brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Parse Tree parsetree at hotmail.com
Tue Jul 30 19:18:56 EST 2002


"John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote in message
news:TPF19.45658$Fq6.4072241 at news2.west.cox.net...
>
> "Thalamus" <zhil at online.no> wrote in message
> news:fry19.4253$sR2.75891 at news4.ulv.nextra.no...
> > "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> skrev i melding
> > news:Ivx19.44193$Fq6.3967852 at news2.west.cox.net...
> > > > > This is a real hoot, Brian.  Part of understanding this problem is
> > > > > understanding the ENGLISH language, which cary proved that she
> can't.
> > > >
> > > > Of course I am correct.
> > > > Unlike them I am on the spiraling ladder to Godhood, and one
condition
> > is
> > > > that you'll have to shed the flesh.
> > > > http://www.transtopia.org
> > > >
> > > > Brian
> > > > PS. Your Christian God was a great crutch, but it is time to lay
away
> > the
> > > > crutch as the old tool has served it's purpose.
> > > > It's time to evolve.
> > >
> > > Well, thanks for the offer, Brian, but we'll have to let you know when
> > we've
> > > got an opening for another God );
> >
> > One should be his/her own God.
> > I don't care to much about the libbies, they'll spiral themselves
downward
> > to their own demise.
> >
> > > In the interim, your expertise in probability and statistics could be
> very
> > > useful in setting the record straight regarding multiple choice
> questions.
> > > Is there anything you'd like to add about this?
> >
> > Well, we could open it up by looking at the culturally neutral IQ-tests
> with
> > multiple choice.
> > Personally I have completed what is called the 'Ravens Matrix Standard
> > Test', and it involves several choices for each question.
> > The questions involved are purely geometrical, something even the
retards
> > should be able to understand that it is culturally neutral.
> > Each multiple choices is not exactly 'wrong' but involves a degree of
> > rightness vs. wrongness, and they can measure through your choices
exactly
> > which level your IQ is centered.
> > IE; A person goes through question 1. and answers it correctly, the same
> for
> > question 2,3,4,5 and 7, then he misses on 6,8,9 and 10.
> > We can see just at WHICH question he begin to miss, where his IQ-level
is
> > set (question 6), and it might reflect a bad draw, different thinking;
and
> > thus  we end up judging that the borderline is 'fuzzy' (as he chose
> correct
> > on question 7).
> > Second level of judgement is when we go into detail and see which choice
> he
> > actually made, the degree of rightness, as the questions will become
> harder
> > and harder to get correct (IE 100% on 1, 95% on 2 etc.)
> > And when the level of correctness reaches zero, that is when we have hit
> his
> > borderline, his maximum level of intelligence.
> > Maybe you'll understand what I'm saying, I doubt the semi-tards will :-)
> > It's quite simple.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
>
> Believe it or not, Brian, the "liberals" are still arguing over what the
> distribution would be if test takers just randomly guessed at the answers
to
> a four choice multiple choice question.
>
> The distribution over 10,000 test takers will be as follows:
>
> A) 25%, plus or minus 0.75%
>
> B) 25%, plus or minus 0.75%
>
> C) 25%, plus or minus 0.75%
>
> D) 25%, plus or minus 0.75%
>
> Without wasting any time with all their silly and erroneous suppositions
and
> assumptions (the kind of thing they must have gone through when they and
or
> their cohorts answered lower than if they'd just guessed on ONE THIRD of
the
> questions), do you agree or disagree that this would be the distribution?

This WOULD PROBABLY be the distribution.  You keep using probabilities while
trying to speak with certainty.  You can't do that.





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list