Which whites should be culled?

Demiurge said:
The IQ of Poland is third highest in the EU. If it weren't for your intellectual inadequacy, you would know this.

Poland is not exclusively Slavic -- in many areas, it is predominantly Baltic and Germanic.

However, it came in behind the Dutch and Germans, so we can assume those Poles should be saying "Yes, sir" to their superiors from real Western nations.
 
Demiurge said:
I am skeptical of all of the people on the internet claiming IQs of 130+(roughly 98th percentile). Very few people I know have actually taken an IQ test, nevermind scored high on one. While I am but one person, I would be willing to bet that very few people have taken one. Unless one is gifted, impaired, or joins the service, it's just not that likely to come up. I suspect that what happens is that people take online tests, which are completely unreliable or they think "130 is pretty smart, I guess, and I think I'm pretty smart, so I must have an IQ around there."

I agree with this: bogus results are plentiful. And the online tests are inaccurate -- they tend to give results in 130-140 range to just about anyone.
 
"Which whites should be culled?"

It has been strange witnessing Infoterror turn into some bizarro-comedy skit (before it seemed more like humor mixed with reactionary anger- maybe I misunderstood). Can he continue to come up with more fantastical premises? Oh no, wait, this is "applied" philosophy...
 
Demiurge said:
It is the best measure of cognitive ability that has been devised to date.
This is true. However, that does in no way mean it is good enough for anyone to be able to say what IQ they "have". An IQ test measures the ability to take a specific IQ test. The tests are really poorly standardized and often incorporate questions that are completely irrelevant when it comes to intelligence. If we are able to agree that intelligence is decided by genetic, rather than environmental factors, it would be interesting to see anyone explain why the average IQ has increased sufficiently in western countries the last 50 years. Such an increase is not congruent with Darwin's theory. The only proper conclusion would be that the tests measure the wrong aspects of the human mind.

One thing that also annoys me is the amount of people who are convinced they are some sort of geniouses after taking an online IQ-test. Take the site iqtest.com as an example. The main site says "Our original IQ test is the most scientifically valid IQ test available on the web today. Previously offered only to corporations, schools, and in certified professional applications, it is now available to you. In addition to measuring your general IQ, our exclusive test assesses your performance in 13 different areas of intelligence, revealing your key cognizant strengths and weaknesses.". This might seem like a very valid and trustworthy test, but after taking the test, they have you pay to get a certificate sent to you. Since the main purpose of the site obviously is selling these certificates, they want to get as many as possible to buy them. They try to achieve this by giving everyone ridiculously high score, making them believe they are intelligent, forcing them to buy the certificate as proof. Their slogan even is "Smarter than you think". :rolleyes: This is the case of most online IQ tests. They give people with average intelligence a result of maybe 150-170, giving them a rather distorted view of themselves, in which they firmly believe, claiming they "have" an IQ of whatever score they got.

The problem is that the more "official" tests aren't that standardized or consistent either. You may take one test that gives you a score of 107 and then score 117 on another test. The results of IQ tests are also highly dependent on who has previously taken the test as the IQ system is based on the idea that the average IQ should always be 100. This means that if a lot of dumb people take an IQ test, you are more likely to score highly on this test than on other ones. The most valid test measuring cognitive ability I've ever taken is the one they use at the enlistment here. There you don't get an IQ score or anything saying "This is your intelligence". You just get a score, which you can compare to everyone else who has taken the exact same test, which is a large portion of our male population.
 
infoterror said:
I agree with this: bogus results are plentiful. And the online tests are inaccurate -- they tend to give results in 130-140 range to just about anyone.
Which is simply the reason why you go do a real one ;)
 
Jrgen said:
No matter which test you take, the system is still flawed.

There's degrees of everything. It can be partially flawed and still worthwhile, especially if that is taken into account when considering the results.
 
I think the problem are not flaws like a lack of standarisation or something like that.
The problem is that iq-tests measure the wrong thing:
1. The odd one out and completion of arays of symbols are highly subjective. Often it is possible to make up a solution that is supposed to be worng but makes sense.
2. Many people with high "cognitive abilities" achieve less in a "practical problem" for example out of science, because they have the wrong attitude, or have a fear of formulas or something like that.
3. I claim that the specific "find the pattern that the people who wrote the test had in mind"-game can be trained.
 
Yeah, like any standardized test, it just measures how well you can perform on that test. The concept of test prep courses perfectly illustrates this. Those online IQ tests are terribly predictible. There's the obligatory questions on prime numbers, anagrams, spacial reasoning. Quite easy to master.
 
The paucity of research that people who discuss psychometrics have done on the tests used by psychometricians is bewildering. I'm tired of correcting errors and posting studies, so I have no further comment.