English town too disturbingly white

[DRoseDARs]

Images of summer landscapes

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
The moderators simply don't have the time to scan every single thread for offenses. That's why there is a report function.

So now that you've noticed it, you've banned Odin, right? Oh wait, he seems to still be posting...

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Epublius Rex


Ahh Lazarus, you're not very smart, are you? Either that or someone should immediately file a law suit against whatever "institution" it is that you are either attending or "graduated" from.

He is referring to the Minnesota Twins Study. Something every college (normally) learns about in Biology 101 and if not there, then in Psych 101. It's famous, has been for 30 years or more.

I note it actually started in 1983. Please do feel free to ask for help if you are struggling with any other aspects of basic arithmetic.

I also note that my understanding of the US educational system is that "101" usually denotes a basic primer, often challenged in more advanced study.

And it puts an end, unequivocally, to the debate of nurture versus nature. The only people who deny are the ones on the left side of the IQ bell curve.

http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/mtfs/default.htm

Is that right? You'll notice that I have asked several times how genetic factors are distinguished from pre-natal environmental ones. Your links do not actually cover that- I smell a bluff here. Were you hoping I wouldn't read them?

I also note that at...

http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/psychology/IQ/bouchard-twins.html

...the authors describe the theory as "a plausible hypothesis". You're telling us it's proof? Good luck with your paper establishing that fact.

The query still stands. How were the influences of pre-natal environmental factors eliminated? The answer, from the studies you post, is "They weren't".

So thanks for feeling you could participate, but try actually answering the question next time. Meanwhile, good luck with your ongoing unemployment.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Has anyone here ever met twins with very different personalities and/or school results? I have. That's one thing that makes me think the geneticist's argument is more than a little ropey.

Still, what does personal experience count for when you can post a few semi-broken links and hope you can bluff the rest, right?

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Is that right? You'll notice that I have asked several times how genetic factors are distinguished from pre-natal environmental ones.

I wonder how many triplets have been born consisting of a pair of identical twins and a non-identical triplet, which then had one of the twins raised in an environment different to its siblings.

[Alexander's Horse]

But what about the racist poster too disturbingly new

[Agathon]

If "clueless" nets me 24hours, shouldn't this be several years?

Get a clue Dude. You, like me, are a repeat offender.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat

I wonder how many triplets have been born consisting of a pair of identical twins and a non-identical triplet, which then had one of the twins raised in an environment different to its siblings.

Is that a scientific test case, or a leaked plotline from "Neighbours"?

[Immortal Wombat]

Possibl both. I am struggling to think of a more plausible situation which could distinguish the two sets of factors.

[C0ckney]

classic, a pissing contest about test scores and a big black man in his undercrackers, gotta love poly

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Epublius Rex


Ahh Lazarus, you're not very smart, are you? Either that or someone should immediately file a law suit against whatever "institution" it is that you are either attending or "graduated" from.

He is referring to the Minnesota Twins Study. Something every college (normally) learns about in Biology 101 and if not there, then in Psych 101. It's famous, has been for 30 years or more. And it puts an end, unequivocally, to the debate of nurture versus nature. The only people who deny are the ones on the left side of the IQ bell curve.

http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/mtfs/default.htm

Now, of course, you will have to actually understand the study of genetics as well as psychology to even begin to understand this study- are you up to it, or are you going to sit there in your little bubble and deny the reality? These studies were conducted on all races and on all continents. They are as valid as they come- no one in academia denies the validity and import of "The Minnesota Twins Study"- but I'm sure you afro-centrists can.

http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/psychology/IQ/bouchard-twins.html

"On multiple measures of personality and temperament, occupational and leisure-time interests, and social attitudes, monozygotic twins reared apart are about as similar as are monozygotic twins reared together. These findings extend and support those from numerous other twin, family, and adoption studies. It is a plausible hypothesis that genetic differences affect psychological differences largely indirectly, by influencing the effective environment of the developing child. This evidence for the strong heritability of most psychological traits, sensibly construed, does not detract from the value or importance of parenting, education, and other propaedeutic interventions."

http://www.lcmedia.com/mind0005.htm

"Nature? Or nurture? Twins may hold the answer. Identical twins raised apart report eerie similarities in lifestyle and preferences. Host Dr. Fred Goodwin, himself a twin, leads this exploration of the world of twin-ness. Guests include Dr. Nancy Segal, author of "Entwined Lives;" Dr. Thomas Bouchard, who directs the Minnesota Twin Study; Dr. Goodwin's twin brother Cliff; and two sets of identical twins, including brothers separated as infants and reunited after 40 years apart, along with "twin ambassadors" Debbie and Lisa Ganz. With commentary by John Hockenberry, father of twins Zoe and Olivia."


Dream on, nurture types, dream on.

Now, in response to the moron above, given the propensity of blacks to commit violent crime, both in the West and in Africa, can anyone not say there are just too many Africans in the world?

And given that the entire modern world was invented by white men, can anyone honestly not agree that there are just too few white men in the world, and that world, given it's problems, needs hundreds of millions more to save it?

I've had a brief flick through and in no way do these lend any backing to your's or Cali's statements. It indicates that there is a genetic predisposition to certain aspects of psyche or personality between genetically identical individuals. Note genetically identical individuals. This certainly does not apply to members of a particular race, and there is certainly no evidence for any racial advantage in the intelligence stakes. This research does not even touch it and for you to make such logical non-sequiturs is quite alarming.

And another point, don't try and patronise me regarding biological qualifications, because you will lose. Horribly.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Anyone know what summoned Pubic Rex to this site?

[joncha]

I think Cali went running to BNP forum or something to complain about how we just didn't get it, and Rex is the genius they sent back to enlighten us.

[Provost Harrison]

Also a DL and blatant liar...he claims he helped map the Human Genome Project yet can't even find the right evidence to back up his argument. So come on smartarse, tell us all what you did on the Human Genome Project...

[Immortal Wombat]

He said one of his siblings worked on the HGP.