"Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
news:3D2ABC38.4040305 at NOSPAMgwi.net...
> John Knight wrote:
>> > You seem to be ignoring Peter's original point about the differences in
> > average size between male and female brains. To be specific, it's of
much
> > concern to his point that the male brain contains an average of 3 1/2
> > billion or 18% more brain cells than the female brain, and that their
sizes
> > are correspondingly different.
>> Reference?
>
The url was posted previously, but following are several articles from that
reference.
John Knight
http://christianparty.net/brainsize.htm
Men Have 3 1/2 Billion or 18.1% More Brain Cells than women!
Men have more brain cells than women, study finds
Copyright (C) 1997 Nando.net
Copyright (C) 1997 Agence France-Presse
COPENHAGEN (July 28, 1997 10:04 a.m. EDT) - Men have 16 percent more brain
cells than women, but the extra gray matter does not make them any smarter,
Danish researchers report.
Neurologists Bente Pakkenberg of Kommunehospitalet and Hans Joergen
Gundersen of Aarhus University analyzed the brains of 94 Danes who died
between the ages of 20 and 90.
Their final tally, reported in the Journal of Comparative Neurology, was
that men have an average of 22.8 billion brain cells, compared to 19.3
billion for women.
"We were surprised by the difference," Pakkenberg told AFP. "We did not
think it was so big, even though men's brains weigh more." That disparity is
150 grams, she said.
The research team used a technique that analyzed the brain layer by layer
and gave a more accurate cell count, she said.
But Pakkenberg insisted the difference in cell number does not show up in
tests measuring male and female intelligence.
"In these tests it is possible that men are better at some things than
women, but in general they are not more intelligent," she said.
Copyright (C) 1997 Nando.net
522,000 men and 522,000 women take the SAT each year. Men with 3 1/2
billion more brain cells each, who score an average of 53 points higher. It
is scientifically impossible to prove that this is because of
"discrimination" and not because of their collective 1.8 quadrillion more
brain cells. Men collectively score 27.6 million more SAT points than
females, which is 65.2 million brain cells for each extra SAT points There
is utterly no way for anyone to KNOW or to prove that these two variables
are independent of each other.
To agree that the analyses and calculations necessary to take the SAT take
place in the brain is correct. To agree that the precise process by which
this occurs is not well understood is correct. To know that these extra 3
1/2 billion brain cells constitute 18.1% of the male brain's mass is
correct.
But there is no analytical process whatsoever by which it can be proven that
there is absolutely no causation for this precise correlation. There is no
way to know that not even one single one of these extra 1.8 quadrillion
brain cells contributed to even a 0.001% increase in the SAT score of at
least one male. How could exactly 3 1/2 billion brain cells--18.1% of the
male brain--refuse to participate in the SAT test (out of a sense of
fairness to females?), while the remaining 19.5 billion brain cells continue
to "discriminate" against females, by outperforming female brains by 18.5%?
If 18.1% of the brains of these 522,000 male test takers were removed, would
those males still collectively score 27.6 million more SAT points than
females? What is it about this 81.9% of the male brain that it performs
18.5% better than a female brain of equivalent size? Is it made of a
superior material?
Who would bet their life that not even 2 out of these 1.8 quadrillion brain
cells might sneak across the feminists' invisible line and cause a 0.001%
increase in an unsuspecting male's SAT Math score? Who is willing to bet
trillions of dollars of taxpayers' money that this is the case?
The statement is an utterly absurd and cynical hypothesis from a bunch of
PMS charged feminists whose frustration about their inability to grasp
abstract concepts shines through in the international press. For each 1%
increase in the percent of feminists who "think": "I am good at math", their
TIMSS scores decrease two points.
Such absurd assumptions and social engineering by feminists who haven't got
a clue what engineering and science are increased the cost of education in
the US from 4.8% of GDP in 1959 to 7.6% of GDP in 1993 (Table 31). They
increased education costs by $215 billion just last year and more than $7.3
trillion over the last 40 years. Yet SAT scores plunged 98 points, 98% of
those taking the GRE test who score in the fiftieth percentile are males and
only 2% females, the US is dead last in TIMSS geometry & last in IAEP math,
& the "gender gap" in test scores didn't budge a point!
Educators have turned a stupid idea into an utterly remarkable failure! US
education ranks as one of the best of the Twenty Nine Phenomenal Federal
Flops.
http://www.iwf.org/news/000918.shtml
September 18, 2000
Differences Between Boys and Girls Are Found in
Nature and the Brain not in Socialization
Renowned Experts Tell National Press Club Audience
WASHINGTON, DC (September 18, 2000) - Leading experts on research into brain
differences between boys and girls, told a National Press Club luncheon
crowd on Friday the 15th that biology-not social construction-explains sex
differences. This has significant implications for both education and the
workplace.
Speaking at an event sponsored by the Independent Women's Forum (IWF), "The
XY Files: The Truth is Out There About the Differences Between Boys and
Girls," the panel of experts noted that both society and boys are being
harmed by fashionable, but misguided, feminist notions. Said Lionel Tiger,
Charles Darwin Professor of Anthropology at Rutgers University and author of
The Decline of Males: "The androgynous commitment to the notion that the
sexes are all the same is essentially causing chronic private trauma in
countless lives because there is no articulation between the social
structure and the real needs of and feelings of people."
Challenging the gender experts who see male/female differences as created by
socialization, Doreen Kimura, Professor of Psychology at Simon Fraser
University and author of Sex and Cognition, presented science. "Some of the
sex differences in intellectual or cognitive patterns are biologically
influenced early in life and a major factor is the different hormonal milieu
experienced by males and females before or shortly after birth," she
reported.
Patricia Hausman, a behavioral scientist specializing in the nature and
origins of human sex differences, agreed. "Many argue that changes in the
social environment could eliminate sex differences in interests," she said.
"To me, this perspective mistakenly assumes that the 'social environment' is
something that Big People force on Little People. I think it is often the
other way around. The Little People send signals to the Big People about
what they do and do not like, and the Big People respond accordingly.
Parents who buy more dolls for a daughter are probably not forcing them on
her. More likely, they are reacting to observations that she did not find a
toy truck particularly captivating, but lavished attention on her first
doll."
The refusal of the education system to accept what science says about boys
and girls is having devastating effects on children, especially boys, the
panelists warned. "The problem with [popular feminist] dogma is that it
gives enormous latitude to educators who want to tamper with children's
gender identities," said Christina Hoff Sommers, W.H. Brady Fellow at the
American Enterprise Institute and author of The War Against Boys. "This
dogma has inspired activist-educators to take on the challenge of
resocializing little boys to be more like little girls."
Tiger concluded by echoing Sommers. "We're now trying to solve the problem
of young males by saying that they're essentially young females," he said.
"What is happening though is that boys do less well in school and they don't
go on to college as often. This will have implications for these young men
to be seen as acceptable or plausible candidates for marriage."
Which leads to a warning for all of those so-called gender experts: Don't
mess with Mother Nature.
