"Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
news:3D2BA019.3060808 at NOSPAMgwi.net...
> John Knight wrote:
> > "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>> sorry, but all i see are assertions, no empirical research.
>
How much more empirical research do you need? You've got scientists from
all around the world collaborating on brain size and test scores, and
they're reaching a very different conclusion than educators and politicians
have. Why?
>> >
> >
> > 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.
>> quite the spread. How much variablility was explained by age and how
> much by gender?
Do you have evidence that there's a significant change in brain size as
people get older? Or better yet, could this change possibly exceed a
standard deviation which would be only 98 million brain cells (compared to
the 3.5 billion brain cell difference between men and women)?
>>> >
> > 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.
>> it's also impossible to prove that there's any relationship to a
> putative difference in the number of brain cells.
>> just where did the samples come from where these numbers were generated?
>
If you think these Swedish scientists made a mistake in counting brain
cells, why don't you contact them and let them know where? The problem is
that their findings are consistent with just about every other shred of data
EXCEPT "IQ tests".
> > 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.
>> i suppose there's a reference there somewhere.
>
Their claim that there's no correlation between "intelligence" and brain
size was based on a comparison to "IQ tests", which we already KNOW are
seriously flawed. They would have reached an entirely different conclusion
if they'd compared it to GRE or TIMSS.
> >
> > 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.
>> assuming the numbers are correct. and that's quite the assumption.
>
Where is your evidence that this is "quite the assumption"? Do you have a
shred of evidence to dispute their research findings? On what basis do you
dispute them?
Do you think you just migh have some kind of religious conviction to "men
and women have the same IQ", which makes you think "men couldn't possibly
have 3.5 billion more brain cells than women", which in turn makes you
believe that there must be a flaw in the GRE, ACT, SAT, TIMSS, NAEP, IAEP,
and all other standardized tests?
Where's your data?
>> >
> > But there is no analytical process whatsoever by which it can be proven
that
> > there is absolutely no causation for this precise correlation.
>> the brain cells were counted how?
>> > 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 b
rain
> > 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.
>> What does all of this have to do with the assertion that there is a
> gender bias in IQ testing? Mattarazzo (1972 *Weschler's Measurement and
> Appraisal of Adult Intelligence*) reviewd the then current literature
> quite extensively (p 352 ff). He cited numerous studies that attempted
> to demonstrate such a difference and failed to do so.
>
These yoyos also developed an "IQ test" which couldn't detect a difference
in the quantitative skills between men and women which the GRE scores show
to be bigger than a freight train.
We might envision them examining ants with an electron miscroscope in the
midst of a herd of stampeding elephants, and not detecting the elephants.
This is precisely Peter's point--Wechsler was an advocate on some kind of an
agenda, not a competent or credible scientist (ala. Einstein).
Would you agree that it's amazing that these men managed to fool the masses
for so long?
John Knight
