I’ve blogged a lot about how Ivy League students regress precipitously to the mean when they go from the SAT to official IQ tests like the WAIS. The obvious explanation for this is that the correlation between these tests is far from perfect, but now I’m wondering if some of them even scored high on the SAT in the first place.
Several years ago 60 minutes did a story about one boy fraudulently writing the SAT for at least 16 other students, and the security was so poor that some of the students he impersonated were girls.
I wonder what percentage of Ivy League students got into their schools by having someone else write the SAT for them.
Pumpkin Person 
Puppy did this. He got someone to write his SAT so he could get a job as a blogger.
I think you are confusing PP’s intelligence level with yours.
Puppy discovering the backstages of elites s/he loves…
When the stakes are so high, it is probable there is fraud.
And there is the massive taking of drugs by students to improve their ability. I was extremely astonished when I discovered it existed in France, but it was never talked about.
Another big thing is that the scholastic data reported by schools dont match ETS statistics. For example, when they give their 25%-75% threshold, if you take all the 75% level, its completely inconsitant with the numbers of people scoring at that level. It’s even more suspicious that those schools claim – and many people report – that they admit only a small fraction of the high scorer.
http://www.stateuniversity.com/rank/sat_75pctl_rank.html
https://www.ivycoach.com/2021-ivy-league-admissions-statistics/
Click to access sat-percentile-ranks-composite-crit-reading-math-2014.pdf
If you take the top 25% of top 5 Universities in termes of SAT (Harvard, Caltech, Princeton, Yale, Chicago) its 1600 people allegedly with a 1590 or 1600 SAT in 2014.
But there were only 2461 people scoring that high. If you take into account the other 7 universities with 25% people above 1560, even if their proportion of peole above 1590 is very low, you have to add at least 400 people.
So as nobody believes that 2000 out of 2461 near perfect scorers get admitted to those top 12 Universities, its perfectly safe to say that they are lying biggly on their statistics. I have checked on their site that the 25th-75th reported is consitant with what they announce. I am pretty sure the scholastic reporting from Universities is a lie and that ETS knows it and doesn’t do anything about it. .
Pure logic.
NB : a way that Universities mislead, is that they take the highest 75th math score and verbal score and they combined them. Their statement is always ambiguous in that respect. But thats cleary cheating because if you have top 25% verbal at 790 and top 25% math 800, and you claim you’re top 25% are at 1590 when they may perfectly be at 1560. I am sure they also lie on the raw data.
Modern SAT is not a great IQ proxy. It’s like taking a good online IQ test, which probably results in 10-15 points off your real IQ. Like the test on queendom.
Another interesting thing is that this intelligent (top 1%) test taker is jewish Sam Eschegoff. The same as the canadian guy condemned to death penalty in China for traficking drugs Lloyd Schellenberg. The guy talking about ETS integrity, Kurt Landgraf, who makes 1.5M a year, looks to have the same integrity and profile than Eschegoff. It’s striking that they have the same way of dodging the questions and taking the interviewer as a stupid girl (wich she isn’t).
Pumpkin, you can study real hard for the SAT and get an amazing score- people who go to Harvard study for their SATs. The SATs are only a valid measure of IQ when there is no studying being done.
I’d think that the PSAT’s have a much higher correlation to IQ than the SAT.
ANYONE can cheat on the SAT if they get a doctors note. The college board gives extra time and private rooms to students who are supposedly disabled, and the college board doesn’t inform universities that a student got extra time. They report it as a normal score. I think this has really only started recently though.
If you want to get into a high-tier school: get a ritalin prescription, get extra time on the SAT, and then hire an admission coach who used to work for an elite school. They can rewrite your application essays.
For decades it’s been argued that studying for the SAT has very diminishing returns, since it measures skills all students have been practicing their whole lives (reading and basic math).
That’s what I was told, but seems like all the top students at my school were taking some expensive SAT prep. Not sure why we’re told such a lie; I ended up not studying for the SAT because of it.
It’s bad public relations if people think the SAT discriminates against kids to poor to afford prep courses, thus there’s probably a lot of propaganda studies claiming test prep doesn’t work.
This is why PSAT scores should be used for IQ. No one studies for them. I’d bet that Harvard students average at 90%ile for the PSAT.
About diminishing returns- if you initial SAT score is high enough, you can still improve up to the ceiling.
For Rahul: I think that it would be lower. If the average PSAT test taker has the same IQ as the average SAT taker, they’d probably be in the 87%ile instead. But I could be wrong. I don’t know statistics.
Puppy have you ever cheated?
Once on an 11th grade biology test. I sat at a very high desk so I had a bird’s eye view of the other students’ answers. I didn’t think anyone would catch on, but as we left the testing session, I overheard one girl say “I hate when you study really hard for a test and people copy off you” so apparently at least one person knew.
I felt bad.
So now we have proof that a girl in your biology class is more intelligent and bigger brained than puppy.
That’s amusing ! There were dizygotic twins, brother and girl, who were extremelly good looking, in my class from 10th-12th grade. They used to copy me for exams in math, physics, philosophy and Latin.
At one point, they were complaining of my handwriting being so bad.
Sometimes they had better grades than me because of their better handwriting. When I missed an exam, they had awful dives. Then, they were admitted into preparatory classes, thanks to the grades, but failed after the first year. They went to less selective university and I don’t know what happened to them but I know one of the guy was a successful model while studying economics.
being raped to death is a real thing apparently.
i feel sorry for black women.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/728521/woman-died-after-bleeding-to-death-following-sex-with-partner-who-took-potion
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/aboriginal-woman-raped-to-death-lynette-daley-justice-for-norma-ten-mile-beach-yamba-australia-a7478811.html
This Trump thing is getting comical. I went to my local book store as you americans say, and saw one of the best sellers was a book called “Proof of Collusion” by a suprise suprise guy named Seth Abramson.
I sometimes think people that vote should be tested for (a) intelligence and (b) aspergers. That would weed out about 80% of sheep people that buy these kinds of stories.
STILL THE GREATEST SCENE IN FILM IN THE PAST 40 YEARS.
As Roddy Piper himself said in 2011: This movie was a documentary.
Looks like we are moving in this direction doesn’t it. Been tracking this stuff for the last couple of years and there seems to be a slow progression towards authoritarianism and surprisingly it’s coming from the left(via mob mentality, social justice warriors, and corporate globalists). Agreed on Trump btw, they are completely off the rails, they(deep state and corrupt Dems) will stop at nothing to get rid of him which despite being generally apathetic to him(though I think he’s better than Clinton by a huge margin, anyone is) their fervor is making me root for him more and more.
My theory is very simple. In fact the simplest theories are usually the most approximate answer. There is a grand conspiracy. I’ve named the names. I’ve said what they do. And I’ve said what they want.
Mikey is the only person that gets it seeing as Puppy keeps banning anyone else who gets it.
I am writing a book called “Global Fertility, Population Control, Capitalism Sustainability and New World Mating System”
3 chapters written so far
”Capitalism sustainability”, this exist*
Some recomendaciones to look into.
Iranian, Romanian, Spanish (especially during the franco era), Japanese, Chinese, South African and german fertility rates.
They all got Novell information and deviate from reasonable prejudice.
Now you must be capable to differentiate morally the real ends from the means [exploited humane causes]. Can you*
Ive also noticed a lot of the people in my town have bad diets. You only notice it when you yourself has decided to have a good diet. You see it in the pallor of the persons skin.
You should do a post on NFL Wonderlic test scores, PP. And also come up with a Wonderlic-IQ conversion. Curious to see what you think the ceiling is.
Agree
plus it would give your blog a shit ton of new visitors and expose them to HBD
Wonderlic is pretty hard. Focuses too much on processing speed.
Does Mugabe still post here?
He made a joke about his doctor telling him posting was bad for his liver & that was the last time i heard from him.
Maybe he drinks on the internet and thus is staying offline
Hi there ^_^
Religion [connect to divine] is the metaphorical version for Mythology [system of beliefs based on myths], much more accurate..
Santo most world religions have a very negative view on homosexuality
46 time you say this as if i don’t know…
And after all, autists are the others not you.
Your mental problems is not just your schizophrenia, it’s a combo of challenges.
Opposition to homosexuality in China rose in the medieval Tang Dynasty, being attributed by some writers to the influence of Christian and Islamic values,[16] but did not become fully established until the late Qing Dynasty and the Chinese Republic.[4] There exists a dispute among sinologists as to when negative views of homosexual relationships became prevalent among the general Chinese population, with some scholars arguing that it was common by the time of the Ming Dynasty, established in the 14th century, and others arguing that anti-gay attitudes became entrenched during the Westernization efforts of the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China in the 19th and 20th centuries.[4] Although rejection of homosexuality originating in the Tang Dynasty might also suggest Indian influences, given the fact that some Hindu and Buddhist literature disapproved of homosexuality
So it was fairly common in ancient china and seen as normal until islam and western influences came and the adoption of a indian cults.
From this brief panorama of history we see that:
1. Cults that had a negative view on homosexuality prospered a lot throughout history and were successful in shaming those behaviours.
2. Homosexuality was seen as normal in many parts of the civilised world before adoption of sexual regulation (Freud basically says religion is about sexual regulation of society, which i agree with).
If you have the inert theory of sexuality, you would have to say that since such large proportions of the male population did it, it must only be social conditioning stopping it now.
If you have the social construction view, essentially whatever Master says dictates a persons sexuality.
It makes me think there must be a lot of men out there with repressed homosexual feelings.
Males are the cancer of humanity.
While, suppposed to be, male competition among species ”is” good for improvement of them, among human beings it’s not, because humanity evolved against or beyond nature of basic expression of consciousness but because this evolution was becoming more and more unequal among individuals, masters started to invest on large-scale servility.
Another huge problem of inerent toxic masculine nature and specially based on human macro- socioevolutionary configuration is that thanks for ”our’ intelligence we become capable to destroy the large part of planet, i mean, fundamentally males. So masculinity become more and more maladaptive because reason is sexually hybrid, with emotional and analytical qualities of highly evolved consciousness.
Exactly like a plague.
More power we have about the planet more cautious we must be and masculinity is everything less cautious or careful, specially on its high expressivity.
Most nonhuman animals compete and kill unmercifully not because they know what they are doing.
Homossexuality and specially male homossexuality never was a easy topic but with the true philosophy, that philosophy you seems incapable to understand, the dialogue between essential/existential and material/adaptative is absolutely required. When we truly analyse homossexuality, i mean, by all views possible, we in one hand, condemn it because lack of direct functional utility but on another hand we accept it based on individual or subjective experience and also about the awareness of absurd nature of existence and life-existence. Even about direct functional utility, very fair skin seems non-functional too.
Pill, philosophy, true philosophy, is not what you instincts are saying for you. If it was, so, a amoeaba could be a philosopher..
While there are men who are extremely evil, these are a few. In women evilness is much more distributed. The only thing that worked against them was they being physically weaker than men. Toxic feminism these days…this is not real feminism….wants to exterminate men. Now that the world is technologically well developed enough they have decided upon themselves that men are not needed. Awfully convenient.
As a percentage women are more materialistic, greedy, narcissitic, arrogant, jealous, scheming, manipulating, egoistic, self-centered, power hungry. And also they are like this about more things.
A lot of men help women when somebody tries to molest or rape. And in many other ways. Not just their wife or girlfriend or mothers/sisters. But fewer women do the opposite. But this never comes in the news. And many women dont talk about this also. I also have seen men offering their seats in buses to pregnant women, but women not offering as much to handicapped men. Also look at the killallmen hastag on twitter. Toxic feminists and some women want all women to to kill all the men. This includes even the men who never harmed women and those who also help women. No wait, they want to keep these latter group of men as ‘pets’.
Some men do domestic violence. But there are also a lot of marriages where women mistreat men. Women can always go their mothers or sisters if they dont like it atleast for some days, while men cant just drop everything and leave. Not to mention marriage/divorce laws favoring them. They use all of this too. And women treating them like this news doesnt come out so you think this doesnt happen. Even in olden times in many households, women used to team up and would play men against each other helped by the fact that males in the household were siblings competing for property, and women used to put them under their thumb using this. Men often used to sleep outside the house in the verandah in many countries, so that women could sleep inside. And this would affect their sleep, health making it easier for women to control or destroy them, if they dont obey them like a dog. Not to mention pushing their husbands if they can push, to go to wars.
”While there are men who are extremely evil, these are a few. In women evilness is much more distributed. The only thing that worked against them was they being physically weaker than men.”
[redacted by pp, jan 21, 2019] Surreal!!
Avg man are already more evil than women, emotionally cold, selfish and prepared to fight stupid wars or to forge them.
Masculinism is one of the most stupid ideology human being can believe… you must destroy all history books and pretend that males are not considerably responsible for all our problems to believe on collective inocence of this group.
”Toxic feminism these days…this is not real feminism….wants to exterminate men.”
Last night feminists were dumber. Now, they are master of manipulation. You must decide what to believe.
Most feminists, the avg feminists, are and specially about this issues, stupid. They are not stupid about male evilness but about excessive santification of woman.
You’re dishonestly blurring extreme feminists with avg feminists.
”Now that the world is technologically well developed enough they have decided upon themselves that men are not needed. Awfully convenient.”
Another shallow piece of you. A place with technology but with poverty, conflicts, all human misery maximized by the value of money and the greedy of an empowered son of bitch is not a good one.
The idea that without male psychological traits, of a minority of them, we would not had civilization is just dumb, intellectually lazy.
Creativity is not dependable of male psychology, It’s a correlation, and not a causality. Sorry to breake your heart.
”As a percentage women are more materialistic, greedy, narcissitic, arrogant, jealous, scheming, manipulating, egoistic, self-centered, power hungry. And also they are like this about more things.”
An incel detected…
How explain most of super-empowered people in the world are males*
An exception to your rule*
”Manipulating” = many times, women need negotiate your well-being with men.
I’m not saying women are fallen angels, there are lot of issues about them which are not apreciable but it’s not comparable with huge problems males, on avg, have caused to this world.
You’re thinking in concrete way, so your cognitive/personal bias blur your understanding of reality. You think to say hard truths about males is a personal attack,
I’m thinking in abstract way, even i’m a man, i’m analysing males separated from my/this identity or perspective. And because i’m homossexual, this process is easier to me. But i also do it with all of my identities or features, even about homossexuals. What i never tolerate is gratuitous hater, impoliteness or desumanization.
There a lot of good and great males but there are a lot of evil ones and the avg male is not better than the avg female, specially to deal everyday. Males tend to be suspicious, dominative, agressive..
”A lot of men help women when somebody tries to molest or rape.”
What’s your age, 15*
Yes, a lot of men help women when SOMEBODY, SOMEMANBODY…
”women manipulating”…
Are you a woman*
”And in many other ways. Not just their wife or girlfriend or mothers/sisters.”
Collectively speaking, males are one of the greatest problems of humanity.
When we divide this collective in subgroups, it’s obvious we will have a variety of valuable specimen…
”But fewer women do the opposite. But this never comes in the news. And many women dont talk about this also. I also have seen men offering their seats in buses to pregnant women, but women not offering as much to handicapped men. Also look at the killallmen hastag on twitter. Toxic feminists and some women want all women to to kill all the men. This includes even the men who never harmed women and those who also help women. No wait, they want to keep these latter group of men as ‘pets’.”
women or TOXIC feminists*
there are
normal/common women
feminists
toxic feminists
You’re saying as if all women are toxic feminists.
Women are not perfect, are men*
If happen a third world shit, 90% or more of responsibility for it will be in the masculine hands.
”Some men do domestic violence. But there are also a lot of marriages where women mistreat men.”
SOME… impression is that this number is higher than ”some” [ 0-10%]
Oh no!!! There are women who mistreat their husbands or boyfriends, what a fuck!!!
”Women can always go their mothers or sisters if they dont like it atleast for some days, while men cant just drop everything and leave.”
Most men don’t communicate their feelings apropriately…
These cases of abusing tend to happen more commonly among lower social classes where this gender rules are ”still” more rooted..
”Not to mention marriage/divorce laws favoring them. They use all of this too. And women treating them like this news doesnt come out so you think this doesnt happen. Even in olden times in many households, women used to team up and would play men against each other helped by the fact that males in the household were siblings competing for property, and women used to put them under their thumb using this. Men often used to sleep outside the house in the verandah in many countries, so that women could sleep inside. And this would affect their sleep, health making it easier for women to control or destroy them, if they dont obey them like a dog. Not to mention pushing their husbands if they can push, to go to wars.”
Well, women are those who became pregant, have and often nurture their kids…
”olden”*
There are bad women too, ooooh
but, again and concluding again
collectively speaking, males are disturbing, specially heteros. Their competitive impetus disgrace their capacity to be rational everyday and about macro-stuffies.
Avg man may be less materialist because he’s more territorialist.
”Surreal!!”
Its real. Instead your above seems surreal.
”Avg man are already more evil than women, emotionally cold, selfish and prepared to fight stupid wars or to forge them. Masculinism is one of the most stupid ideology human being can believe… you must destroy all history books and pretend that males are not considerably responsible for all our problems to believe on collective inocence of this group.”
No they are not. And they are less emotionally expressive than women, but it doesnt mean they are emotionally cold. And they are less selfish than women. As for wars, many women leaders also started wars. Queen elizabeth, queen isabella of spain, margaret thatcher, catherine of russia etc. No queen or female leader unless she was from a non war party to begin with, except merkel shied away from starting wars too as far as i know. If there is tell me.
”Last night feminists were dumber. Now, they are master of manipulation. You must decide what to believe.”
?? When did i say that?. And also i am not talking about feminists genuine feminists but i am talking toxic feminists.
”Most feminists, the avg feminists, are and specially about this issues, stupid. They are not stupid about male evilness but about excessive santification of woman.
You are dishonestly blurring avg feminists with extreme feminists ”
I am not talking about most feminists or avg feminists st*pid, but toxic feminists. Didnt i already say this. Wasnt i clear? It was instead you who dishonestly blurred all men as the same by saying men are a cancer to humanity.
”
”Now that the world is technologically well developed enough they have decided upon themselves that men are not needed. Awfully convenient.”
Another shallow piece of you. A place with technology but with poverty, conflicts, all human misery maximized by the value of money and the greedy of an empowered son of bitch is not a good one.”
Toxic feminists write articles saying that men are obsolete or men are as useful or ice cream or are men necessary. And women are just as much responsible for all of those things. There are lot of greedy empowered daughters of bitches.
”I’m not saying women are fallen angels, there are lot of issues about them which are not apreciable but it’s not comparable with huge problems males, on avg, have caused to this world.”
It only looks like men were solely responsible for it. We dont know what went on behind the scenes. You think men would willingly go to wars and put their life and limb on the line. Even if they dont die they would often lose one or more of their limbs or develop all sorts of problems.
”
The idea that without male psychological traits, of a minority of them, we would not had civilization is just dumb, intellectually lazy.
Creativity is not dependable of male psychology, It’s a correlation, and not a causality. Sorry to breake your heart.”
I didnt say that. I dont know if civilisation would have been possible or not possible without male psychological traits. I have absolutely no idea.
”An incel detected…
How explain most of super-empowered people in the world are males*”
I am not an incel. And I will tell you why most of the super-empowered people are male. Inheritance was thorogh the male line in most of history. Why? Because men stayed with their parents while women used to go to their inlaws after marriage. Why? Because if men would have gone to their inlaws after marriage, their inlaws would have chewed them alive. Women team up better with other women better than men team up with other men. And this inheritance over millenia accumulated leading to men getting richer. But women were/are just as powerful. Probably even more.
”You’re thinking in concrete way, so your cognitive/personal bias blur your understanding of reality. You think to say hard truths about males is a personal attack,
I’m thinking in abstract way, even i’m a man, i’m analysing males separated from my/this identity or perspective. And because i’m homossexual, this process is easier to me. But i also do it with all of my identities or features, even about homossexuals. What i never tolerate is gratuitous hater, impoliteness or desumanization.
”
I am not. My comment was more objective than yours. You are the one who ran around calling men as cancerous. You being homosexual could be clouding your judgement against men, since homosexuals are mostly bullied by men.
””A lot of men help women when somebody tries to molest or rape.”
What’s your age, 15*
Yes, a lot of men help women when SOMEBODY, SOMEMANBODY…
That proves all men are not evil. Also when man faces a problem from a woman only his blood related women or sometimes female best friend helps him out, but rarely a stranger women does that. But men do this for women.
”Are you a woman”
No
”Collectively speaking, males are one of the greatest problems of humanity.
When we divide this collective in subgroups, it’s obvious we will have a variety of valuable specimen…
”
Women can be as much a problem and men can be as much a solution. It is not one or the other
I am not 15, nor an incel nor a woman. Rest of your comment i will reply later.
How old are you?
”No they are not. And they are less emotionally expressive than women, but it doesnt mean they are emotionally cold. And they are less selfish than women. As for wars, many women leaders also started wars. Queen elizabeth, queen isabella of spain, margaret thatcher, catherine of russia etc. No queen or female leader unless she was from a non war party to begin with, except merkel shied away from starting wars too as far as i know. If there is tell me.”
A MINORITY of leaders who are belicists were females…
THEY ARE, THEY ARE…
Try to use the expression ON AVG.
They are colder… like it or not
This blog have a lot of this ”less emotionally expressive” guy
Don’t confuse a phlegmatic temperament with a fully expressive.
great majority of males don’t care about nonhuman animal care; a significant % of them don’t care about human rights…
Great majority of
capitalists
hunters
bullies
anti-environmentalists
anti-egalitarians
are males.
what a fuck you are trying to manipulate
Are you that argelian guy* If so..
Masculine human personality is more variable than feminine. So it’s expected very altruist individuals to be disproportionately males [even there are a lot of females there]. Exactly because males are more confident and physically stronger they tend to be capable to save lifes in dangerous situations than females but it doesn’t mean females are less capable to save lifes in their own way. I’m on the nonhuman animal care scene, vegans, vegetarians, and always have a disproportionate % of females.
”I am not an incel. And I will tell you why most of the super-empowered people are male. Inheritance was thorogh the male line in most of history. Why? Because men stayed with their parents while women used to go to their inlaws after marriage. Why? Because if men would have gone to their inlaws after marriage, their inlaws would have chewed them alive. Women team up better with other women better than men team up with other men. And this inheritance over millenia accumulated leading to men getting richer. But women were/are just as powerful. Probably even more.”
Absolutely insane!!!!!!
Women were reproductive pet for men a very little time ago. A minority of women who had any chance to be equal to men in society.
It’s just like you’re living in alternative reality where males are, on avg, after all evidences of contrary, wonderfully precious human beings while females [based on your own decisively conclusive words] are psychopathic parasites.
”I am not. My comment was more objective than yours. You are the one who ran around calling men as cancerous. You being homosexual could be clouding your judgement against men, since homosexuals are mostly bullied by men.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
what i HATE dishonest bitch who lies in the most shameless way!!!
I absolutely hate stupid people, i hate, my dream is someday be able to kill some of this cretine, and fundamentally those who are the combination of evil with stupid, but it’s so difficult to differentiate stupidity from evilness.
I ALREADY said i have a personal reason, but it’s not just that…
I’m JUST looking for the human history, the life behavior, the macro-behavioral trends among sexes, the way males and females tend to behave, what the traits evil people tend to have and specially those on the power…
The same over-confidence who can save lifes also can kill unmercifully.
Again, or you’re an autist or you’re an autist.
Men tend to behave badly about everyone even among themselves.
”Yes, a lot of men help women when SOMEBODY, SOMEMANBODY…
……
That proves all men are not evil.”
Look dude, i will not waste my time with a madman with a primitive brain who think 95% of crimes in the world mean nothing.
Just this simple sentence on this part of our debate, aborted by me right now, you already showed why try to argue with you about this issue is impossible.
This sentence is absolutely wrong or you wrote this incorrectly and shadow what you mean or…
In end of day, I’M RIGHT, just right, and you’re fundamentally wrong. Your arguments are nonsense and your fundamental perspective is already deadly wrong.
You loo like ”anti-racists” who defend black people from all bad behaviors they disproportionately have…
”No”
I’m being sarcastic because you are very manipulative here..
”Women can be as much a problem and men can be as much a solution. It is not one or the other”
Throughout human history men has been the biggest challenge for human peaceful, rational and philosophical evolution.
”I am not 15, nor an incel nor a woman. Rest of your comment i will reply later.”
So.. it’s even more problematic.
Accept the reality is to be a man, definitely.
”Try to use the expression ON AVG.
They are colder… like it or not”
They are on VERY avg colder.
”women or TOXIC feminists*
there are
normal/common women
feminists
toxic feminists
You’re saying as if all women are toxic feminists.
Women are not perfect, are men*
If happen a third world shit, 90% or more of responsibility for it will be in the masculine hands.”
I said some women and toxic feminists. Cant you read? Scroll up and read it again. And yes nobody is perfect. And with regard to third world countries, they are third world. You dear old queen elizabeth is also to blame for the good chunk of them becoming thirdworld.
”SOME… impression is that this number is higher than ”some” [ 0-10%]
”
How much?
”Oh no!!! There are women who mistreat their husbands or boyfriends, what a fuck!!!
”
Yes what a f*ck!!!
”Most men don’t communicate their feelings apropriately…
These cases of abusing tend to happen more commonly among lower social classes where this gender rules are ”still” more rooted..”
Yes because they dont communicate their feelings properly, which means the way women like and as much as women like,they should be mistreated.
”Well, women are those who became pregant, have and often nurture their kids…
So? This is weird. Also dont men do anything for their kids.?
”olden”*
There are bad women too, ooooh
but, again and concluding again
collectively speaking, males are disturbing, specially heteros. Their competitive impetus disgrace their capacity to be rational everyday and about macro-stuffies.”
They are more rational, less disturbing. Both about micro and macro-stuff. They are competitive about fewer things and also mostly towards other men. And most of it is healthy competition. Very few are like what you say.
” A MINORITY of leaders who are belicists were females…
THEY ARE, THEY ARE…
Try to use the expression ON AVG.
They are colder… like it or not
This blog have a lot of this ”less emotionally expressive” guy
Don’t confuse a phlegmatic temperament with a fully expressive.
great majority of males don’t care about nonhuman animal care; a significant % of them don’t care about human rights…
Great majority of
capitalists
hunters
bullies
anti-environmentalists
anti-egalitarians
are males.
what a fuck you are trying to manipulate
Are you that argelian guy* If so..”
Minority of leaders were women to begin with, how does it prove women can be less bellicose. You really dont understand how to read statistics. And again men are not emotionally colder, they have more alround cognitive and affective empathy on avg. They just ‘talk’ about feelings less.
Capitalists majority are men so? Establishing a company is bad now? Hunters yes, but what percentage of men are like that. And also they are nicer to human beings than towards animals. Hunting is more of behaviral trait that persisted from hunter gather society when men used to do most of the hunting. I didnt say they are perfect. As for bullies, they are just as many female bullies too. Bullying is not just physical. Anti-environmentalists yes majority are men, but again how many men are anti-environmentalists as a percentage. You take a tiny percentage of them and use that to portray all men as bad. Anti-egalitarian, no. Men have less anti-egalitarian tendencies than women.
You have been trying ot manipulate people not me. And who or what the f*ck is argelian guy?
”Masculine human personality is more variable than feminine. So it’s expected very altruist individuals to be disproportionately males [even there are a lot of females there]. Exactly because males are more confident and physically stronger they tend to be capable to save lifes in dangerous situations than females but it doesn’t mean females are less capable to save lifes in their own way. I’m on the nonhuman animal care scene, vegans, vegetarians, and always have a disproportionate % of females.”
I didnt think men needed physical strengh to offer their seats to pregnant women. But there are situations yes where men being physically stronger helps, but there are many altruistic situations where physical strength is not factor. That said when it comes to altruism, number of altruistic people… women make up as much as men. Global altruism men make up more number. Altruism that benefits all people globally not one gender. As for non-human animal care i already mentioned about it. And regarding vegan, vegetarianism: Men requiring more protein find it harder to skip meat. And some vegan/vegetarian people do it to appear hip, cool or to lose weight or to look good reasons too.
”Absolutely insane!!!!!!
Women were reproductive pet for men a very little time ago. A minority of women who had any chance to be equal to men in society.”
Until a very litte time ago, most men used to be married of before 16, some before 20 and rarely before 25. Below 20 is a young age to see women as reproductive pets by men. A lot of pressure to have kids come from MIL of the woman and grandparents of both. Since history and even to this day. Even this pressure is moslty upto the first or second child as they would get suspicious of the womans ability to give birth. After a couple of kids the MIL and granparents of both cool off.Since the 20 th century only did men started marrying late. But even then wanting kids doesnt mean they see women as reproductive pets. If you mean they saw women as reproductive pets because men fathered a lot of kids, keep in mind they were no contraceptives even during most of the 20 th century in many parts of the world. No access to fam plan operations either. For many of them. And kids after a certain number, were a reproductive by product of having sex. At that time, there was no schools, colleges, movies, malls, etc. So passing time after 5 years was through chit chat, playing games or during off work after they grew up was either by chit chat or sex. Only in the last quarter of the 20 th century and 21st century did famplan operations, contraceptives became significantly widespread. And also with the fall of agricultural economies, number of kids per couple started falling
In modern times, in some couples men like to have more kids, in some, women. I am not married. I personally dont want to have any kids, but i wont have a shot at getting married at all or face more rejection, respectively, if i insist on no or even just one kid, respectively.
”t’s just like you’re living in alternative reality where males are, on avg, after all evidences of contrary, wonderfully precious human beings while females [based on your own decisively conclusive words] are psychopathic parasites.”
I am living in practical reality and you are living in theoretical reality. Also i dont say men are wonderfully precious human beings. No they are not. But a lot of them are. Hitler, ghenghiz, stalin, and jani beg …who flung that plague ridden corporse into europe black death were all men. And most of the people who these three men killed were also men. Jewish, slavs, gypsis, bengalis, french, polish… men were the killed in higher percentage. Jani-beg killed more women than men because i am guessing i am not sure, but i feel women were a higher percentage of eSome SS officers too were reluctant to join hitler initially and they were arrested. And a lot of these men also lost their lives in theprocess.urope population then. But i doubt jani beg knew that.
And most of the people who fought with their lives to stop and kill hitler, genghiz were men. Including some german men, towards hitler. Some SS officers too initially were reluctant to go all the way with hitler regarding killing jews, russian invasion,so they were arrested. Even higher up in his own circle germal military leaders…some of them opposed killing jews and some the russian war. All of these were arrested. I dont what happened to all these people later. Some i heard were released after the munich trials?
But you may like jani beg, he is responsible for wiping out half the knwon world, as it was also a single greatest feat for ecoological protection as it lead to increased protection of plants, growth of forest and animals in europe and china. A quarter of forests came back due to the pop fall because of black death. He could be history’s greatest environmentalist.
As for my response to your women are psyhopathich parasites question? This is tricky to answer. I described women perfectly in my first comment on this topic. In relationshipsn women are more parasitic in more ways. More psychopathic in relations i dont know. PROVOCATIVE AND NON-PROVOCATIVE REASONS AND FREQUENCY IF ALL THESE ARE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION: Non-physical torturing their partner to death using threats, abuse, fights, yells, nags or other means is done by women. Men turturng their parnter to death is by physical means or using physical means as a threat to torture and very few times a few of the above. So who among men or women do these more often are more psychopathic. Global level? Men were the ones who made most of the final decision to wars or pushing the button to launch war. But that final decision/ pushing the button person will be influenced by or sometimes forced by others group of ministers etc. But who knows who they in turn were forced by?
”HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
what i HATE dishonest bitch who lies in the most shameless way!!!
I absolutely hate stupid people, i hate, my dream is someday be able to kill some of this cretine, and fundamentally those who are the combination of evil with stupid, but it’s so difficult to differentiate stupidity from evilness.
I ALREADY said i have a personal reason, but it’s not just that…”
I didnt read it, i dont reall your comments. What was your personal reason if you dont mind telling again. And did i say you were harassed by a man? No!
In the above comment i meant to say’ women were a higher percentage of europes population then. But I doubt jani beg knew that’ . Part of the first sentence and the second sentence got switched. And then i meant to say ”some SS officers were reluctant..
Santo: I’m JUST looking for the human history, the life behavior, the macro-behavioral trends among sexes, the way males and females tend to behave, what the traits evil people tend to have and specially those on the power…
The same over-confidence who can save lifes also can kill unmercifully.
Again, or you’re an autist or you’re an autist.
Men tend to behave badly about everyone even among themselves.
Name: Decision in human history like inter-tribal wars, inter-cty state, inter-kindom, inter-empire wars except probably romans offenivse wars were taken under the duress of weather, crop failure, drying up of hunting-gathering grounds, excess grainshortage, economic problems.. leading to more mouths going hungry. Families request the local chieftain, who takes the matter furthur higher. Some times the chief sees the situation…starving men, women, children. So a tribe decides to invade another tribe. Decisions this big are often taken collectively, with the chief,king playing only the final arbiter mostly. If everything is hunky dory the chief or king cant pull their people into war. If everything is bad the chief/king can prevent hhis people from war even if he doesnt wat. But if he does he will lose his power or get assisanated. Very few times can a king take his subjects to war against their wish. Unless his kingdom is very big or he is an emperor. But even then if the economy of the empire or the big kingdom is facing severe economic troubles they go to wars. Napolean wars also started like this, due to conditions in france. But sometimes even after winning, some kings or emporers try to use the benefits they gained to grab more territories so that they dont face the same situation later. That said, civilians in wars shouldnt be killed. But this was done by very few leaders among leaders who vent to war. But it was also men sometimes theirown men who resisted kings, emperors, rulers like that.
Santo: ””Yes, a lot of men help women when SOMEBODY, SOMEMANBODY…
……
That proves all men are not evil.”
Look dude, i will not waste my time with a madman with a primitive brain who think 95% of crimes in the world mean nothing.
Just this simple sentence on this part of our debate, aborted by me right now, you already showed why try to argue with you about this issue is impossible.
This sentence is absolutely wrong or you wrote this incorrectly and shadow what you mean or…
In end of day, I’M RIGHT, just right, and you’re fundamentally wrong. Your arguments are nonsense and your fundamental perspective is already deadly wrong.
You loo like ”anti-racists” who defend black people from all bad behaviors they disproportionately have…”
Name: Men do that. I know it is hard to get for you, as you have become so used to hating men, that your cognition cannot accept this. You are a madwoman with a prmitive brain.
Most of the crimes commited by men are commited by a tiny percentage of men. Your arguments are non-sense and it looks like you are like those anti-racists.Defending women blindly and using rhetoric rather than substance. And accusing all men for things some do. And ignoring men who try to stop that too.
santo: Me: ”No’
I’m being sarcastic because you are very manipulative here..
”Women can be as much a problem and men can be as much a solution. It is not one or the other”
Throughout human history men has been the biggest challenge for human peaceful, rational and philosophical evolution.
”I am not 15, nor an incel nor a woman. Rest of your comment i will reply later.”
So.. it’s even more problematic.
Accept the reality is to be a man, definitely.”
You were manipulative, i am correcting your manipulation. And i accept the reality of being a man. But i have to say that it is painful being a man. All off us get blamed and for all the things.
“Try to use the expression ON AVG.
They are colder… like it or not”
They are on VERY avg colder.”
Read all my comments again.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/yougov-poll-homosexuality-half-young-people-10458032.html
Just look at bonobos…
”Of 1,632 people surveyed, 60 per cent of heterosexuals and 73 per cent of homosexuals supported the idea that sexuality is a scale.”
1,632 people were surveyed..
1,632 people don’t represent majority of british population… food to lazy thinking…
jesus, are you [redacted by pp, jan 21, 2019] or what*
”I have homossexual feelings”, what crap is that* Seems too vague…
I think an interesting study would be on how barbarians like the mongols or goths or basically people that live in uncivilised places view homosexuality historically.
My pet theory on homosexuality is that it comes from a domesticated/feminine upbringing, but there might be a genetic component. Thus civilised societies would see the most homosexuals. With it being particularly endemic to the upper classes in particular.
Thats why the natural response of masculine men to homosexuals is to bully them to ‘toughen them up’ and make them shed that evolutionary dead end behaviour.
Thats just my pet theory. But the ancient roman descriptions homosexuality was a way of showing masculinity by penetrating a social inferior, so Im open to correction.
It’s not an evolutionary dead end becuase most homos are bi. I think there was homophobia within ancient germanía.
“Jair Bolsonaro is known for his strong opposition to left-wing policies. Most notably, he has been a vocal opponent of same-sex marriage,[3] environmental regulations,[86] abortion,[5] affirmative action (particularly racial quotas),[6] immigration[87] (particularly from Haiti, Africa and the Middle East, which he once called “the scum of humanity”) ,[76] drug liberalization,[7] land reforms,[88] and secularism at the state level,[7] among other things”
HAHAHAHAHA. This guy is way more controversial than trump. If trump said something like that he would be sent to a re-education camp in Rabbi Tims basement.
You’re so imature… do you think someone over-generalizing people of this regions is funny*
Bozo is an extremely stupid man, a parasite who has been politician since 1989 and never did nothing good for people just for himself and his white trash famiglia…
He won based on anti-leftist/PT propaganda with very unfair and malignant fake news. He represent what white guilt look like in its pure expression.
Hes very entertaining the way he describes it. When you consider its an act, its very impressive. His affect is an act, but his stance on immigration seems genuine. The media never talks about the illegal immigrant who beat up trumps elderly mother and gave her brain damage.
I didn’t know.
Apparently (wiki + contemporaneous press articles), it was the son of a railroad executive (in charge of a rehab program for alcoholic while his son was an alcoholic himself). There were from northern Italian origin. 100% white. And the guy was stopped by a black delivery man who Trump rewarded twice : just after the act in a ceremony in Trump hotel , second time when he saved him from house foreclosure.
I am not sure if such an event could have influenced him because his mother wasn’t the victim of a Jamaican (it’s the name of the neighborhood).
”P. D. Mangan 🇺🇸
@Mangan150
Eating all the time makes you less smart, because a major factor that drove the evolution of cognition was food scarcity.
Intermittent fasting and exercise boost cognition.”
A lot of stupid people on foodlogy department…
Conjectures, false causalities and personal insecurance is their business.
RR is this true?
chomsky tearing materialists and anglo-american “philosophers” a new one.
“the talk in this field isn’t only wrong. it’s meaningless.” —chomsky referring to the mind-body “problem”
sounds exactly like steve jones on charles murray. “murray’s claims aren’t wrong, they’re meaningless.”
hereditism survives for the same reason materialism survives. because psychology and philosophy professors are dumb. almost as dumb as [redacted by pp, Jan 25, 2019] women. but they smell better.
On the contrary, he invites to follow only rationality of the model irrespective of intuitions about its intuitive aspect (so I suppose the morality of the model is even more pointless)
So theories like « g » or whatever model, either for its consistency or, predictivity, don’t have to answer objections grounded on counter-intuitive properties.
Chomsky so clear and conveys interesting propositions so easily thx for posting.
Do you know where classes of Chomsky are available on line ? Like this one.
Only thing dumb about HBDers is ignorance of reaction norms, but seeing as the P = G + E model has not been debunked for IQ, they will be largely vindicated.
The P = G + E has been debunked for IQ in that it is well known that certain genotypes correlate with certain environments and that environments run in families as well, making genotype impossible to distinguish from familiality.
Everyone knows the model is wrong.
HBDers think it is insignificantly wrong.
The P = G + E has been debunked for IQ in that it is well known that certain genotypes correlate with certain environments and that environments run in families as well, making genotype impossible to distinguish from familiality.
Certain genotypes are correlated with certain environments within certain societies, but perhaps not in every society, unless said genotype is causing that environment, in which case the environmental effect is counted as a (indirect) genetic effect. So what is needed is a study where we test the IQs of people from many different kinds of societies and use machine learning to predict their IQs from both genomic and environment variables.
« chomsky tearing materialists and anglo-american “philosophers” a new one. »
—->
« Everything is properties of organized matter » is hardly an anti-materialistic proposition in the common sense of the word. It’s only that properties of the mind are not more counter-intuitives than, vg, particles and anti-particles properties.
—->
Where he may be attacking a straw men is that reductionism is not saying I don’t like the properties just study something else, but trying to explain the mind with models taking into accounts its components. But it’s true that philosophers starts by the properties of the mind they don’t like and try to see how to create a model that would make them disappear wich is pre-Galilean.
Pumpkin, on tests like WAIS, do most people go with the answers they reasoned out to be correct even though they aren’t sure whether or not they are correct?
Yes