In article . net,
Maxprop wrote:

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:



Blue eyes and a full, beautiful head of hair. How about you, Jon?

Same, but not as ugly. g

Then you must be one great looking dude. :-)

Talk to Horass. He likes guys.


--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."

On 11 Nov 2004 23:04:00 -0800, (Jon-boy
Ganz) wrote this crap:


Same, but not as ugly. g

Then you must be one great looking dude. :-)

Talk to Horass. I like guys.


You have to gay-up everything, don't you, Jon-boy?





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

"Horvath" wrote in message
...


Same, but not as ugly. g

Then you must be one great looking dude. :-)

Talk to Horass. He likes guys.


I have to gay-up everything!





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

Post some of my dogmatic views that are substantially "left of center"
Max. Your bluff is being called... not for the first time either. You
haven't answered this, because you can't.

Maxprop wrote:
Okay, Douggie. I'm not going to drag exact quotes from Google

That's just as well.


...1) When I was
disputing the way welfare has traditionally been used as a selling point for
the dems during campaigns, you accused me of Neaderthalic illogic,
antihumanitarianism, lacking in compassion, etc.

Opposing inhumanity is "substantially left of center?"

... Conservatives, while
recognizing that some individuals simply cannot help themselves, also
subscribe to the belief that too many use welfare as a reason to avoid
becoming productive.

I would somewhat agree, bu you must have missed out on the welfare
reform acts of the 1990s. And you can't seem to point to a quote where I
am in favor of increasing welfare. Once again you attempt to proclaim
some great ideological principle and stub your toe on your own ignorance.


... 2) You've constantly decried the "tax cuts for only
the very wealthy," seemingly ignoring the fact that the very wealthy
constitute roughly 10% of the population but pay roughly 30% of the nations
revenue.

I don't ignore that fact at all. The richest 10% of the country owns 50%
of the wealth and well over 50% of the income... so that makes paying
30% of the tax burden rather a free ride, doesn't it?

Aside from the sound economics, it is immoral to decrease the tax burden
on a group well able to bear it, in order to increase the tax burden on
those further down the ladder.

Next I suppose you are going to angrily denounce me for failing to
contribute the "Buy Chateaubriand For a Millionaire" charity drive.



... 3) You've resorted to name-calling when I advocated
semi-privatization of Social Security.

Not really, I just call you names like "stupid" and "caveman fascist"
because they are the closest fit.

Privatization of Social Security is a stupid scheme that will benefit
the politically well-connected brokers handling gov't retiremnet
accounts. You're in favor of that? And you think it's "conservative?"


... Most conservatives believe that SS
won't endure at its current status

Actually, figures show that SS will be solvent 'till 2040AD or
thereabouts. Most "conservatives" have at least a passing familiarity
with basic accounting.

I'd be in favor of rolling back Social Security, but not handing it
over for yet another rob-the-taxpayer scheme to redistribute the wealth.


Don't hold your breath for quotes. You've gotten all I care to provide, the
operative word being "care."

Thanks, you've shown how much you care, Maxxie. And how disconnected
from reality you are. I suggest unplugging the Fascist Whacko Fantasy
Channel once in a while and watching/reading some real actual news...
you know, from planet Earth...

DSK

OzOne wrote in message ...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 05:53:56 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:


OzOne wrote in message

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:08:00 GMT, "Maxprop"
scribbled thusly:


OzOne wrote in message

On 10 Nov 2004 11:05:26 -0600, Dave scribbled
thusly:

To take an anecdotal example, my daughter attended an elementary
school
where the minimum criterion for admission was a very high IQ score,
regardless of the parents' wealth. She then attended a private prep
school
where the parents' money was at least a significant admission
factor
for
many students and the average IQ was much lower. The two groups
were
just
about on a par in their college records of both admissions and
performance.

Yep, one group had brains, the other a work ethic passed from their
successful parents.

So how does this support your contention that SAT/ACT scores correlate
with
IQ????? Two groups with disparate IQ averages, and both scored
roughly
the
same on the tests. Did the significance of this escape you?

Max

Has it escaped you that you don't need a high IQ to do well at school?
It's all about application.

I don't believe this. No, it has not escaped my notice, but that's not
what
this discussion is about. We're discussing the relationship between IQ
and
SAT/ACT scores, not extraneous factors that can mean success in school or
on
the tests.

Jeez, let's start from the beginning: The website you provided has
contended a direct correlation between IQ and SAT/ACT scores. But the
anecdote related by Dave would indicate that IQ may have little or
nothing
to do with success on the exams. Two groups, one with a higher average
IQ,
the other with a lower average IQ, both scoring equally well on the
entrance
exams. That could conceivably be used as an example of why the Kerry
states
really might not have higher IQs, rather other extraneous factors leading
to
high SAT/ACT scores. Thus my contention is correct: the website
purporting
to show the relative IQs of the various states is bogus, if using
college
entrance exam scores as the basis of those state IQ ratings.

(whew) Got it?

Max

You probably should read this
http://www.sq.4mg.com/IQ-SAT.htm
"Claude Steele: Chair of the Department of Psychology at Stanford
University since 1997

But is this SAT an IQ test? "It is in a sense an IQ test. The SAT and
IQ test correlate very highly. Between the SAT and the IQ, they
correlate almost as much as the SAT correlates with a second
administration of the SAT, as much as it correlates with itself. So
they're very similar tests in content." from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/test/views.html"

and this

http://www.scienceblog.com/community...e=article&sid=
2297
"Meredith C. Frey and Douglas K. Detterman, researchers at Case
Western Reserve University, have shown that students' SAT test scores
correlate as highly as, and sometimes higher than, IQ tests correlate
with each other. This is strong evidence that the SAT is a de facto
intelligence test. Their findings will be published in the June issue
of Psychological Science, a journal of the American Psychological
Society.

While this finding may be surprising to many who take the test, it was
no surprise to the researchers. The origins of the SAT can be traced
back to intelligence tests that were originally given to screen
entrants into the armed forces. Many who study intelligence had
suspected that the SAT was an intelligence test though it seems no one
had ever investigated the relationship."

and this
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-smm021104.php
SAT measures more than student performance, research shows it is also
a reliable measure of IQ
Each year thousands of high school students take the Scholastic
Assessment Test, or SAT, hoping to gain admission to the college of
their choice. Colleges and universities use SAT scores to help project
a prospective student's performance. But research shows there is more
to the SAT, that it is really an intelligence test.

Interesting reading. I skimmed two of them, but I shall avail myself of
them more thoroughly when time permits.

However I think the relationship, as stated in these treatises, between SAT
scores and IQ is a theoretical one at best, and a casual one at worst. As
Dave has pointed out several times, there are myriad other factors that can
affect success or failure on such exams. Given a small, well-defined
population of similarly raised, similarly-educated individuals, I think that
the SAT scores may correlate well with IQ. But the demographics of the
total population of students taking such exams is not so narrow, rather
widely varied throughout the country and throughout the socio-economic
spectra. Reality seldom emulates theory where humans are concerned.

Max

"Dave" wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 05:45:41 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

Perhaps I'm not seeing something here. Your anecdote implies that two
groups of disparate average IQ scored equally well on the entrance exams.
That would seem to support the notion that IQ and SAT scores do not
necessarily correlate, regardless of the underlying reasons.

Not quite. I'm saying that the correlation that would otherwise exist can
be
reduced. I suspect that if you had two groups with the same IQs and the
same
schooling and test preparation, you'd get a high correlation. Problem is
that between regions of the country you seldom have the same schooling and
test preparation.

Okay, I get your message, and am in agreement on all points. I made this
same point to Oz a few minutes ago in another thread.

Max

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 09:53:11 -0800, "Jonathan Ganz"
wrote this crap:

I have to gay-up everything!


We know. We know.





Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

"Horvath" wrote in message
...

I have to gay-up everything!



We know. We know.






Pathetic Earthlings! No one can save you now!

"Dave" wrote in message

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:27:12 GMT, "Maxprop" said:

Whatever you are, you oppose and hate anything
coming from conservative republicans these days. THAT alone would lead
any
rational individual to conclude that your are anything but a
conservative.

Have the last word, but count on me to remind you of your true leanings
from
time to time. :-p

I think you've tarred Doug unfairly, Max. I often differ with him, but
he's
reasonably well-informed, often bringing interesting information and
perspective to the discussion. And when he avoids the name-calling he can
carry on a perfectly rational dialog. I find his views eclectic, though
often a little left of center from my perspective.

Doug is bright and well-informed, or at least well-read. Like you, I find
his perspective somewhat left of my own, but then he believes me to be a
right-wing extremist, a perception I've made no attempt to dispel, mostly
for his benefit. He's young enough to become easily irritated with anyone
who attempts to classify, or contradict, his political leanings, thus the
name-calling and vitriol. I really should abstain from that sort of thing,
but I've enjoyed yanking his chain. It's a bad Usenet habit, but so
compelling. And fun. Had he responded with more equanimity I probably
would have ignored him.

Max

"Dave" wrote in message
...
Since we're bragging, let's just say mine did well enough to be asked to
teach the SAT course.

Bragging??

Your kid is a teacher???

Teachers must be very well paid where you live.


If one of my kids decided to become a teacher I would be very dissappointed.


Regards


Donal
--