brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Bob LeChevalier lojbab at lojban.org
Fri Sep 20 17:17:15 EST 2002


"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
>"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
>news:2a3lougkdd9aqu8mqqniqf46c6u3sg95rd at 4ax.com...
>> "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
>> >Keep your eye on the prize, Daniel.
>> >
>> >Israel scored 466 on TIMSS math and 468 in science.
>> >http://www.geocities.com/fathersfiasco/
>>
>> You are aware of course that "Israel" is not "Jews".  Most Jews don't
>> live in Israel, and only 75-80% of Israelis are Jews.
>
>Precisely.  "Only" 18% of residents of New Jersey are jews,

6 million Jews in the entire country and you think 1.5 million are in
New Jersey alone?  Try 5.6% (lower than the 8.7% in New York)
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop.html

>but that's enough to put New Jersey in TOP position for education spending, 

Why isn't NY higher in spending if this were relevant (and New York
City with the highest concentration of Jews, spends far less than the
rest of the state, only $8106 per student), and 3rd through 5th places
were DC, Connecticut and Alaska.


and in the
>lowest tenth position for ACT and SAT and NAEP scores, consistently, year
>after year.

Nope.  NJ has rarely taken the NAEP, and when it has, it has been
above the national average in all subjects.  In SAT verbal last year,
it was 42nd. In math it was a middling 31st.

>Israel's scores are already so low that even if it was 100% jews, the scores
>couldn't go much lower.  A 466 is about ground zero.

Nope.  Austria's girls averaged 406 in the advanced math (and 385 in
the Numbers and Equations section; American girls were weakest in
Geometry at 408, but American boys weren't much better in geometry at
439.)

But the US had 8% of the kids not currently taking mathematics and
they averaged 390.  Those not using a calculator during the TIMSS test
averaged 388.


I never found your 466 number.  Israel's science literacy for girls
average 460.  But their advanced math score was 546 and their advanced
physics score was 482.  But in math and science literacy, the US did
not do as bad as they did in the advanced category, whereas South
Africa did horribly, 365 and 348 for boys and girls on math literacy.

Clearly, there is a long way below 466.

>> >American girls scored 469 in TIMSS science, 1 point higher than Israel.
>> >http://www.geocities.com/fathersfiasco/

And Russian girls did 463 and Cyprus boys 459.  Must be all the Jewish
kids in Cyprus and Russia, right?

>> >But  32% of American 12th grade girls' responses were not statistically
>> >significant, 23% were statistically significant because they scored lower
>> >than if they'd just guessed, and of the 45% that was statistically
>> >significant, the amount by which they scored lower than boys was
>> >statistically significant on 24.4%, by which they scored higher than boys
>> >was statistically significant on 2.6%, and the difference between boys and
>> >girls was not stastically significant on 18%.
>>
>> You have no idea what "statistically significant" means, and your
>> usage there is incorrect.
>
>The usage is 100% correct, and you know it.

The usage is purely pulled out of your strange orifice, and you know
it.  Statistical significance is based on sample size, and the sample
size was constant throughout the test.

>> >Had it not been for simple give-away questions,
>>
>> There weren't any, and you haven't demonstrated that you could do
>> better than guessing yourself.
>
>The following is just one example of a no-brainer TIMSS science question,
>yet half of American 12th grade girls STILL managed to get it wrong:
>
>G2. When a small volume of water is boiled, a large volume of steam is
>produced. Why? A. The molecules are further apart in steam than in water. B.
> Water molecules expand when heated. C. The change from water to steam
>causes the number of molecules to increase. D. Atmospheric pressure works
>more on water molecules than on steam molecules. E. Water molecules repel
>each other when heated.

What is the correct answer, and WHY is it correct?

By the way, you've switched from science literacy to physics to pull
out this question.  Don't think that I wont notice when you have to
hunt around from multiple tests in order to find numbers for a problem
or two that you think supports your LIES.

>A greater percentage of girls in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Germany,
>Greece, Italy, Norway, Russia, Slovenia, and Sweden, all of whom spend far
>less for education than we do, got this answer correct.

And a lesser percentage got it correct in Austria, Cyprus, Czech
Republic, France, Latvia and Switzerland, with Latvia and Cyprus
having some of the highest overall scores in the world in physics

>87% of the girls
>and 89% of the boys in Slovenia, who spends a tenth as much for education as
>we do, got this answer correct, so it was obviously a simple question to
>many boys and girls around the world.

Not necessarily.

By the way, to show how idiotic your reasoning is on this issue,
Israeli girls had 87.2% get this one correct, more than Israeli boys
at 81.9%.  So the Israeli girls were second only to the Slovenians on
that problem.

You can't even skew your problem selection enough to cover all your
prejudices at one time.  Why not choose H03, where only 9.1% of
Israeli girls and 22.6% of American girls got it right?  Of course
only 22.6% of Greek boys got it right too and 11.4% of French girls.
Must be "statistically significant", right?  Nincompoop.

>Yet their TIMSS science score of 469 required absolutely no problems to be
>solved and no calculations to be correct.

False.  IF that were the case then how could South African girls score
333 on science literacy.

>And Israel got an average science score of 468, 1 point lower than American
>12th grade girls.

And you would score 200, because you haven't demonstrated that you
could get a single problem correct if you didn't have the answer key
around.

>> Since the test is not measuring "stupidity", but rather "quality of
>> mathematics and science education", this is irrelevant.  Einstein was
>> educated in Germany and Switzerland.  Of course he was also educated
>> there more than a century ago, and very few school systems operate the
>> way they did a century ago.
>
>Which is why he flunked algebra,

False.

>couldn't get into college,

False.

>LIED about the sources of "his" papers and research,

False.

>and was just as much of a "feeble minded ... moron" as our Immigration and Naturalization Service considered
>him to be then

False.

>> >And you want us to believe that a moron like Einstein,
>>
>> Prove that his IQ was less than 25.
>>
>> >who was on the left side of this
>>
>> Prove that his IQ was less than 100
>>
>> >FLAT bell curve
>>
>> If a bell curve is flat then that means that it is not a bell curve.
>
>Very good.  You actually made an accurate statement, for a change.

But you didn't, which is normal for you.

>> >who never even had a laboratory
>>
>> He didn't need one since all of his research was theoretical.
>
>This isn't the way it works--unless you're a PLAGIARIST.

Stephen Hawkings might be the greatest physicist alive today, still
doing important work and he's been almost immobile in a wheelchair for
his entire career (he hasn't been able to feed himself for 28 years).

http://www.hawking.org.uk/text/about/about.html
http://www.hawking.org.uk/text/disable/disable.html

He's done all his work without a laboratory too.

>> >or colleagues to help him with his "research",
>>
>> Of course he had colleagues.  Some of them were the people you claimed
>> that he plagiarized from
>
>They weren't "colleagues".

Prove it.

>They accused him of STEALING their papers, published 10 and 20 years earlier.

Citation, please?  Or did you pull this one out of your strange
orifice, too?

lojbab



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list