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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (3221)	1/11/2006 1:03:19 PM
From: Crabbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219410

"Crabbe, it's true I am getting too old, but I haven't lost my mind yet." "We should expect the Flynn Effect to pick up speed." The Flynn Effect is that the average IQ increases by approximately 3 IQ points or 3% each decade. Considering that you drove a rusty 1951 Hillman as a youth, your IQ would be on the order of 18-21% lower than of your equivalent lusty young stud today. That would mean that your generation learned more than three times as slow as the present student generation. Extending the Flynn Effect backwards immediately shows the fallacy. If Einstein was the brain of his generation then a chimp would have been the brain of Newton's generation and an amoeba would have been the brain of Christ's generation. I believe somewhere on a thread here on SI I read about psychology not being a science. The Flynn Effect is definitely not science. Can I equate the studies of IQ to the study of the egg and heart attacks? Also why would female selection of intelligence in a mate be a greater selective agent in increasing human intelligence today than in the past. Today the law allows one mate. In the past there were no limits. So many women could then have picked one intelligent male then but today the intelligent male can only have one. But then again the intelligent male may not even want one on hand all the time. Certainly in your years of experience you are aware that things don't change much. Sex, marital or extramarital, hasn't changed. Promiscuity rises and falls with each succeeding generation but pretty much regresses to the norm. The Romans had fellatio parties, todays teenagers have rainbow parties. Victorian's never spoke of sex. Revolutionary change of 50% increase in learning speed every ten years are just BS. r

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (3221)	1/11/2006 2:02:48 PM
From: Crabbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 219410

A notable omission was any mention of the contents of the skull. While males rate intellectual aspects lower than do females for males, they still rate fairly highly. Maurice You must travel in the lofty circles of academia. I however travel the more traveled road of the more common man and I can assure you for a large section of the male population intelligence in the female of the species is not a desirable trait. Intellectual conversation for a vast number of males is who will win the Super Bowl. For the next step up a discussion of which is better Miller lite or Bud lite. Believe me the exterior of the skull is much more important in their selection of a mate than the interior, unless the interior of the skull exceeds the power of their own then they quickly act and reject. r