A peer-reviewed study about Wikipedia's accuracy

[Wacka]

So HA quotes Psychologists on genetics?

 

Lets hear what Geneticists think about Freud.

[Ramius]

So HA quotes Psychologists on genetics?

 

Lets hear what Geneticists think about Freud.

 

Thank you.

[DC Tom]

Fine. Here's a quote from the American Psychological Association's Report: "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns."

 

Again, the things I've been writing about intelligence and heritability are pretty standard stuff. Unfortunately, the information researchers have worked so hard to gather has generally failed to be absorbed into popular culture.

 

You know, I only checked the board this morning to see if you were offering up anything stupid. You don't fail to disappoint...

 

 

I asked for something that says "anything even REMOTELY like what you said." You, naturally, offer something entirely UNLIKE what you said. What part of that said "The correlation between an adopted child's I.Q. and the I.Q. of his or her adoptive mother grows progressively weaker as the child gets older, eventually disappearing altogether."

[Orton's Arm]

You know, I only checked the board this morning to see if you were offering up anything stupid. You don't fail to disappoint...

I asked for something that says "anything even REMOTELY like what you said." You, naturally, offer something entirely UNLIKE what you said. What part of that said "The correlation between an adopted child's I.Q. and the I.Q. of his or her adoptive mother grows progressively weaker as the child gets older, eventually disappearing altogether."

I naturally trusted that the average reader would be able to read the quote with some level of intelligence and understanding. Based on the responses I've gotten--and I'm not just talking about your own--I was being unduly optimistic. Let me spell this out very clearly. The observed level of heritability for intelligence increases as children get older. The reason this is so is because adopted children develop a stronger correlation with the I.Q.s of their biological parents.

 

Meanwhile, the American Psychological Association had this to say about c^2

by late adolescence . . . c2 is quite low (zero in some studies).

Then there's this quote, also from the same document:

Between-family differences create what is called "shared variance" or c2 (all children in a family share the same home and the same parents). Recent twin and adoption studies suggest that while the value of c2 (for IQ scores) is substantial in early childhood, it becomes quite small by late adolescence.

Shared environmental factors--such as the I.Q. of the adoptive mother, the particular school adopted children attend, etc.--make little or no difference in determining adult-level I.Q.s

[DC Tom]

I naturally trusted that the average reader would be able to read the quote with some level of intelligence and understanding. Based on the responses I've gotten--and I'm not just talking about your own--I was being unduly optimistic. Let me spell this out very clearly. The observed level of heritability for intelligence increases as children get older. The reason this is so is because adopted children develop a stronger correlation with the I.Q.s of their biological parents.

 

Meanwhile, the American Psychological Association had this to say about c^2

 

Then there's this quote, also from the same document:

 

Shared environmental factors--such as the I.Q. of the adoptive mother, the particular school adopted children attend, etc.--make little or no difference in determining adult-level I.Q.s

 

Never mind that the above is the most convoluted pile of nonsense since your last post. It has nothing to do with what you said. You said: "The correlation between an adopted child's I.Q. and the I.Q. of his or her adoptive mother grows progressively weaker as the child gets older, eventually disappearing altogether."

 

That has precisely sh---all to do with anything you've linked. Show me the source that says that.

[Ramius]

I naturally trusted that the average reader would be able to read the quote with some level of intelligence and understanding. Based on the responses I've gotten--and I'm not just talking about your own--I was being unduly optimistic. Let me spell this out very clearly. The observed level of heritability for intelligence increases as children get older. The reason this is so is because adopted children develop a stronger correlation with the I.Q.s of their biological parents.

 

 

Never mind that the above is the most convoluted pile of nonsense since your last post. It has nothing to do with what you said. You said: "The correlation between an adopted child's I.Q. and the I.Q. of his or her adoptive mother grows progressively weaker as the child gets older, eventually disappearing altogether."

 

That has precisely sh---all to do with anything you've linked. Show me the source that says that.

 

Tom, can you do me a favor here? Please, please, please tell me he didnt just say that heriability changes as a child grows older. Please tell me someone cannot obviously be THIS stupid.

 

Heritability changes? :worthy: Now, the genetic information passed on to you from your parents CHANGES as you get older? I cant believe you said that heritability changes as you get older! Wow. and we have no reached a new level of stupid. This is "special ed" level stupidity from crank yankers.

 

Note to everyone that actually understands genetics: In the above statement, i am ignoring the following 2 conditions that HA fails to understand:

 

1. Heritability is a measurement of a trait across an entire population of organisms.

 

2. Heritability has NO, NONE, ZERO effect on any given individual. It has no value and worth, because heritability cannot and is not used to measure a single individual form a given population (But again, over 70+ pages, HA has never once even come close to understanding the differences between a single measurement/data point and a distribution of data)

[DC Tom]

Tom, can you do me a favor here? Please, please, please tell me he didnt just say that heriability changes as a child grows older. Please tell me someone cannot obviously be THIS stupid.

 

No, he didn't. He said inheritability changes. He just called it "heritability" again.

 

2. Heritability has NO, NONE, ZERO effect on any given individual. It has no value and worth, because heritability cannot and is not used to measure a single individual form a given population (But again, over 70+ pages, HA has never once even come close to understanding the differences between a single measurement/data point and a distribution of data)

 

Might have something to do with confusing "heritability" and "inheritability". But then, "heritability" is a statistical measure...so why would he understand it?

[Orton's Arm]

So HA quotes Psychologists on genetics?

 

Lets hear what Geneticists think about Freud.

The field of psychometrics is a subset of psychology. If your goal is to design good intelligence tests, observe their g-loading, and to observe the correlation of these tests to real-world results, you must turn to psychometrics.

 

The geneticist can tell us (or fail to tell us, as the case may be) which particular genes are responsible for the correlations observed on intelligence tests.

 

It's typically much easier to determine whether a trait is heritable, than it is to determine the genes responsible for the trait. In the 1800s, Mendel's experimented with 28,000 pea plants. He found plants pass their traits onto their offspring, long before anyone knew what a gene even was.

[DC Tom]

The field of psychometrics is a subset of psychology. If your goal is to design good intelligence tests, observe their g-loading, and to observe the correlation of these tests to real-world results, you must turn to psychometrics.

 

Oh, good. Another topic HA knows nothing about. This should be fin...

 

It's typically much easier to determine whether a trait is heritable, than it is to determine the genes responsible for the trait. In the 1800s, Mendel's experimented with 28,000 pea plants. He found plants pass their traits onto their offspring, long before anyone knew what a gene even was.

 

INHERITABILE, you idiot. Not "heritable". They're different concepts, and THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ARE NOT THE SAME THING.

 

You just never stop. You are like the Energizer Bunny of stupid.

[Orton's Arm]

Tom, can you do me a favor here? Please, please, please tell me he didnt just say that heriability changes as a child grows older. Please tell me someone cannot obviously be THIS stupid.

 

Heritability changes? :worthy: Now, the genetic information passed on to you from your parents CHANGES as you get older? I cant believe you said that heritability changes as you get older! Wow. and we have no reached a new level of stupid. This is "special ed" level stupidity from crank yankers.

 

Note to everyone that actually understands genetics: In the above statement, i am ignoring the following 2 conditions that HA fails to understand:

 

1. Heritability is a measurement of a trait across an entire population of organisms.

 

2. Heritability has NO, NONE, ZERO effect on any given individual. It has no value and worth, because heritability cannot and is not used to measure a single individual form a given population (But again, over 70+ pages, HA has never once even come close to understanding the differences between a single measurement/data point and a distribution of data)

If your goal is to produce a treasure of stupidity, the above post is your crown jewel. I'm in an oddly patient mood right now, so I'll take the time to explain just how very dumb you've just been. And believe me, you've just made Britney Spears look something like a genius by comparison.

 

As someone as arrogant as you should already know, "heritability" in the broad sense refers to the amount of variation which can be explained by genetics. Suppose identical twins raised apart had an 80% correlation for height. That would mean that height is 80% heritable. Now imagine that the percentage went up as they got older--70% when they're 12, 80% when they're 15, and 90% when they're 20. In this scenario, the heritability for height increases as children get older. This does not--you dunce--mean than the genetic information children receive changes as they get older. It means that said genetic information explains a changing percentage of overall variation as children get older.

 

The fact that you're surprised that heritability numbers can change over time just tells me you don't understand what heritability actually is.

[Orton's Arm]

Oh, good. Another topic HA knows nothing about. This should be fin...

INHERITABILE, you idiot. Not "heritable". They're different concepts, and THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ARE NOT THE SAME THING.

 

You just never stop. You are like the Energizer Bunny of stupid.

You honestly don't have the faintest idea of what you're talking about, do you?

[Ramius]

If your goal is to produce a treasure of stupidity, the above post is your crown jewel. I'm in an oddly patient mood right now, so I'll take the time to explain just how very dumb you've just been. And believe me, you've just made Britney Spears look something like a genius by comparison.

 

As someone as arrogant as you should already know, "heritability" in the broad sense refers to the amount of variation which can be explained by genetics. Suppose identical twins raised apart had an 80% correlation for height. That would mean that height is 80% heritable. Now imagine that the percentage went up as they got older--70% when they're 12, 80% when they're 15, and 90% when they're 20. In this scenario, the heritability for height increases as children get older. This does not--you dunce--mean than the genetic information children receive changes as they get older. It means that said genetic information explains a changing percentage of overall variation as children get older.

 

The fact that you're surprised that heritability numbers can change over time just tells me you don't understand what heritability actually is.

 

This gem is priceless. You say that correlation = hertiability and tell ME i dont know what heriability is? :worthy: :worthy:

[Alaska Darin]

You just never stop. You are like the Energizer Bunny of stupid.

[Ramius]

As someone as arrogant as you should already know, "heritability" in the broad sense refers to the amount of variation which can be explained by genetics. Suppose identical twins raised apart had an 80% correlation for height. That would mean that height is 80% heritable. Now imagine that the percentage went up as they got older--70% when they're 12, 80% when they're 15, and 90% when they're 20. In this scenario, the heritability for height increases as children get older. This does not--you dunce--mean than the genetic information children receive changes as they get older. It means that said genetic information explains a changing percentage of overall variation as children get older.

 

Heritability for height will not change, because across a population, it is measured as full grown adult height. Not that your small mind can actually comprehend a concept of this magnitude. Because, according to your assinine logic, you are saying that there is a changing amount of genetics that accounts for your height.

 

Newsflash moron: Genetics dont change over time! (well, aside from a slow degradation of the telomeres, and from some accumulated mutations, both concepts i wont even begin to try to explain to you, seeing how those are more of a basic freshmen level biology concept, and you have yet to pass the first grade proficiency level in your understanding of, well, anything)

 

And again, heritability does not involve a single individual. It is worthless and cannot be used ot describe an individual. You need to grasp your grasp your tiny little brain around this idea, as well.

[DC Tom]

You honestly don't have the faintest idea of what you're talking about, do you?

 

You're the one that's been confusing "heritability" and "inheritability" for months. And now your answer to that is to introduce YET ANOTHER concept ("psychometry") that you have absolutely no clue about.

 

This is why I keep this conversation going. Most people understand concepts by reducing their ignorance. You seem to think you can understand a topic by piling ignorance on top of ignorance as deeply as you can. It's fascinating.

[Orton's Arm]

You're the one that's been confusing "heritability" and "inheritability" for months. And now your answer to that is to introduce YET ANOTHER concept ("psychometry") that you have absolutely no clue about.

 

This is why I keep this conversation going. Most people understand concepts by reducing their ignorance. You seem to think you can understand a topic by piling ignorance on top of ignorance as deeply as you can. It's fascinating.

More of the same drivel. Thanks for playing.

[DC Tom]

More of the same drivel. Thanks for playing.

 

Right. Can you even BEGIN to explain psychometry to the class?

 

Didn't think so...

[Ramius]

Right. Can you even BEGIN to explain psychometry to the class?

 

Didn't think so...

 

I love when its pointed out that he is a moron and he has no clue what he's talking about, his only reply is "robble robble robble, you're a moron, robble robble robble, i'm right, robble, robble, robble, wikipedia, robble robble robble"

[Orton's Arm]

Heritability for height will not change, because across a population, it is measured as full grown adult height. Not that your small mind can actually comprehend a concept of this magnitude. Because, according to your assinine logic, you are saying that there is a changing amount of genetics that accounts for your height.

 

Newsflash moron: Genetics dont change over time! (well, aside from a slow degradation of the telomeres, and from some accumulated mutations, both concepts i wont even begin to try to explain to you, seeing how those are more of a basic freshmen level biology concept, and you have yet to pass the first grade proficiency level in your understanding of, well, anything)

 

And again, heritability does not involve a single individual. It is worthless and cannot be used ot describe an individual. You need to grasp your grasp your tiny little brain around this idea, as well.

My comments about height were just an example of how heritability could change if measured at different ages. The example is relevant because the heritability for intelligence is measured at different ages, and that heritability figure rises as children become adolescents.

 

The fact that you think you're special because you've heard about telomeres is truly pathetic. Anyone who read about Geron a few years back has heard of telomeres and their degradation over time.

 

Intelligence is about 80% heritable. This means that, on average, 80% of the intellectual difference between two randomly selected adults can be explained by genetic differences. But that's just an average figure. Someone who incurred a severe head injury or other environmental catastrophe could easily have a far lower I.Q. than the one predicted by his or her genetics. But in the absence of malnutrition, severe head injuries, or other severe environmental problems, a typical person's deviation from the average I.Q. will generally be explained largely by genetics.

[Orton's Arm]

I love when its pointed out that he is a moron and he has no clue what he's talking about, his only reply is "robble robble robble, you're a moron, robble robble robble, i'm right, robble, robble, robble, wikipedia, robble robble robble"

Of all the people who could possibly be making an accusation like this, you are the last person who has the right to do so. Practically the only tool you ever employ is the argumentum ad hominum.