On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 12:46:23 AM UTC+11, Snit wrote:
> On Nov 1, 2023 at 7:17:57 PM MST, "rbowman" wrote
> <kqgf6l...@mid.individual.net>:
> > On Wed, 01 Nov 2023 04:35:13 GMT, Snit wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 31, 2023 at 6:35:50 PM MST, ""Commander Kinsey"" wrote
> >> <op.2dpip0prgml7km@ryzen>:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>> What should I learn?
> >>>>
> >>>> That you are not more important nor any more special than others. That other's beliefs are just as valid EVEN IF you do not believe as they do.. That your intuitions are not somehow special.
> >>>
> >>> Why on earth would I want to think that?
> >>
> >> Only if you want to be a decent person would you want to. You have no desire to be a decent person.
> >>
> >>> I know religious people are inferior.
> >>
> >> Many religious people are good people. You have no desire to be as good as them, no less better. You want to THINK of yourself as better even as
you spew bigoted hateful nonsense.
> >>
> >>> It's been scientifically proved, intelligence is indirectly proportional to belief.
> >>
> >> This is you misusing stats... showing you do not understand correlations.
> >
> > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10943-019-00926-3
>
> Curious. From the same author:
>
> https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10943-021-01353-z
>
> I would like to see more research on this... but even assuming higher IQs are correlated with lower levels of religiosity, that is a broad picture.... for Kinsey to try to tie that to an individual shows he does not understand how such stats work. It would be like me pointing to studies that Ashkenazi tend to be more intelligent (there are many such studies) and insisting that means *I* must be more intelligent because I am a part of that group. Nope. Heck, I would go so far as to say the studies themselves, from what I have seen, tend to assume genetics where I think culture plays a bigger role.

There's a lot of variation within cultures, and a lot of genetic variation within groups.

Intelligence is ill-defined. The people who study it tend to define it "as what an IQ test measures" which harks back to the original observation that a lot of different tests that ostensibly measured different sorts of cleverness tended to give moderately strongly correlated results.

People did realise that there were lots of different processes being looked at, and tried set up multifactorial measures of lots of different kinds of intelligence, but that didn't get anywhere.

Robert Plomin's book "Blueprint" talks about the "heritability" of intelligence, but because he was trying to exploit the huge collection of genomes put together by "23 and me" that didn't include IQ test results, he had to use "years in education" as a rough proxy.

That would make me more intelligent than Win Hill, who had the sense to drop out of a Ph.D. in chemical physics and settle for an M.Sc. in electronics when I wasted a few more years getting a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry and picked up the electronics by reading text-books and applications notes.

> Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger.
>
> They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

Commander Kinsey is not to be taken seriously. He's a troll who specialises in producing irritating nonsense.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney