te:
rote:
deviation below mine.
n that most people estimate most others as less intelligent than themselves most of the time.
good reasons, but aren't. It's nothing new. It's why teamwork is important.
ny barrier to valuing their contributions. A lot of the work I did didn't r equire much intelligence, or experience but it was quicker to do it myself than to take the time to package it up and pass it on to one of my junior c olleagues
Q tests - isn't a single skill and there's no evidence that whatever is bei ng measured and touted as intelligence - essentially exam-passing capacity
- is normally distributed (in the sense of conforming to the Gaussian bell curve).
exam passing capacity.
to the bell curve.
elates - to some extent - with the concept of intelligence.
t's an empty claim.
yawn.
ed to various levels of intelligence" which does happen to be wrong, becaus e the IQ (intelligence quotient) is a number evaluated by pencil and paper IQ tests.
I can't even be bothered. You follow so little.
ally referred to as intelligence, but it doesn't quantify anything that is directly related to actual intelligence (whatever that might be).
ured by intelligence tests" but Mensa exists to prove them wrong.
lol, unfortunately I agree with the latter point
ligence tests.
e itself fits any bell curve. This is IQ 101 stuff, there's little point an yone debating it.
't paying attention in that particular undergraduate class.
re was being given, I can understand your unwillingness to cope with the co nsequences.
ise this, but resorting endlessly to childishness makes you look childish. And guess what, it is childish.
n't demonstrate that it isn't there.
oh dear
ens to be the basis of any useful discussion - and your unwillingness to en gage with the idea that IQ is only weakly related to intelligence
we know it doesn't equal intelligence. This is iq basic stuff.
childish
looks rather more like a life-time addiction to sloppy thinking.
all because I'm not interested in debating with you what is already well es tablished. Childish.
th exam-passing capacity, so administrators take it seriously, but nobody e lse needs to and most probably shouldn't.
you are, you would have known that there is real climate science (as publis hed in peer reviewed journals) and denialist propaganda that's fed into any media outlet that is too cheapskate to do real science reporting. Asking f or "evidence" that this has been going on for years is roughly like insisti ng that somebody identifies Donald Trump as a contender for the Republican Party nomination as a presidential candidate.
basic knowledge of the world. He failed.
well thought out but it has too many holes in it to convince others. Don't let your ego fool you into thinking otherwise.
ucing facts or by linking to more or less authoratitive sources. I'm afraid that it's your ego that is on display here, and it looks to be enlarged wi th hot air.
. I'm well aware that my capacities are finite, but you aren't testing them .
u don't find my arguments convincing, but you have done so in a way that ma kes it perfectly clear that you haven't understood them.
yawn. again.
nd you don't seem to have noticed that you are out of your depth.
pathetic & childish