"Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
news:3D2EA20B.6040504 at NOSPAMgwi.net...
> John Knight wrote:
> > "Mark D. Morin" <mdmpsyd at NOSPAMgwi.net> wrote in message
> >
> >>>The mere mention of the differences between the sexes, in your mind, is
> >>>"prejudice"!
> >>>
> >>>Do we have that right?
> >>
> >>No.
> >>You are exercising circular reasoning.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Is this your final answer?
> >>>
> >>>John Knight
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>ps--and now that you've concluded that "prejudice" is involved,
> >>
> >>Prejudice has been involved for millenia. Prejudice exists despite
> >>evidence and prejudice is what blinds people to evidence. Prejudice
> >>evokes the circular reasoning that you have been so good at. Prejudice
> >>is independant of data--show me the data fool.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > Well, it's pretty clear that you're just trolling now.
> >
> > You haven't got the slightest idea if anyone's "prejudiced" regarding
their
> > opinion, whether it's their opinion of the data, or of the crooks who
> > manipulated it. You didn't level that charge because you wanted to
avoid or
> > critique any possible prejudice. You levelled that charge only because
you
> > (and I) know that it's impossible for you to defend your position.
> >
> > You keep repeating the mantra about "measurement errors" of one of the
> > simplest things in the world to measure,
>> Who is trolling? What do you know about measuring brain volume or number
> of neurons in a brain? Both are exceptionally unreliable.
If it was this unreliable, then r-squared for brain size versus GRE scores
would be nowhere NEAR 0.8795. The ONLY thing that could be gained by even
more reliable measurements would be an increase in r-squared.
Again, the only outlier is the Black man, and if he's removed from the
calculations, r-squared gets very close to 1.0. You *must* know that you
cannot get better correlation than that.
Where are the measurement errors?
>> > without ever pointing out
> > specifically where you believe these measurement errors are. This was
> > simply an attempt to discredit what you know (or at least sense) to be a
> > FACT.
> >
> > You're willing to go to great lengths to attempt to refute the
correlation
> > between brain size and GRE scores, no matter what the facts are.
>> The fact is, there is a robust correlation between age and brain volume.
> If age is not controlled for, you can not say anything about between sex
> differences.
>
This is patently false, and since it's already been explained to you, it's
not clear if you're just trolling, or if you really don't understand how
inconsequential age and brain size are to the correlation we're discussing.
Let's try this a different way. Even IF "there is a robust correlation
between age and brain volume", you cannot also ignore that there is also a
"robust" correlation between brain volume and GRE scores, which means that
as brain volume increases, so do GRE scores. Any adjustments for
measurement errors for increased brain volume would be cancelled out by the
increase in GRE scores, and you'd be back to r-squared = .8795
But since you haven't even attempted to quantify this "robust correlation",
it should be pointed out that after the age of 20, average brain volume
remains virtually FIXED by race and sex.
John Knight
