View Single Post
  #71   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 17-12-2004, 11:54
dlavery's Avatar
dlavery dlavery is offline
Curmudgeon
FRC #0116 (Epsilon Delta)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Herndon, VA
Posts: 3,176
dlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond reputedlavery has a reputation beyond repute
Re: YMTC: Redabot weighs 129.8?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonathan lall
Okay, time out on the topic. If you feel the urge to slap me (and I know you do), do it in a Private Message, because I don’t want to kill this rather enjoyable thread.

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to take issue with that comment. It's in direct response to another comment (also in jest) made earlier. After all, I have to keep my image as a ‘public defender’ of lawyers everywhere on this forum, because in general, FIRST is taught to hate them in a dazzling display of biased ignorance. That being said, I actually did my research before I made that little parting remark. I would have been content to not disclose any sources, but since you asked…

Know Your Child’s IQ
, by Glen Wilson and Diana Grylls lists occupations that they maintain are typified by various IQ levels. It is unclear where they got this information or whether it is based on empirical data at all however to your credit, engineers are placed in the same IQ category as lawyers; that is the ~130 mark.

But.

CNN did a story on this very recently and mentioned attorneys scored higher than all other professional disciplines, including "doctors" (as in MDs), and engineers. Professional disciplines are by far the cream of the crop in this regard. However, it should also be noted that years of schooling and IQ are proportional. In order to become an engineer, one can take half the schooling the average lawyer or doctor has to endure. I am guessing (though I have no proof of this) that engineers have higher IQs than MDs on average for the simple fact that the IQ system places a high emphasis on mathematical prowess, but the years of schooling proportionality is evidenced in the table here (engineers are notably not mentioned in that table) for those interested.

Unfortunately, I could only find one set of IQ ratings of both attorneys and professional engineers here, but the lowest mean IQ I could find with Google for “attorneys” or “lawyers” was 127, whereas according to this, the mean IQ of engineers (who have not gone back for another three or four years of school--remember again the years of school propotionality I discussed earlier) is 111. This is the also the lowest average IQ for engineers I could find. I did not find any source that put engineers’ average IQ above that of lawyers, but if you find one, point me in its direction by all means. The point is that an analysis of numerical data puts the average lawyer at least three points ahead of the average engineer.

Flame away everyone, but in a PM. Quickly back on topic, while I would really prefer to stay out of this part of the discussion, I'd just like to note that Al's example of four crab steering devices could be logically interpreted as one device or module; one could argue that the mobility of this hypothetical Wildstang consists of four tangible objects, and thus the fact that they are not physically attached is a side issue. Run with that if you like.
Pitcher does a fast throw to third trying to snag the runner, but doesn't set for the pitch. Tweet! Umpire calls a balk. Opposing batter advances to first base. **

You can't post a diatribe like this in a public forum, and then insist that all those that want to respond must do so only via PM. Sorry, but those sorts of double standards are inappropriate. Whenever anyone makes a public post on this (or any other forum), you must expect and even welcome a public response. To do otherwise is to say "my words are worthy of public scrutiny and acceptance, but if you disagree with me then by definition your words do not meet the same standards." This is disingenuous and demeaning to those who see things in a different - and possibly more correct - way than you do. This is particularly true when the post is based on facts of questionable validity (i.e. the only references are opinion essay web sites that do not list any verified, peer reviewed data sources).

You publicly opened the door on this side-topic, so you need to be prepared for a public discussion that may follow. If it is too divergent from the original discussion and you feel it deserves a seperate thread, then fine. Make a new thread and move the discussion there. But to limit public discourse to just one side of the discussion is intellectually dishonest.

-dave

**<edit>Natchez caught me on this one. He says the third base runner comes home on a balk. Turns out we were both right. According to The Baseball Almanac and Official Major League Rules Book in Section 8.05 - The Pitcher, all runners advance one base on a balk, not just the batter. The batter will go to first and the third base runner will come home.</edit>
__________________
"I know what you're thinking, punk," hissed Wordy Harry to his new editor, "you're thinking, 'Did he use six superfluous adjectives or only five?' - and to tell the truth, I forgot myself in all this excitement; but being as this is English, the most powerful language in the world, whose subtle nuances will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' - well do you, punk?"
- Stuart Vasepuru, 2006 Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest



My OTHER CAR is still on Mars!!!

Last edited by dlavery : 17-12-2004 at 20:26.
Reply With Quote