Monthly Archives: February 2020

The non-linear relationship between head circumference & cranial capacity

29 Saturday Feb 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Source: Figue 3 in Jørgensen, J. B., & Quaade, F. (1956). External cranial volume as an estimate of cranial capacity. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 14(4), 661–664.

The above chart shows the line of best fit predicting cranial capacity from head circumference in 121 skulls. The authors of the paper created the following formula to predict cranial capacity from head circumference:

Expected cranial capacity = 5.43 (head circumference) – 1346

However this formula predicts negative cranial capacity for the smallest circumferences in the scatter plot. Why? Because to make the relationship linear, the authors excluded the 11 smallest crania.

Although this paper is a major contribution to the field, the authors apparently lacked the skills to calculate non-linear relationships so Pumpkin Person decided to do it for them, creating a revised formula (using all 121 skulls):

cranial capacity = 0.0080(head circumference)^2 – 1.9(head circumference) + 158

So while the authors’ formula predicted a 200 mm head circumference would have a -260 cc capacity (physically impossible) my formula predicts 98 cc capacity (consistent with the line of best fit) because my formula can adapt to the curving shape of the relationship.

It’s important to note that the formulas above are both based on skulls so when applying them to living heads an adjustment needs to be made. For example, when J.P. Rushton estimated the cranial capacity of living army staff using Lee & Pearson’s regression equations using head length, head breadth and head height, he deducted 11 mm for fat and skin around the skull for each measurement since he was applying a formula derived from skulls on living heads.

However Lee & Pearson noted that there was no obvious way to adjust for fat and skin around the skull when using circumference to predict capacity.

However it occurred to Pumpkin Person that if head length and head width are deducted 11 mm, and these are more or less equivalent to head diameter, then perhaps one should convert circumference into diameter, subtract 11 mm, and then convert back to circumference before applying circumference formulas.

Kyle Kulinski talks Iraq war & deep state

27 Thursday Feb 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 35 Comments

A lot of these progressive YouTube stars are kind of clueless, and Kulinski is no exception. If he really thinks Bush and Cheney were architects of the Iraq war, then the “Woke” generation is asleep. Though to his credit, at least Kulinski knows some of the relevant players (wolfowitz, kristol), and doesn’t blame it all on mysterious Bob Rubin types like certain morons in the comment section.

The humiliation of Mike Bloomberg

24 Monday Feb 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 114 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

When I was four-years old I was obsessed with the Incredible Hulk. He was my hero and when older kids would become physically abusive, I would make the dinging noise that occurred whenever David Banner’s eyes changed colours as he transformed into the big green monster.

Even though I was still a four-year-old child, the psychological confidence that came with imagining myself transform into the Hulk allowed me to escape from much older bullies.

But then one day a six-year-old girl who lived across the street told me she was watching TV that night and saw Wonder woman beat up the Incredible Hulk. The idea that my hero, and someone who was as big and strong as the incredible Hulk could be beat up by a woman was so profoundly disturbing I was never the same after that. Even though the girl quickly admitted she had lied, the psychological damage was done.

I would never again have another alpha-male hero, and even today my heroes tend to be women like Oprah or nerdy men like Bill Gates. People whose power came not from muscle and physical strength, but from socio-economic power. Because socio-economic power lacks the concrete bravado of muscle mass, self-made billionaires could never be humiliated the was the Incredible Hulk was (in my neighbor’s lie).

But then Michael Bloomberg decided to run for president. At first he was like the incredible Hulk, simply buying hundreds of millions of dollars worth of add-time and jumping to second place in the polls.

Then came last week’s debate where one of the 10 richest men in America was eviscerated on live TV by a woman. And not just any woman, but a 70-year-old woman. And not just any 70-year-old woman, but a bookish wonky nerd with glasses. And not only did she dominate him verbally, but she smart enough to wear boots so she could tower over him physically. Adding insult to injury, she would mock his height in the days after the debate.

Watching this humiliating skeptical, I was reduced from successful professional man to that four-year-old boy who was just told the incredible hulk got beat up by wonder woman.

Warren hates billionaires and she wanted to expose one as nothing but an emperor who has no clothes, and boy did she. Did she ever.

I don’t even know how Bloomberg even shows his face after this. How does he look other billionaires in the eye. Maybe he can blame his lack of practice.

The best way for Bloomberg to recover is to buy a pair of six inch elevator shoes, and come out swinging in the next debate. Walk up to Elizabeth warren and say “no I wont let those women out of those nondisclosure agreements because I honor contracts unlike you, you wealth confiscating fake Indian witch!” and then walk up to Bernie Sanders and say “you might be able to fool these kids with your anti-war shtick, but you voted for the Iraq liberation action act which paved the way for the Iraq war you so hypocritically condemn others for voting for.”

And when Sanders tries to defend himself, Bloomberg could yell “YOU VOTED FOR THE WAR!!!!! YOU WILL BURN IN HELL FOREVER MORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

LSAT-IQ conversion

23 Sunday Feb 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

, ,

Here’s a thread where people listed their scores on both the LSAT and the ACT/SAT.

Because the SAT is constantly changing, I decided to focus on the LSAT-ACT correlation, ignoring the SAT.

The correlation between self-reported LSAT scores and ACT scores was 0.46+ (n = 19).

The LSAT scores of the sample had a mean of 164 (SD 8.03) and the ACT scores had a mean of 29 (SD 4.02).

Using equipercentile equating, we can infer from the above distributions that the average LSAT taker (LSAT = 150) is a equivalent to a post-April 1995 to pre-March 2016 SAT score (V + M) of 1030 which is equivalent to an IQ of 107 (U.S. norms).

source

Meanwhile, the average Harvard Law student (LSAT = 173) equates to a post-April 1995 to pre-March 2016 SAT score of 1485 which equates to an IQ of 144. Of course Harvardl Law students (like all people selected by a specific test) would regress precipitously on a test not used to select them.

Nonetheless, a simple equation for converting LSAT to IQ is:

IQ = 1.61(LSAT) – 134.3

Of course this data is only based a small sample of self-reported scores so this equation should only be considered preliminary. One potential red flag is the IQ predicted for the average LSAT taker is 107. While this is above the U.S. average, it is surprisingly low for aspiring law students, given that the average university graduate has an IQ of 111 and mostly the above average ones would pursue even higher learning.

But it could be that many people who don’t even graduate from university decide to take the LSAT just in case, including many people from low IQ criminal communities who see a law degree as a way to vindicate themselves or their loved ones:

Spike Lee’s Do The Right Thing

15 Saturday Feb 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 86 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Here at pumpkinperson.com, we’re huge fans of Spike Lee, whose most famous film is Do the Right Thing.

The film was partly about the tension between Black and Korean Americans. Here’s my favorite scene:

Despite being fresh off the boat with no money in their pockets, no business experience and no English, the Korean immigrants in the film were so adaptable, they could come into a Black neighborhood and out-compete all the life long black businesses until they had a monopoly. Sadly, this made the black characters in the film feel genetically inferior.

Speaking of youtube clips, someone posted a youtube video named after one my blog articles:

Average IQ at Harvard law school

02 Sunday Feb 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 162 Comments

Tags

,

I’ve always been curious about people who got advanced degrees from elite universities, like Harvard law school graduates for example, because not only do they have the most advanced degrees, but from the most prestigious schools to boot. We know Harvard undergrads average IQs around 17 points higher than the average university undergrad (125 vs 108 (white norms); the difference is much larger on the SAT because it’s used to select Harvard undergrads, thus causing a selection bias.

We also know law school grads average about 11 points higher than the typical university grad (119 vs 108 (white norms)).

A naive reader might think that if Harvard undergrads are 17 points smarter than the average university grad, and if law grads are 11 points smarter than the average university grad, then Harvard law grads must be 17 + 11 = 28 IQ points smarter than the average university grad, giving them an IQ of:

108 + 28 = 136

But this would only be true if Harvard students and law grads were independent groups. In reality, being a Harvard undergrad dramatically increases your odds of getting a Harvard law degree (or equivalent).

Law degrees (i.e Juris Doctor degree) are now classified as a type of doctor’s degree and Harvard confers about 1,455 such degrees a year. Given that U.S. citizens are about 78.9% of Harvard, we can guestimate U.S. citizens recieve only 78.9% of their doctor’s degrees, so roughly 1,148.

Given that about 4 million Americans come of age every year, we can say getting a Harvard Doctor’s degree is a one in 3,484 achievement, and thus the median such person would be a one in 6,969 achiever.

If there were a perfect correlation between IQ and academic success, this would imply an IQ of 154 (U.S. norms) but since the correlation between IQ and highest degree attained is only about 0.55 an IQ of 0.55(54) + 100 = 130 is expected.

Converting to white norms gives an IQ of 128.