Skeptisicm is the basis of scientific inquiry and discussion. Just because
someone you once knew had an idea does not make it a good idea. There is
something called "the burden of proof " that is missing from this idea.
Besides who can agree on what is intelligence, what regions or processes of
the brain are critical to things intelligent, and what the eeg might have
to do with subtle differences in qualitative assessment of thought? Frank
Lefever took a reasonable position especially considering some of the way
out stuff that tramples this list serve.
At 5:19 PM +0000 3/27/99, k.renstein wrote:
>This idea came from a neurologist i once knew. And Mr. Lefever, why do frown
>on questions from others trying to learn more?
>F. Frank LeFever <flefever at ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>news:7devh2$egb at sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com...>> In <7dej6i$htd$1 at bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net> "k.renstein"
>> <kenneth.grant at worldnet.att.net> writes:
>> >I have been told EEG freq. can be linked with intelligence.. is this
>> I think the history of this idea is a little bit like the history of
>> cold fusion...
>>>> F. LeFever
Richard Hall, Associate Professor of
Comparative Animal Physiology
Division of Sciences and Mathematics
University of the Virgin Islands
St. Thomas, USVI 00802
rhall at uvi.edu