Re: OT: Artificial?
- From: Doug Weller <dweller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 05:29:14 +0100
On 18 May 2006 12:35:36 -0700, in sci.archaeology, bogart.lloy@xxxxxxxxx
wrote:
Why couldn't most of the population be around average? There's no
p.a. wrote:
That is because an IQ of above 130 in almost
all cases is (far) less then 130.
There is nothing above 100.
I'm almost certain that half the population is
above average. ;-) The other half may *seem*
larger, but on a given day, you can collect a
healthy sample of stupidity from anywhere
along that curve.
mathematical reason to think that half are above and half below.
DOug
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OT: Artificial?
- From: bogart . lloy
- Re: OT: Artificial?
- References:
- OT: Artificial?
- From: Peter Alaca
- Re: OT: Artificial?
- From: Doug Weller
- Re: OT: Artificial?
- From: bogart . lloy
- Re: OT: Artificial?
- From: Peter Alaca
- Re: OT: Artificial?
- From: bogart . lloy
- OT: Artificial?
- Prev by Date: Re: E.P. Grondine - 'MAN AND IMPACT IN THE AMERICAS'
- Next by Date: Flores Man Debate, Continued
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: Artificial?
- Next by thread: Re: OT: Artificial?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|