A speech without substance
in [Golf]
|
From: William Clark on 14 Sep 2008 13:05 In article <60dqc45khlph3c15a7695dveie5auu5d31(a)4ax.com>, Jack Hollis <xsleeper(a)aol.com> wrote: > On 14 Sep 2008 15:25:43 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> > wrote: > > >> I have no idea who had the best SAT scores. > > > >Let me try to make this easier for you. Both of Obama's parents were > >highly educated and intelligent. > > Education is not the same as intelligence. > > >Educated, intelligent people tend to > >have educated, intelligent children. That is simply the way of things. > > You've never heard of the term regression to the mean. Ok, Jack, why don't you explain to everyone here then? I am sure we are all ears for this new definition. > > >You seem to be getting tripped up over the fact that's he's black, but > >the truth the color of his skin had no bearing on his IQ. As hard as that > >is for you to swallow. > > I'm sorry to disillusion you my friend, but it has been widely > reported that African Americans score significantly lower on > standardized IQ tests than whites. All African Americans? Does EVERY African American have to score lower than all whites, or are you just having trouble with the idea of an "average"? Dear, oh dear. Statistics don't seem to be your strong suit. > > This is from the Report of a Task Force established by the Board of > Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association > Released August 7, 1995. It was published in American Psychologist, > Feb 1996. Official Journal of the APA. > > "African Americans. The relatively low mean of the distribution of > African-American intelligence test scores has been discussed for many > years. Although studies using different tests and samples yield a > range of results, the Black mean is typically about one standard > deviation (about 15 points) below that of Whites (Loehlin et al, 1975; > Jensen, 1980; Reynolds et al, 1987)." Note the use of the world "mean", here. Several times. Now do you get it? > > There are some indications that the gap is shrinking a bit, but the > difference is still significant. > > Obviously, group data says nothing about any individual. So why waste everyone's time with this drivel?
From: William Clark on 14 Sep 2008 13:07 In article <48CD2B5D.4CFD5CD0(a)att.net>, The Professor <DBID(a)att.net> wrote: > Jack Hollis wrote: > > > On 14 Sep 2008 14:44:59 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> > > wrote: > > > > >> This is all conjecture. I just would like to see Obama's SAT and LSAT > > >> scores. These tests are standardized and correlate highly with IQ > > >> tests. > > > > > >You are correct. As does academic achievement. > > > > Not really. Mensa has never used GPA or having a degree as > > qualification to join their society. They know that those measure are > > purely subjective. You could an MD and a dozen Ph D's and that > > wouldn't get you in. However, back in Obama's days in school, a high > > enough SAT or LSAT score would do the trick. In fact, you could be a > > high school drop out and get in if your LSAT score was high enough. > > > > Mensa does not accept SAT scores any more because of all the politics > > surrounding the test. > > Not that I care bout MENSA, but the SAT is not a meaningful test. The ACT > does better...at least it tests knowledge. I would like to see the > standardized test scores of people claiming to be intellectually superior to > others though. It's 100% telling when such people won't give you their scores > though. You know that if they were high they'd be wearing them! But it is to Jack and BAR. At least, until they see Obama's, at which time it will have to be re-interpreted.
From: BAR on 14 Sep 2008 13:16 William Clark wrote: > In article <pcadnVDPT-8Ft1DVnZ2dnUVZ_hWdnZ2d(a)comcast.com>, > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> William Clark wrote: >>> In article <f9qdnUBNy6Pym1DVnZ2dnUVZ_vninZ2d(a)comcast.com>, >>> BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Carbon wrote: >>>>> On Sat, 13 Sep 2008 19:59:42 -0400, BAR wrote: >>>>>> William Clark wrote: >>>>>>> In article <De2dnWiJyp5Jh1HVnZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d(a)comcast.com>, >>>>>>> BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Where is his undergraduate transcript? >>>>>>> I doubt you could read it correctly even if it was provided. If this is >>>>>>> your best effort to disparage his academic record, I think you should >>>>>>> find something else to occupy your time. >>>>>> He must have barely graduated from Columbia. >>>>> You sure are wrong a lot. Harvard Law is the top law school in the >>>>> country. They do not accept bottom of the barrel students (i.e. McCain >>>>> and Palin), period. How can you possibly not know that? >>>> If Obama's undergraduate degree from Columbia was awarded based upon >>>> superior achievement or merit he would have put that on he resume. But, >>>> he doesn't mention it. >>> Perhaps in your world people have to flaunt the most meagre >>> achievements. However, in others, and higher education in general, we >>> tend not to make a fuss about them. It's deemed to be poor taste. >> Titles are meaningless in academia? > > No, they are ranks, just like in the military you idolize. Of course, > this has absolutely nothing to do with SATs, GPAs, etc. Rank in the military is given due to proven leadership skills and capabilities, not from reading books and writing papers.
From: BAR on 14 Sep 2008 13:22 William Clark wrote: > In article <G7KdnXG2M7wvrlDVnZ2dnUVZ_uCdnZ2d(a)comcast.com>, > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> annika1980 wrote: >>> On Sep 14, 9:44 am, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Do you know what percentage of Naval Officers of any class make Admiral? >>> In McCain's family it's about 2-out-of-3. McCain was the dumb one. >> True, he couldn't keep an plane flying. > > I believe it was five planes, actually. He should have been flunked out of the Naval Academy.
From: BAR on 14 Sep 2008 13:24
Carbon wrote: > On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 11:56:14 -0400, BAR wrote: >> Carbon wrote: >>> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 15:18:39 +0000, The Professor wrote: >>>> Jack Hollis wrote: >>>>> On 14 Sep 2008 14:44:59 GMT, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> This is all conjecture. I just would like to see Obama's SAT and >>>>>>> LSAT scores. These tests are standardized and correlate highly >>>>>>> with IQ tests. >>>>>> You are correct. As does academic achievement. >>>>> Not really. Mensa has never used GPA or having a degree as >>>>> qualification to join their society. They know that those measure >>>>> are purely subjective. You could an MD and a dozen Ph D's and that >>>>> wouldn't get you in. However, back in Obama's days in school, a high >>>>> enough SAT or LSAT score would do the trick. In fact, you could be a >>>>> high school drop out and get in if your LSAT score was high enough. >>>>> >>>>> Mensa does not accept SAT scores any more because of all the politics >>>>> surrounding the test. >>>> Not that I care bout MENSA, but the SAT is not a meaningful test. The >>>> ACT does better...at least it tests knowledge. I would like to see the >>>> standardized test scores of people claiming to be intellectually >>>> superior to others though. It's 100% telling when such people won't >>>> give you their scores though. You know that if they were high they'd >>>> be wearing them! >>> Whatever. Of the three, who's scores are likely to be higher on *any* >>> standardized test? >> Again, leadership is not something that is learned from books. > > So the ignorant like to say. What have you ever led? |