don't have kids (mostly) by choice and I think it's good that more and more people are deciding not to reproduce. With the number of people who breed like fools, the species is going to survive. We may become less intelligent as fewer families have more children, but that just makes me happy that I didn't have kids.

Interestingly, it's mostly religious people who want to have more and more kids... "Life is precious, blah, blah, blah..." It's also the religious who are so eager to force other people to breed, by outlawing abortion and birth control... I have come to realize lately that these people are insane. So, I'll just sit back and watch the show.

But remember... more is not always better...



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It's also the religious who are so eager to force other people to breed, by outlawing abortion and birth control... I have come to realize lately that these people are insane. .

What is insane is to claim that religious people are trying to outlaw birth control.


That being said, I highly doubt that kids from big families have lower IQ's. They probably don't get as much teaching attention at home like kids from smaller families. How much a person is exposed to and taught is only a part of 'IQ'.

What is IQ?

Whether or not IQ tests are an accurate measure of intelligence is open to debate. It is difficult to define exactly what constitutes intelligence; it may be the case that IQ scores represent a very specific type of intelligence.


Human intelligence includes abilities and traits, abstract thought, communication, creativity, emotional intelligence, knowledge, learning, memory, problem solving, reaction time, reasoning, understanding and visual processing.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
What is insane is to claim that religious people are trying to outlaw birth control.


From the leading GOP presidential (and overtly religious) candidate:

Santorum: States Should Have the Right to Outlaw Birth Control


edit on 2/23/2012 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

What is insane is to claim that religious people are trying to outlaw birth control.


They are. What is insane about it?



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
That being said, I highly doubt that kids from big families have lower IQ's. They probably don't get as much teaching attention at home like kids from smaller families. How much a person is exposed to and taught is only a part of 'IQ'.

What is IQ?

Whether or not IQ tests are an accurate measure of intelligence is open to debate. It is difficult to define exactly what constitutes intelligence; it may be the case that IQ scores represent a very specific type of intelligence.


Human intelligence includes abilities and traits, abstract thought, communication, creativity, emotional intelligence, knowledge, learning, memory, problem solving, reaction time, reasoning, understanding and visual processing.



Instead of assuming and doubting, a sure sign of intelligence would have been to at least read. The study in question understands full well what intelligence is. Your false assumption about being taught less has nothing to do with what is actually being discussed.

You assume they need to be educated on what defines intelligence. I am curious why? It seems like a weak argumentative ploy.

Just saying. Instead of assuming and doubting, reading and refuting could have seemed well intelligent.
edit on 23-2-2012 by LErickson because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

Okay .. watched the whole thing ... ( ZZZZZZZZ - but I liked the commercial in the beginning)
'think progress dot org eh ... well ... that's reeeeeeeeally left ... isn't it?
I'm sure they didn't take anything out of context .. naaah ... of course not.


He's right .. states have rights to pass whatever laws they want as long as they are constitutional.
He said that the law should be whatever the majority of the people want.
The rest was him stating his personal beliefs. Everyone can have them.

From your referenced article -
Think Progress . org

But an overwhelming majority of Americans — virtually all women (more than 99 percent ) aged 15–44 have used at least one contraceptive method ....


That's an Obama-ism and untrue.
Obama Birth Control Numbers Don't Add Up

Yet the National Health Statistics Report (Number 36, March 3, 2011), released by the same department, HHS, that developed the mandate, says only 86.8 percent of women aged 15-44 have ever had vaginal intercourse.


86.8 percent have had sex ... and of those having sex how many used birth control? It's even less.

Oh .. from the same source -


The President also claims "more than half of all women between the ages of 18 and 34 have struggled to afford" birth control. "Struggled" is subjective, but birth control is not expensive. Andrew McCarthy reports in the February 11 National Review that birth control pills cost as little as $15 per month. McCarthy further notes that diaphragms and Nuva Rings (both worn inside the vagina) cost as low as $15 per month, and the progestin–dispensing arm implant Implanon averages about $11 a month. Injections of the birth control shot Depo-Provera, McCarthy says, “go for about 40 smackers, and they last three months.” Condoms cost about a quarter, and aren't hard to find free...

According to the Guttmacher Institute analysis, an additional 6.3 percent of women rely on the no-cost methods of withdrawal and periodic abstinence. We can be sure women suffer no financial "struggle" to afford methods that rely more on self- discipline than technology



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson
They are. What is insane about it?

They aren't So to accuse them of it and say they are insane for doing it when they aren't ... that is what is insane.
edit on 2/23/2012 by FlyersFan because: typo



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by LErickson
The study in question understands full well what intelligence is. Your false assumption about being taught less has nothing to do with what is actually being discussed.

I made no false assumptions and I"m plenty intelligent thank you very much. When earning my degree in psychology we studied IQs and testing etc etc etc. I stand by my post. IQ testing being accurate is open to debate. IQ testing doesn't fully record true intelligence.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I made no false assumptions and I"m plenty intelligent thank you very much.


You assumed that the study did not understand what intelligence is. You were wrong.
That is what we call a false assumption.
What would you call it?


When earning my degree in psychology we studied IQs and testing etc etc etc. I stand by my post. IQ testing being accurate is open to debate. IQ testing doesn't fully record true intelligence.


I am not debating that. You sure did a quick shift from your point. Most intelligent people that point out intelligence and education are two different things know better than to try and brag about their education to prove they are intelligent.

I cannot even believe you just pulled that.

I am not sure why you assumed what you did but you did and it was wrong. I was hoping you might explain why instead of trying to tell me you are intelligent because you have a degree.



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by LErickson
They are. What is insane about it?

They aren't So to accuse them of it and say they are insane for doing it when they aren't ... that is what is insane.
edit on 2/23/2012 by FlyersFan because: typo


You can stick your fingers in your ears all you like but they are.
I will be more than happy to provide the bills for you after work tonight. Until then it would do you good to look into it instead of just sitting here assuming things.

Did you even see BH's post?



posted on Feb, 23 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
86.8 percent have had sex ... and of those having sex how many used birth control? It's even less.



Are you male?
Do you think the only reason for women to be prescribed birth control pills is to prevent pregnancy?



new topics




 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join