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.

Technology Stocks : Alphabet Inc. (Google) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (6339)	1/20/2006 1:44:26 PM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15857

OT, Lizzie, RE: well GV, being in the 88th percentile might seem good when measured against all citizens but not for the US president, at least in my view. I think most of the folks I deal with everyday have combined scores of 1350 and up on their SATs, with a significant number of individuals scoring a perfect 700 on the mathematics portion of the SAT. A few things, Lizzie, and then I'll drop this. First, those people you associate with that have combined scores of 1350+? 1350 for people who took the test in the past decade is pretty darn close to 1206 back in the 60's. Remember, again, that recentering thing. It adds 100+ SAT points to anyone who took the test after 1995. Second, a perfect math score is 800. And third, IMO the SAT measures only a particular kind of smart. I am fortunate that it helped me out. But some of the smartest people I've ever met happened to have an SAT score that would cause you to think that they were less than bright. You would have underestimated their intelligence to your detriment. Former Senator Bill Bradley's a pretty bright guy. He scored a 485 on his verbal, and less than 1100 overall. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they're unintelligent.