## User Tag List

1. woot Minnesota the only one beating us is New Hampshire! Negative correlation with Christians lololol.

2. Oh no, here we go again, The Bell Curve blah blah blah

btw I think Massachusset is the highest because of MIT

3. Originally Posted by FDG
Oh no, here we go again, The Bell Curve blah blah blah

btw I think Massachusset is the highest because of MIT
Let's take the population of Massachusetts: approx 6,600,000

Now let us assume that their average should be 100, that means the sum of all IQs in Massachusetts should be 660,000,000.

The total student body enrolled in Harvard and MIT is around 32,000. Let us assume that the average IQ of the students there is 200. This means we need to add 3,200,000 to 660,000,000 to adjust the average.

The new total IQ should be 663,200,000. Divide this by the population of 6,600,000 and we have their new average IQ: 100.5

4. Originally Posted by Jonnyboy
Let's take the population of Massachusetts: approx 6,600,000

Now let us assume that their average should be 100, that means the sum of all IQs in Massachusetts should be 660,000,000.

The total student body enrolled in Harvard and MIT is around 32,000. Let us assume that the average IQ of the students there is 200. This means we need to add 3,200,000 to 660,000,000 to adjust the average.

The new total IQ should be 663,200,000. Divide this by the population of 6,600,000 and we have their new average IQ: 100.5
You forgot to add the mystical IQ expasion due to MIT and Harvard's force field

oh and also some sense of humor

5. Originally Posted by Jonnyboy
Included. Not sure what you mean by "skewing racial distribution." The distribution is what it is; multiple things can be correlated without any skew.
Multiple variables can cause data to mislead. Until variables are isolated a correlation between two variables can cause associations to appear differently than they truly are. I noticed how there appears to be an association between climate and both IQ and race. This leaves lots of room for interaction between them to cause data to misrepresent.

Looking back I probably should have said racial correlation.

Negative correlation with Christians lololol.
-0.08 is almost the same as no correlation. Anything with an absolute value below about .4 or so is weak.

6. Originally Posted by BlueGray
Multiple variables can cause data to mislead. Until variables are isolated a correlation between two variables can cause associations to appear differently than they truly are. I noticed how there appears to be an association between climate and both IQ and race. This leaves lots of room for interaction between them to cause data to misrepresent.

Looking back I probably should have said racial correlation.
I can bet they're so dumb they didn't even run a multivariate regression, thus isolating the cross-correlation effects

7. Originally Posted by BlueGray
Multiple variables can cause data to mislead. Until variables are isolated a correlation between two variables can cause associations to appear differently than they truly are. I noticed how there appears to be an association between climate and both IQ and race. This leaves lots of room for interaction between them to cause data to misrepresent.

Looking back I probably should have said racial correlation.

-0.08 is almost the same as no correlation. Anything with an absolute value below about .4 or so is weak.

Source: Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen (2006). IQ and Global Inequality. Washington Summit Publishers: Augusta, GA. ISBN 1593680252

8. You understand how credible Lynn among the scientific community, right?

9. That doesn't isolate any variables.

Assuming the global chart is accurate it would seem to support the theory that the Flynn effect is caused by improved nutrition.

10. useless

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•