John Knight wrote:
> "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 coming up with different numbers. look at the reported measurement
error.
...
>>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?
yes
> 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)?
brain cells were not counted--volume was measured and assumptions were
made about number of cells. Given that there are other reasons for
differences in volume, the hypothesis of differing number of cells
warrants demonstration rather than assertion.
...
>>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".
sorry, the methods that they reported do not support this generalization.
>>>> > 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.
and how do you know this?
> They would have reached an entirely different conclusion
> if they'd compared it to GRE or TIMSS.
assuming the ability to measure brain size reliably.
>>>>>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?
Look at the ranges the authors reported.
> On what basis do you dispute them?
their own data
>> 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?
so far, the data do not support your assumptions. When measurement
error exceeds variance attributable to a variable, you have a major problem.
>> Where's your data?
as reported in the sites you posted.
...
>>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).
and you nor peter have been able to provide any data to support this
assertion.
--
====================================================
You can't make someone love you, but you can let
yourself be loved by someone.
http://home.gwi.net/~mdmpsyd/index.htm
