tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post3249337777811243949..comments2024-01-13T18:57:18.243-05:00Comments on Information Processing: The Neanderthal ProblemSteve Hsuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02428333897272913660noreply@blogger.comBlogger82125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-73351477709665898832015-05-31T11:07:57.359-04:002015-05-31T11:07:57.359-04:00There is a general problem for cloning any ancient...There is a general problem for cloning any ancient<br />organisms: mammoths, Neanderthals and even ancient Homo Sapienses. <br /><br /> <br /><br />The matter is that the arm race between big organisms like<br />us and different pathogens is a part of evolution. We are under natural selection<br />all of the time and genomes of our species are changing in order to resist a<br />new pathogens. <brDmitry Postrelovnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-6028593444327304652014-11-09T06:37:54.500-05:002014-11-09T06:37:54.500-05:00Where did you come up with the idea that Neanderth...Where did you come up with the idea that Neanderthals were stupid? They created tools, buried their dead, and did a lot of things that homo sapiens were doing at the time. Are they stupid because they went extinct? Well in that case, if nuclear bombs started to go off like some apocalyptic movie scenario or an asteroid hit Earth, cockroaches would survive and humans would die. Would that make William Hayesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-45234542947736804262014-11-07T14:03:14.358-05:002014-11-07T14:03:14.358-05:00This guys view of neandertals is pathetic. http://...This guys view of neandertals is pathetic. http://dienekes.blogspot.de/2014/05/in-defense-of-neandertals.htmlOliver Clozovnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-83361765041245357742014-08-11T11:45:57.632-04:002014-08-11T11:45:57.632-04:00what if their characters were way more advanced, c...what if their characters were way more advanced, could we come up with a genetic modification for that?Darryl Koala Jonesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-37623762735739030192014-06-15T19:00:52.856-04:002014-06-15T19:00:52.856-04:00I think people need to not be so afraid of scienti...I think people need to not be so afraid of scientific advancement. If we can better ourselves through science, we should. Certainly not force it on anyone, although I can't imagine anyone not wanting the best for their children. If you could make you children smarter, healthy, stronger, kinder,happier, better why wouldn't you? I think anything negative that impacts a person and society, Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-89859420945158600842014-03-09T22:42:01.375-04:002014-03-09T22:42:01.375-04:00I find this entire column and comment thread insen...I find this entire column and comment thread insensitive and offensive.<br />I myself am a caveman, a neanderthal, if you will. I was discovered in glacier, frozen, some years and thawed out and brought back to life.<br /><br /><br />My IQ is not so low that I could not make it in this frightening and confusing modern world. In fact, I even made it through college and law school.Leftist_Conservativehttp://leftistconservative.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-86463579257378442252014-03-08T18:30:36.415-05:002014-03-08T18:30:36.415-05:00I think as parents we have a duty to do the best f...I think as parents we have a duty to do the best for our offspring, part of that is selecting partner. Genetic fixes, and similar, fit in the same way. I vaccinate to avoid disease in my child for the same reasons. My concern is not the need to do this, but when is it safe/effective. We already see that with the cervical cancer vaccine, which is fantastic science, and safety is excellent, Simon Watersnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-17564942800663517312014-03-08T18:04:40.176-05:002014-03-08T18:04:40.176-05:00Comes up in teaching kids chess. Whilst some young...Comes up in teaching kids chess. Whilst some young kids really "get chess" at a very young age, the majority struggle with basics till they are around 9. Thus being bright, but not an especially good chess player I'm about the level of the best 13 year olds in my country. Sure there is a lot of learning in chess, but the best 16 year olds are way ahead of me, and it ain't three Simon Watersnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-82151240864935147982014-03-07T21:15:00.449-05:002014-03-07T21:15:00.449-05:00"the ability to learn" is another mere a..."the ability to learn" is another mere abstraction. one can speak concepts into existence. he cannot speak things into existence. and things needn't conform to concepts. <br /><br />and putative "fluid" tests do NOT measure learning ability even if there were such a thing.<br /><br />as one professor of mine said, "for most students school is just pattern recognition.chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-28516726604107664192014-03-07T10:42:49.534-05:002014-03-07T10:42:49.534-05:00Well a fluid test by definition is something you&#...Well a fluid test by definition is something you've virtually never done before. Fluid intelligence is defined as NOVEL problem solving. Once you've practiced it, it's no longer a valid measure of your intelligence.<br /><br />Fluid intelligence can also be defined as the ability to learn, while crystallized intelligence is how much you have learned. Obviously they're highly Iamexpertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-9802256123652524172014-03-07T00:40:35.721-05:002014-03-07T00:40:35.721-05:00you are polite and not abrasive, but you're ac...you are polite and not abrasive, but you're actually arguing against yourself. and i'm sure that the correlation between fischer random rating and standard rating is near 1.<br /><br />it goes for you and jensen and all y'all:<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-89804163380395074362014-03-06T18:55:28.776-05:002014-03-06T18:55:28.776-05:00fake,
but if not age 22 is quite a long time fro...fake, <br /><br />but if not age 22 is quite a long time from her first six years. i wonder how she'd do on the matrix reasoning?chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-15758925785144284642014-03-06T17:55:01.317-05:002014-03-06T17:55:01.317-05:00"not that any child could be raised by wolves..."not that any child could be raised by wolves". A child could be raised by dogs so maybe a child could be raised by wolves. <br /><br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkX47t2QaRsStevie Macnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-51748699208430384842014-03-06T05:12:19.938-05:002014-03-06T05:12:19.938-05:00not that any child could be raised by wolves. BUT,...not that any child could be raised by wolves. BUT, "A child raised by wolves might at first flunk a fluid test, but after a <br />few weeks of domestication, fluid tests would reflect his biological <br />potential."<br /><br /><br />IS the DUMBEST thing i've EVER heard.<br /><br /><br />there is a part of violinists brains which is enlarged as a result of their violin-ing. chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-49447732014068203642014-03-06T02:54:08.890-05:002014-03-06T02:54:08.890-05:00 I agree that no test is 100% fluid, but many are ... I agree that no test is 100% fluid, but many are close enough to make it a useful meaningful concept. A child raised by wolves might at first flunk a fluid test, but after a few weeks of domestication, fluid tests would reflect his biological potential. By contrast he may never reach his potential on the SAT.<br /><br />I agree that among culturally homogenous people, crystallized tests are Iamexpertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-76607339722518999832014-03-05T18:02:50.131-05:002014-03-05T18:02:50.131-05:00Chartreuse, anything you could say, I've thoug...Chartreuse, anything you could say, I've thought of it twice. (by which i assume you mean have never thought of) The herritabilities (sic.)(corrected for reliability) do not even include the two most g loaded Wechsler fluid tests (figure weights, matrix reasoning) (these are brand new. how many studies have been done? how can the ravens be the LEAST correlated with other self-described iq chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-43055068559627162312014-03-05T03:16:37.272-05:002014-03-05T03:16:37.272-05:00but i took the liberty of correcting the heritabil...but i took the liberty of correcting the heritabilities for reliability which requires division by the reliability rather than sqrt(reliability). here's the result:<br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Information <br /> <br /><br /> 0.8351648352<br /> <br /> <br /> Block Design<br /> <br /><br /> 0.795389049<br /> <br /> <br /> Vocabulary<br /> <br /><br /> chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-56867208728048065262014-03-05T02:41:31.465-05:002014-03-05T02:41:31.465-05:00here. i did your work for you. here are g-loadings...here. i did your work for you. here are g-loadings averaged over studies corrected for reliability. guess which subtest still comes out on top? hint: it's vocabulary for children and adults. http://analyseeconomique.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/meta-analysis-g-loadings-h2-c2-e2-in-wais-and-wisc-subtests.xls followed by all the other most culturally loaded subtests. here's a table chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-35012076963408887982014-03-04T23:47:08.909-05:002014-03-04T23:47:08.909-05:00if by "and all your attempts to debunk it her...if by "and all your attempts to debunk it here have been very easily countered" you mean "not even understood or addressed let alone countered" i agree.<br /><br />maybe you should practice on the n-back a little more.chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-89548461592386133912014-03-04T22:56:48.826-05:002014-03-04T22:56:48.826-05:00a pair of typical hereditist iq mongers.
http://w...a pair of typical hereditist iq mongers.<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXSLcYQHqFQchartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-50169538054500030572014-03-04T22:55:36.001-05:002014-03-04T22:55:36.001-05:00Chartreuse, the distinction between crystallized a...Chartreuse, the distinction between crystallized and fluid ability is very much valid and all your attempts to debunk it here have been very easily countered. Iamexpertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-82239547842049969372014-03-03T21:23:42.216-05:002014-03-03T21:23:42.216-05:00gee. you have no idea what you're talking abou...gee. you have no idea what you're talking about, so i stopped reading.<br /><br />"matrix reasoning" is a new addition. how many studies in how many countries on its reliability and g-loading? the ravens is the least correlated with other self-described iq tests, that is, of all self-described iq tests. it is not a battery, but only one sort of test. it is the most flynned. yet chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-77903762786741976952014-03-03T21:04:18.693-05:002014-03-03T21:04:18.693-05:00The reason tests like vocab and arithmetic show l...The reason tests like vocab and arithmetic show limited Flynn Effect is because the Flynn Effect reflects an actual rise in brain size & neurological development that has occurred over the 20th century, and thus it shows up best on direct fluid measures of actual intelligence (i.e. Raven, Similarities) not crystallized measures of knowledge (vocab, arithmetic, SATs). Now in homogenous Iamexpertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-84726532931577066212014-03-03T20:34:29.769-05:002014-03-03T20:34:29.769-05:00Gee, they left out the wechsler’s only high g/nonv...Gee, they left out the wechsler’s only high g/nonverbal subtest, Matrix Reasoning (“this shape goes to this shape like this one goes to”) because it wouldn’t fit their agenda – it would be low cultural yet high g – it would screw up their findings b/c research is consistent: the higher the g loading, the higher the heritability coefficient. That’s the consistently replicated finding in the field panjoombynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5880610.post-68940336948244344332014-03-03T19:24:15.943-05:002014-03-03T19:24:15.943-05:00more bs. "even after their actual intelligenc...more bs. "even after their actual intelligence". what tests have been flynned the most? not vocab or arithmetic? on what tests did afrikaners score lower than british south africans in the 50s but son't any more? surely it was the culturally loaded ones? nope. it was the "fluid" ones.<br /><br /><br />calling FACTS pc and assuming that if there is a word and a sense then chartreuse1737noreply@blogger.com