movie gets mentioned a lot here

50 ditch diggers and collective thought

that makes sense, I guess Einstein was a moron... thanks for clearing that up for me :thumbsup

dude, i could have used that ditch diggers clip in another thread earlier this week, totally forgot about that part. crap!

:1orglaugh

The year 5555 is when our arms and legs become useless due to our increasingly sedentary lifestyles and reliance on technology. Made in reference to TheSquealer's post about people using voice software to 'type' rather than their arms.

Unlike Space 1999 and Kubrick, the song has already arguably got one prediction right, test tube babies.

try and focus on a task for 30 hours :thumbsup

oh yah, lol, the big bang theory ran with that- the sheldonian calendar for singularity.

http://www.worldpublicunion.org/2013...s-disease.html

ill just leave this right here..

30 seconds? Are you kidding me? Oh, you said hours. 30 hours? Are you k- oooh, look, another bird!

derp. in fact, the entire notion of psychology being a science is fictitious.

I imagine your funny statement reflects in your bank account as well :2 cents:

all jokes aside I've always been skeptical of the alphabet diseases..

Yep. In fact two cents is all I have in my bank account. Still, at least I'm not a humorless cunt. :2 cents:

I dont think he was a moron. Since he was a low paid employee who never really truly solved the problems he was determined to solve (namely unification theory), he might have been a moron. I had a girlfriend that went to medical school to prove she wasn't stupid. She was dumber than a box of rocks. She was however able to commit herself to spending 20 hrs a day memorizing all the intricacies of the human body, because she was motivated to do so.

I am saying that the study attempts to make a correlation where there most likely is none. The data sample is too small to mean anything and anyone with an understanding of basic math should understand that, including those conducting the study.

I can line up 58 people and have them flip coins to prove there is a correlation between landing on heads and IQ.

I do agree that conspiracy theorists are idiots. I am not sure that IQ plays into that. You don't have to be a stupid person to have a severely distorted sense of reality. Perceptual psychology and how our senses develop and are used, is a very interesting field of study, further "tuning" out things is a highly individualistic thing, i would guess. In other words, someone who survived a plane crash is not going to tune out the sound of a plane flying over head and so on. Sounds, shapes, colors and so on all have different meanings and different significance to different people.

Conspiracy theorists have issues primarily with their distortions of reality and their own internal representations of reality which end up getting worse and worse as they go and they continue increasingly to distort information around them to fit into that severely distorted model they've created. Usually, they end up doing two things. 1) They dismiss ANYTHING that challenges their beliefs as being irrelevant. 2) They distort anything they can to fit their beliefs. We all do this to some extent, but these guys do it to a very unreasonable and unhealthy extent.

tell us more about your 'dumb as rocks' gf.

also? real slick.

:1orglaugh :thumbsup

hah, my experience with an ex is exactly the same. except it was law school. i encouraged her to get into a more respectable industry, such as porn, but no.

We were young. 19. She was the typical dumb, hot blond who was very insecure about being the dumb, hot blond. It was kinda hard to convince her that maybe the medical profession wouldn't be the best route. Last i saw, she's in real estate.

I once watched her lick a hot skillet that she was cooking with. That's where i realized that hot/dumb and smart/beautiful, where two different things that served two entirely different purposes :)

maybe the researchers in the op will sort out that the brain works like a muscle= singular focus + consistency builds up the parts of the brain that today's testing and info gathering considers high iq.

I have a more pragmatic view of people. I view us as an ant colony or bee hive. There is structure, there is a hierarchy. There are leaders and followers. I believe anyone can be a leader or a follower but that both are necessary. I believe all our behaviors are designed/learned/innate to serve the purpose of us fulfilling those roles and ensuring our collective and individual survival.

I honestly have no problem with someone who is dumb. I don't consider myself smart. I don't hate the rich, the poor or the average. I think we are all more often than not, exactly where we are supposed to be because the forces of nature, more than anything puts us there. Smart, average and dumb people are all useful in the colony. A highly intelligent person won't likely be picking fruit or driving cabs. A dumb person won't likely be running NASA. In other words, 2 decades ago, there were more law students in school than practicing lawyers. That equation shifted the opposite direction. What created more lawyers? The conscious choice of each individual and random number sequence that happened to reveal a streak? Or the greater, invisible balance that exists which more often than not, puts people right where they should be? (edit: - i meant that external forces greatly influenced the outcome with respect to more/fewer lawyers)

there's prolly a middle ground eh, pragmatism + evolution too much pragmatism discounts the randomness of nature and too much well, you get the idea.

hasn't been solved yet BTW... here's more stuff by a bunch of morons:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Bayesianism

He also rejected string theory if I recall and died a pretty bitter person. Now we're learning that the speed of light isn't the cosmic speed limit either. Obviously he was a smart guy - I don't think I was suggesting he wasn't smart. He was a gifted mathematician and there are millions out there.

the entire article is junk. 53 people were tested... by "higher IQ" do they mean 100 as opposed to 90? on and on.. garbage.

Yeah. This is why I feel bickering about politics fpr example is useless. I mean it has to be done. I have no delusions that I can fight and argue and win and change the world once and forever. I also have no delusions that "my side is right" which in itself becomes a complex and unwinnable philosophical argument. I think that left and right are defined and shaped by the other an that they each represent 1/2 of the swing of a pendulum where both cannot exist without the other... An when one side swings too far, it is countered by the other and so on. My arguing about abortion (as an example) in my view, simply creates another that will argue the opposite... in a wider, cosmic sense. The stronger my argument and the louder my voice, the louder and stronger that counter voice will be.

Politics is a great example of that. Left an right, stand in direct opposition, each sure only they are correct and neither change anything in the big scheme of things. They simply balance each other out.. Extremes are also necessary in both parties because the extremes define the center. Balance.

Using my iPhone - sorry for spelling and grammar