Guenny wrote:
Very much so. I especially love them with obvious Mormon overtones. That's why I can't wait for Stephanie Meyer's new movie coming out about an alien love triangle or something. I'm not sure, but I'm sure it'll be good!
·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- **** your autistic kid, I'm tired of hearing about him.
**** your autistic kid, I'm tired of hearing about him.Follow
I'm waiting on a love story between Ahuizotl and Shinji Ikari.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
lolgaxe wrote:
Guenny wrote:
Very much so. I especially love them with obvious Mormon overtones. That's why I can't wait for Stephanie Meyer's new movie coming out about an alien love triangle or something. I'm not sure, but I'm sure it'll be good!
These posts seem to have come from another, weirder thread.
It only gets weird when the Incredible Hulk shows up in a Gundam.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Smasharoo wrote:
Really, you came to the conclusion that you are as smart as it's possible to be without any downside
Also, he's a Jedi who can use both positive and negative Force powers and a half-drow ranger/assassin/cleric/wizard who dual-wields vorpal flametongues.
Edited, Mar 26th 2013 3:17pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
At least the ranger bit was first in the list!
Also, whoever keeps making that sticky mess out in the thread hallway between here and the DAOC forum, housekeeping would like to have a word with you.
Also, whoever keeps making that sticky mess out in the thread hallway between here and the DAOC forum, housekeeping would like to have a word with you.
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Smasharoo wrote:
Uh huh. Some of us can be brilliant without being neurotic though. I know that's hard for the smart but neurotic crowd to accept though. A funny side note from my own observations is that really high scores on the broader tests tend to precisely test for neurotic/obsessive minds. Hence my point that we're not really testing intelligence.
Really, you came to the conclusion that you are as smart as it's possible to be without any downside and that people who are smarter are flawed in some other way that lowers their overall ability to achieve things?
Really, you came to the conclusion that you are as smart as it's possible to be without any downside and that people who are smarter are flawed in some other way that lowers their overall ability to achieve things?
Except that I don't think those people are actually smarter. I suppose it all depends on your definition of intelligence and/or smarter.
We create IQ tests that at the high end more or less test for neurotic and obsessive/compulsive minds, and then *surprise* we find that everyone who scores really really high on them are neurotic and obsessive/compulsive. Shocking! Were we really testing for intelligence at all? Are some of those people very useful for their obsessive minds in the exact right conditions? Absolutely. What percentage of them are actually capable of doing much at all that's exceptional and valuable? About the same as among the general population.
So not really unique snowflakes. Sorry about that.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Eske Esquire wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Guenny wrote:
Very much so. I especially love them with obvious Mormon overtones. That's why I can't wait for Stephanie Meyer's new movie coming out about an alien love triangle or something. I'm not sure, but I'm sure it'll be good!
These posts seem to have come from another, weirder thread.
And better.
Edited, Mar 26th 2013 3:43pm by Guenny
gbaji wrote:
We create IQ tests that at the high end more or less test for neurotic and obsessive/compulsive minds, and then *surprise* we find that everyone who scores really really high on them are neurotic and obsessive/compulsive. Shocking! Were we really testing for intelligence at all? Are some of those people very useful for their obsessive minds in the exact right conditions? Absolutely. What percentage of them are actually capable of doing much at all that's exceptional and valuable? About the same as among the general population.
Because this made the thought pop into my head, I wish there was a "there is no pattern" kind of answer for these tests. Some people are way too good at seeing patterns in things.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
We create IQ tests that at the high end more or less test for neurotic and obsessive/compulsive minds, and then *surprise* we find that everyone who scores really really high on them are neurotic and obsessive/compulsive. Shocking! Were we really testing for intelligence at all? Are some of those people very useful for their obsessive minds in the exact right conditions? Absolutely. What percentage of them are actually capable of doing much at all that's exceptional and valuable? About the same as among the general population.
Because this made the thought pop into my head, I wish there was a "there is no pattern" kind of answer for these tests. Some people are way too good at seeing patterns in things.
I'm gonna let you in on a little secret: K-Mart sucks.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
We create IQ tests that at the high end more or less test for neurotic and obsessive/compulsive minds, and then *surprise* we find that everyone who scores really really high on them are neurotic and obsessive/compulsive. Shocking! Were we really testing for intelligence at all? Are some of those people very useful for their obsessive minds in the exact right conditions? Absolutely. What percentage of them are actually capable of doing much at all that's exceptional and valuable? About the same as among the general population.
Because this made the thought pop into my head, I wish there was a "there is no pattern" kind of answer for these tests. Some people are way too good at seeing patterns in things.
Yeah. That's actually a problem. There's always a pattern in everything, if you look hard enough (and/or are the right kind of mind). But in the real world, sometimes the patterns you see aren't really relevant at all. Actually, most of the time, they aren't. It's why I question whether we're really testing for intelligence with these kinds of tests. Seeing a pattern and knowing what it means are two completely different things. We're almost testing more for high functioning autism (or whatever other kind of neurosis fits) than intelligence, and I think it's a mistake to confuse the two.
The greatest minds in history were the ones who had both the ability to see things in ways other didn't, but also the ability to discern what things they saw mattered. Being able to dismiss the irrelevant is likely a far more important trait when assessing intelligence, yet I'm not aware of any test which does this directly (or very well). Another way to look at it is that there are an infinite number of wrong answers out there. It's easy to contrive a test in which he who can see the one correct pattern or answer that fits fastest and best "wins". And that's largely what we do with IQ tests. It's a lot harder to construct a test in which one is required to derive a course of action from information given, or provide multiple equally "correct" answers, but pick the one that is best in some way, or, better yet, to have no actual right answer, but pick from the best of a set of wrong ones (which would drive the high IQ scorers nuts btw).
Those are skills that are often far far more useful in life. Cause the real world isn't black and white.
Edited, Mar 26th 2013 2:13pm by gbaji
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Not that I think putting the data out there will stop bickering, but at least you'll have something concrete to bicker about.
Are intelligence tests reliable?
Yes, after about age 9 intelligence test scores are fairly stable, with correlation coefficients in the .8 or higher range.
Is intelligence fairly stable?
Variations from around age 20 to around 80 see correlation coefficients around .6.
Are intelligence tests valid?
They are fairly good predictors of school achievement. Scores tend to correlate to income with a .5 coefficient. But is that measuring intelligence? There is a lot of debate over how intelligence is defined, with some psychologists even including kinesthetic intelligence (motor control and bodily orientation).
Are intelligence tests reliable?
Yes, after about age 9 intelligence test scores are fairly stable, with correlation coefficients in the .8 or higher range.
Is intelligence fairly stable?
Variations from around age 20 to around 80 see correlation coefficients around .6.
Are intelligence tests valid?
They are fairly good predictors of school achievement. Scores tend to correlate to income with a .5 coefficient. But is that measuring intelligence? There is a lot of debate over how intelligence is defined, with some psychologists even including kinesthetic intelligence (motor control and bodily orientation).
Will Allegory go to prom with me?
...
...
Jophiel wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
Really, you came to the conclusion that you are as smart as it's possible to be without any downside
Also, he's a Jedi who can use both positive and negative Force powers and a half-drow ranger/assassin/cleric/wizard who dual-wields vorpal flametongues.
Edited, Mar 26th 2013 3:17pm by Jophiel
Flametongues are really the worst sort of weapon to get in a vorpal variant. You're cauterizing the decapitating strikes which serves only to hinder your combat ability. I'd recommend a swap to a silvered ice enchanted vorpal and a cold iron lightning enchanted vorpal variants. You can cover fire with the obvious fireball or flamestrike from your multiclass levels. I have been following this min maxing topic for 20 years.
Just as Planned.
Allegory wrote:
Not that I think putting the data out there will stop bickering, but at least you'll have something concrete to bicker about.
You need to link your source first; that way we can tell whether or not your opinion is wrong without having to read all the gobbledygook.
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
Jophiel wrote:
I ****** 15 times every time I take an IQ test.
If you'd said "every time I post" it would have explained some stuff.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Allegory wrote:
Not that I think putting the data out there will stop bickering, but at least you'll have something concrete to bicker about.
Are intelligence tests reliable?
Yes, after about age 9 intelligence test scores are fairly stable, with correlation coefficients in the .8 or higher range.
Is intelligence fairly stable?
Variations from around age 20 to around 80 see correlation coefficients around .6.
Are intelligence tests valid?
They are fairly good predictors of school achievement. Scores tend to correlate to income with a .5 coefficient. But is that measuring intelligence? There is a lot of debate over how intelligence is defined, with some psychologists even including kinesthetic intelligence (motor control and bodily orientation).
Are intelligence tests reliable?
Yes, after about age 9 intelligence test scores are fairly stable, with correlation coefficients in the .8 or higher range.
Is intelligence fairly stable?
Variations from around age 20 to around 80 see correlation coefficients around .6.
Are intelligence tests valid?
They are fairly good predictors of school achievement. Scores tend to correlate to income with a .5 coefficient. But is that measuring intelligence? There is a lot of debate over how intelligence is defined, with some psychologists even including kinesthetic intelligence (motor control and bodily orientation).
You understand that the kind of statistical analysis you're using (or whomever generated these stats that you're quoting used) is meaningless for this kind of data, right?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Samira wrote:
If you'd said "every time I post" it would have explained some stuff.
Like why we're waist deep in ten year old *****?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Except that I don't think those people are actually smarter.
No! Who would have expected THAT twist?
What? Still everyone?
No! Who would have expected THAT twist?
What? Still everyone?
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Like why we're waist deep in ten year old *****?
If I had a dollar for each time I've asked myself that...
If I had a dollar for each time I've asked myself that...
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Jophiel wrote:
Samira wrote:
If you'd said "every time I post" it would have explained some stuff.
Like why we're waist deep in ten year old *****?
You understand that the kind of statistical analysis you're using (or whomever generated these stats that you're quoting used) is meaningless for this kind of data, right?
I'm fascinated why you think this. Please. GO ON.....
Disclaimer:
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.
Jophiel wrote:
Samira wrote:
If you'd said "every time I post" it would have explained some stuff.
Like why we're waist deep in ten year old *****?
***** that is ten years old or ***** from a 10 year old?
(i know i should know this)
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Elinda wrote:
***** that is ten years old or ***** from a 10 year old?
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
You get a lot of use out of that image.
I found the commercial funny enough, and the format should have been used more often.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Recent Visitors: 314
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (314)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- **** your autistic kid, I'm tired of hearing about him.
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC