IUBio

brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

John Knight johnknight at usa.com
Fri Jul 12 21:23:18 EST 2002


"Hope Munro Smith" <hopems at mail.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:hopems-1207022039410001 at cs6625171-151.austin.rr.com...
> In article <AhLX8.49083$P%6.3468866 at news2.west.cox.net>, "John Knight"
> <johnknight at usa.com> wrote:
>
> > "Cary Kittrell" <cary at afone.as.arizona.edu> wrote in message
> > news:agn34f$hla$1 at oasis.ccit.arizona.edu...
> > > In article  <SZCX8.47920$P%6.3357792 at news2.west.cox.net>
> > > "John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> writes:
> > > <
> > > <
> > > <"Shadow Dancer" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
> > > <news:agm2br$mukqa$1 at ID-150265.news.dfncis.de...
> > > <> Here are some I just dug up:
> > > <>
> > >     {...}
> > > <>
> > > <> And yet another:
> > > <> http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/heshe.html
> > > <>
> > > <> My terminology was wrong, I meant the corpus callosum.  Either way,
> > women
> > > <> use their entire brains more efficiently than men do and, once
again,
> > size
> > > <> does NOT matter :P
> > > <>
> > > <>
> > > <
> > > <Not only was your terminology wrong, but so were your conclusions.
Here
> > are
> > > <some I just dug up.  In the following 12 subjects, no country scored
> > lower
> > > <than American 12th Grade Girls who scored:
> > >
> > > What Johnny isn't telling you is that he "just" dug these up years
ago,
> > > and has been drawing erroneous conclusions ever since.  For example
> > > he also is not telling you that:
> > >
> > > <
> > > <Zero percent of American 12th grade girls correctly solved TIMSS math
> > > <problems.
> > > <
> > > <Zero percent of American 12th grade girls correctly solved TIMSS
physics
> > > <problems.
> > > <
> > >
> > > that I have twice in the past demonstrated that  his "method" of
> > "analysis"
> > > which "led" to the above "conclusions" would also "lead"  to the
> > "conclusions"
> > > that:
> > >
> > >     a.  anyone answering all questions correctly should receive a
> > >         mark of only 80%, and
> > >
> > >     b. five out of every four girls got one question wrong.  Can
> > >        you say reduction ad absurdem?
> > >
> > > It's not the girls who can't apply math correctly.
> > >
> > >
> > > Google has it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -- cary
> >
> >
> > Let's use a simple example of how wrong you are, cary.
> >
> > Question K09 on the 12th Grade TIMSS Math test given to 12th graders
around
> > the world in 1995 reveals an astounding difference in math skills
between
> > the sexes in all the countries who participated.  The average difference
in
> > all countries was 10.5%, with 47.3% of boys and 36.8% of girls answering
> > correctly, but the difference in the US was 22.1% (28.6% of girls and
50.7%
> > of boys).   In countries like Cyprus where 60.1% of the boys answered
> > correctly, guesses on the test would not have influenced the scores by
that
> > much, but where only 28.6% of American girls answered correctly, guesses
> > must be taken into account.
> >
> > Since this was a multiple choice question with four possible choices,
the
> > probability of getting the correct answer just by guessing is 25%.  In
other
> > words, for every four students who guessed, one of them would have
gotten
> > the correct answer by chance.  The maximum score would have been
achieved
> > had all the students who didn't understand the problem guessed at the
> > answer, so where 28.6% of American girls answered the problem correctly,
> > 23.8% of them got the correct answer by guessing, and 4.8% indicated
that
> > they understood the problem [x = total guesses, 0.25x = correct guesses,
> > 0.75x = incorrect guesses = 71.4%, x = 95.2%, 0.25x = 23.8%, 28.6% got
the
> > correct answer - 23.8% guessed the correct answer = 4.8% understood the
> > problem].  However, with an estimated error of plus or minus 3%, only
1.8%
> > are known with certainty to have understood the problem.
> >
> > American boys didn't do that much better, since [prior to the adjustment
for
> > the 3% error] just 34.3% of them got the correct answer because they
> > understood the problem, 16.4% got the correct answer because they
guessed,
> > and 49.3% guessed incorrectly. Thus only 31.3% are known with certainty
to
> > have understood the problem.
> >
> > Prior to adjustment for the 3% error, 53.2% of the boys in Cyprus
guessed,
> > 39.9% guessed incorrectly, 13.3% guessed correctly, and 46.8% understood
the
> > problem [x = total guesses, 0.25x = correct guesses, 0.75x = incorrect
> > guesses = 39.9%, x = 53.2%, 0.25x = 13.3%, and 60.1% correct answers -
13.3%
> > correct guesses = 46.8% who understood the problem].  Only 43.8% are
known
> > with certainty to have understood the problem, so per capita, compared
to
> > American boys 40% more boys in Cyprus are known to have understood the
> > problem, and compared to American girls, 24 times as many were.
Compared to
> > American girls, 17 times as many American boys are known to have
understood
> > the problem.
> >
> > Is this adequate proof that our attempt to establish "gender equality"
is a
> > failure?  Yes.  To achieve that ephemeral goal, our "educators began an
> > unnecessary and destructive "gender war" of unprecedented proportions,
more
> > than doubled education spending as a percent of GDP, and out-spent by
more
> > than three times countries whose students far outperformed ours.  Japan,
> > whose 8th graders scored 105 points higher than ours, spends half as
much
> > for education.  Korea, whose 8th graders scored 107 points higher than
ours,
> > spends even less per student than Japan.
> > http://christianparty.net/timssgeometry.htm
> >

The link on that page might be hard to find, so you can go directly to it at
http://christianparty.net/timssk09.htm

> >
>
> This is because parents assume a larger portion of the
> cost of education than they do in the United States.
> In most other countries, parents have to buy
> all their children's school books, supplies, uniforms,
> plus pay for transportation to and from school. No school
> buses subsidized by the community or free lunch
> programs. There goes part of your theory.  Anyone else
> want to trash the rest of it?

Do you REALLY think this would double the cost of "education"?

John Knight





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net