Ass Hat

Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls

  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food

  New Thread
  New Poll

End Ass Hat

New site? Maybe some day.

Username:

SPAM Filter: re-type this

(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)

Message:

UBB enabled. HTML disabled Spam Filtering enabledIcons: (click image to insert) Show All - pop

b i u add: url image video(?)

:	post by im thinkin slarbys at 2010-03-05 15:16:07

Conservationist said

im%20thinkin%20slarbys said

in general, it would be better, but i think you are dismissing the important roles dullards play in our society, and i'm not just talking about cleaning toilets. Also, you are gravely mistaken if you think getting rid of people below 120 IQ is going to solve all your problems. CASE STUDY: The tests i've taken have come out in the 145-155 range and I'm a walking waste of life by "conservative" standards (i.e. life = collecting unemployment, playing metal, fappage, rttp, that is all.)
and one more thing, i would have no problem with this plot except for, if you get rid of all the low IQ girls, who am i going to have sex with???

You've put a lot of issues into one post, so I'm going to break it out which will move more slowly but more accurately.

1. What tests are these? Are these administered by a psychologist with experience in intelligence testing?

2. 145-155 is not genius, and no reliable test will give you that broad of a range. 160 is genius.

3. That some high intelligence people are dysfunctional does not mean that on the whole, high intelligence people are more functional than low intelligence people.

4. This is a useful resource:

http://www.eugenics.net/papers/murray.html

5. "Conservative" standards aren't as uniform or kneejerk as you'd think, especially considering that "conservative" is a very wide definition -- actually far wider than liberal. If the metal music is good, most conservatives would be OK with what you're doing, unless offended for religious reasons. And even then, they will probably not urge for its censorship. It's a small minority that makes sites like BoycottHouston.org

yea i was pretty sleep deprived when i posted that...
ultimately, i would totally support any mass depopulation efforts if such a thing were within the realm of possibility, (and especially if they would allow me to survive!! hahah) but i love playing devils advocate w you prozak, so let me try and summarize what i was driving at; As long as we're playing eugenics fantasy camp, why not employ a comprehensive battery of metrics to maximize the number of ultimately "competent" humans left in the gene pool and minimize the number of people who are smart but lazy, dysfunctional, etc. (shoot! i done disqualified myself!)???
In short, shouldn't someone of above average IQ be able to recognize the pitfalls in relying on one measurement of intelligence?

btw, the tests i was referring to were certainly not facebook tests, one was administered by my college psychology teacher, a psychologist, the other i took online, but the questions were similar even if the scoring was not as accurate. i don't remember which was which as this was a long time ago, but on one i scored low 140's and the other low 150's hence the "range" i gave in my previous post (not tryin to brag it was pertinent to my point)

as far as the term "conservative" goes, mea culpa, i should have known better than to paint with such broad strokes. what i was trying to express was that being an avid reader of your screeds, i think there are many people who would not fit your definition of productive competent humans despite having an above average IQ

[default homepage]

7:42:04pm Apr 23,2024
load time 0.01145 secs/10 queries]