To: Seeker of Truth who wrote (4035 ) 2/6/2006 11:19:17 PM From: Crabbe Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 218481 I do not in the first place believe the Flynn Effect, whether caused by nutrition, better schooling, more early life excitation of brain cells, or ghosts and goblins. For 40 years from 1963 the average scores on the SAT and ACT in the United States declined, as one example of a reverse to the Flynn trend, Nutrition in the 20th century did improve, although I find it hard to believe that farm reared children were poorer nourished than Twinkie feed children of the late 20th century. I also find it hard to believe that thirties children were better nourished than were teens and twenties children. Physical stature would be a strong indicator of the lack of nourishment of thirties children. I would also debate better schooling, I had the privilege of attending a two room school with eight grades. We, my fellow students and I almost to a man/women always out performed our town educated fellow students in high school. Early stimulation of the brain with all the gadgets and goodies of today is more of a detriment than a stimulant to brain development or so say psychologists. There is one possible explanation, better medicine and immunization against childhood disease. Medicine however has been a two edged sword, allowing misfits and etc. to live, breed, and reproduce, thus contributing to the decimation of the gene pool. Scientists tend to be at least from the top 10 %tile of the population; probably effective scientists tend to be from the MENSA ranks. Thus, a lowering of the average IQ from allowing the stupid to outbreed us, tends to have little effect on the upper end of the IQ scale. Video games, etc. may have a diminishing effect as the best and brightest probably have a greater access, and a greater affinity to gadgets. Drive is probably the reason that every other scientist in the US seems to be from a developing country. These people want much more to get ahead and this is a route that they utilize. Ultimately what M calls IT will do the inventing and developing for us. Perhaps you have heard of computer programs that evolve inventions, make a tiny change to design, test it, if it helps keep it if it doesn't get rid of it repeat innumerable times. Many developments of this process have been patented now. I think, having worked in the Silicon Growing industry for several of my almost innumerable years, that the idea that it takes more energy to produce a solar cell than it produces in a life time is bunk. Especially so now that solar panels can even be made from plastics, perhaps at a lower efficiency than Silicon but still an effective power source. r