Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (72813)	7/21/2001 11:08:47 AM
From: xcr600	Respond to of 122087

No wonder why no one takes us seriously overseas..lol << President G. W. Bush was rated the lowest of all the Republicans with an IQ of 91 >>

To: Land Shark who wrote (72813)	7/21/2001 11:39:22 AM
From: joseph krinsky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Have they published how those numbers correlate to the performance, (i.e effectiveness, popularity, failures or successes) in office of the Presidents rated? Or is it just a satire, or maybe another useless academic exercise to enable people ("intellectuals") to peacock their supposed mental superiority? You know, the "look how stupid some of these guys are, (especially take note of the ones we don't like, snicker, snicker) and how smart we are, and how did we ever survive" gambit? I would imagine those evaluations have as much value in the scheme of things as the tracking of readership of playboy magazine in a gay library. ;-)

To: Land Shark who wrote (72813)	7/21/2001 12:27:51 PM
From: Ben Wa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

creativity x iq = better than unimaginative iq 127 iq seems to be a magic number where creativity x iq is maximized. Of course, we all know that any kind of intelligence test, achievement test, ....is culturally biased against people of non European heritage.

To: Land Shark who wrote (72813)	7/21/2001 4:33:28 PM
From: jeffsthoughts	Respond to of 122087

Well, as they say: If you can't beat 'em, join 'em! Your little study seems to prove something interesting. There appears to be an inverse correlation between "IQ" as measured by a group of liberal eggheads and the quality of a Presidency. It would appear that the criteria used to determine intelligence in this study is highly biased. Witness Carter's high number! Why do the intellectual liberals keep focusing on their brand of intelligence and IQ? Because they don't want to discuss actual goals. Most of them do not wish to disclose their true personal beliefs. It is easier to convince sheep that someone is "dumb" by repeating it over and over again than it is to debate the end goals of policy or promote their own ideas for the greater good. It would appear that these intellectuals prefer attacking their opponents with meaningless charges of an intellectual deficit to exposing their own ideas and desired end goals to the light of day. Personnaly, I have always said that I would rather have a simple guy with power fighting for what I believe, than a simple OR smart guy fighting for everything in which I don't believe. Furthermore, I would rather have policy differences with somebody that I share values and a vision with, than someone who is 100% opposed to something I believe in (like personal freedom). Intellectual prowess can be exercised in the pursuit of ideas contrary to one's interests - or even ideas that are based on pure evil. It would seem to follow then that focusing on a leader's IQ is no way to determine whether or not you will benefit from that leader's power. There have been plenty of brilliant leaders throughout history that willingly massacred their own people and drove their country to ruin in the pursuit of a well formulated academic argument or philosophy. Keep the intellectuals in the universities where they can do less damage. Let real men and women run the country. I've never felt that continuing to call somebody stupid, whether outright or through a highly questionable and biased "study," was demonstrative of any intellectual power anyway.