SDN has Found an "interesting" Board

Did a related website in the community go down? Come back up? Relocate to a new address? Install pop-up advertisements?

This forum is for discussion of these sorts of issues.
Narsil
Jedi Knight
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:59 am

Post by Narsil » Thu Sep 06, 2007 12:43 pm

A lefty plant in context refers to someone from the left-wing government who was planted in the military to deliberately make the military look bad. It's effectively a delusional pro right-wing conspiracy-theory. Effectively, in the bit that Vympel quoted, Darkstar was spouting off a bunch of typically right-wing bollocks.

User avatar
Who is like God arbour
Starship Captain
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Who is like God arbour » Thu Sep 06, 2007 4:20 pm

Again an example of Mr. Wongs oversimplification:
  • Darth Wong wrote:
    Tribun wrote:It gets even better.
    As everyone with a mediocre mind should be able to see, I haven't demanded that he proves that he is intelligent. I have only pointed out that his conclusions were fallacious - and that this is not an indication for intelligence. Maybe he is not able to see the difference. The difference is that someone who is intelligent doesn't say stupid things like he has done. If someone says nothing, that's neither a proof for intelligence nor for stupidity. But if someone says stupid things, like he has done when he has made fallacious conclusions, that's a sure indication for stupidity.

    But - on the other side - it is interessting how he seems to feel at once as if his education is questioned and seems to think that it is necessary to refer to his "shiny degree and professional engineering license". I have the impression that his intelligence is a tender spot in Mr. Wongs self-esteem. Why does he accent his "shiny degree and professional engineering license" if he really things that he has no need to prove his intelligence?

    It is interessting too, how he ignores thereby what I have actually said. His "shiny degree and professional engineering license" proves only that he is educated. That allone doesn't prove that he is intelligent. (Only for people who jump to conclusions. With that sentence I haven't said that he is stupid nor have I said that he is not intelligent. I have only said that his "shiny degree and professional engineering license" alone doesn't prove that he intelligent. All three possibilities are still open.)

    Anyway, his answer indicates again that he is not able to address the issues of my response as one would expect from an intelligent person. Because he clearly hasn't adressed what was actually said. Pity.
    That's classical Darkstar-style. Reducing it to its vital points, he simply accuses Mike out of the blue of being a stupid idiot. Does he really think he could cloak his rudeness behind many words?
    I love the way he's still trying to disprove my intelligence by playing Internet games, because he knows he can't possibly compete in terms of real tests of intelligence :lol:
    PeZook wrote:How, exactly, does an engineering degree from a reputable university "not prove" one's intelligence?

    At the very least, it shows that the person holding it is above average, mentally speaking. It's not like any Joe Schmoe can simply go and get himself an engineering degree with no effort or intelligence required.

    But I suppose it's typical of uneducated morons with an inflated ego to downplay the importance of education as a measure of intelligence and good work ethic.
    Xeriar wrote:The same way some students just manage to cruise through by relying on the work of friends and memorizing rote answers they don't believe in (such as creationists getting Geology degrees).
    Darth Wong wrote:Sadly, even those students (who are best advised to go to poorer schools because you can't get through a tough program that way) are still much smarter than the average Net kiddie.
    Darth Servo wrote:
    The Rabid Stupid Asshole wrote:It is interessting too, how he ignores thereby what I have actually said. His "shiny degree and professional engineering license" proves only that he is educated. That allone doesn't prove that he is intelligent. (Only for people who jump to conclusions. With that sentence I haven't said that he is stupid nor have I said that he is not intelligent. I have only said that his "shiny degree and professional engineering license" alone doesn't prove that he intelligent. All three possibilities are still open.)
    My red-neck aunt has been known for wondering why college educated people get paid so much more than people with nothing but a high school diploma. The degree is "just a piece of paper" according to her. Apparently Darkstar has borrowed a page from her playbook.

    Really, he is just trying to distract away from the fact that he is INCAPABLE of getting a "shiny degree and PE license" and is once again looking for ANYTHING to attack Mike. Now watch as Darkstar tries to attack this statement on the basis of "I never claimed a college degree was just a piece of paper" totally ignoring the main point which is that an UNeducated moron like him doesn't have the first clue what its like to get a college degree and has no business stating what a college degree does or does not indicate. His statement may hold some weight with a liberal arts degree but NOT a science or engineering one.
    Darth Wong wrote:I wonder if he recognizes that his core audience is uneducated kiddies. Statements like that (where he dismisses the idea that it takes high intelligence to complete a difficult science or engineering degree at a reputable university) would only serve as food for mockery when read by educated people, but uneducated people would lap it up. It's as if he's trying to ensure that his audience is entirely composed of uneducated kiddies.
I love it when they are speaking and speaking and are only digging their own graves without even noticing it.

They still seem to ignore the difference between education and intelligence.

I mean, I'm not saying that stupid people can complete a science or engineering degree. But not everyone who has such a degree has to be intelligent. Maybe I should note, that there is not only stupid and intelligent. There are still the average intelligent persons. And there are many posibilities how an average intelligent person can achieve such a degree.



And who is "he"?

Is Darkstar still trying to disprove Mr. Wongs intelligence by playing Internet games?

And I have such a "shiny degree" myself, which is in the German education system more worth than a "Bachelor of Applied Science". A Bachelor of Applied Science is an undergraduate academic degree while there are also advanced degrees, which include master's degrees, doctoral degrees (Ph.D.s), and other postgraduate qualifications such as graduate certificates and professional degrees.
    • And no, I will not prove that claim because there is no possibility to prove it without giving away my identity.
      Besides, I don't think that my degree is relevant. It doesn't prove how intelligent I am. It proves only that I'm educated - and that only in the field, I have studied.

And where was the attempt in this lines to disprove Mr. Wongs intelligence?

I have let it intentionally open. I have even outright said, that "I haven't said that he is stupid nor have I said that he is not intelligent."

I'm saying only that his "shiny degree and professional engineering license" is not enough to prove that he is intelligent. He has to show that he is intelligent - not with showing his "shiny degree and professional engineering license" - but with intelligent responses. And he still fails to bring forward only one intelligent response. All he has done till now is intentionally misunderstanding what was said, ignoring arguments and making fallacious conclusions. That doesn't impress me nor any other intelligent person. That can only impress stupid persons who are easy to deceive.



That provokes the question what Mr. Wong thinks what intelligence is at all.



Let us look for example at a really famous (but not necessary popular) person: George W. Bush.

According to his biography he has attended the really famous Yale University - a university I have heard from unlike from the University of Waterloo - and has received a bachelor’s degree in history.

Furthermore he has attended the even more famous Harvard Business School and has received a Master of Business Administration.

Following Mr. Wongs logic, Mr. Bush has to be really really intelligent. He has even two "shiny degree[s]" from reputable universities.

And indeed, his IQ estimates range between 111.1 and 138.5, with an average around 125.

But Bush’s IQ is below average relative to that subset of the U.S. citizens who also managed to work their way into the White House. In fact, his intellect falls near the bottom of the distribution. When compared with twentieth-century presidents from Theodore Roosevelt through Clinton, only Harding has a lower score (at least on three of the four estimates).

And as far as I know, Mr. Wong doesn't think that George W. Bush is intelligent:
[url=http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.shtml]Mr. Wong[/url] has wrote:On the War on Terror: Only an idiot would have taken a war against a small radical group with a few thousand members and failed to keep it confined to as small an area as possible (hint: mountains of Afghanistan). Only the monkey king of idiots would deliberately try to expand this war into a global conflict against the entire Islamic fundamentalist movement around the world. Too bad for you Americans that you elected just such an idiot monkey king. Twice. Sucks to be you, but we tried to warn you before all this happened.

Narsil
Jedi Knight
Posts: 332
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:59 am

Post by Narsil » Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:02 pm

Mr. Bush can be blamed upon the American education system which seems to be less adept at actually teaching people than the Canadian education system, and George W. Bush has the overwhelmingly unfair advantage of an extremely rich and influential father.

And anyone with a proper college degree knows that they're fucking hard work and you need to be intelligent to actually get one.

User avatar
Who is like God arbour
Starship Captain
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Who is like God arbour » Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:10 pm

And does that not prove that a "shiny degree" alone doesn't prove intelligence.

Mr. Bush has two "shiny degree[s]". They have no worth - according to you - because the U.S. education system is bad.

Although he still has an IQ between 111.1 and 138.5, with an average around 125. That's far above average.

According to you, the Canadian education system is better.

But I don't really know that. I have never heard of the University of Waterloo.

And I'm sure you have never heard of the University on which I have studied. The degree I have doesn't even exist in Anglo-American education systems. How could you judge its worth or what it says about my education, let alone about my intelligence?

That's one reason why a "shiny degree" alone is not sufficient prove for intelligence.





And hard work is not a sign for intelligence. Nearly everyone who works only hard enough can get a "shiny degree". The person who understand the subject without the need to work hard is - in my opinion - more intelligent than a person who has to work really hard to understand it.

And there are many students who have to work really hard to get their "shiny degree".

In my old Abitur class (Abitur is a diploma from German secondary school qualifying for university admission or matriculation) many could have studied and were intelligent enough and maybe even more intelligent than I am. But they have decided to not study. Others have decided to study although they were far less intelligent than some of my old class mates and have get a "shiny degree" because they have really worked hard for it.

But even with their "shiny degree" they aren't more intelligent than some of my old class mates who have no "shiny degree". Now they only know more.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:14 pm

Who is like God arbour wrote:Mr. Wongs answer was:
        • I love the way they think I need to somehow "prove" my intelligence by catering to their little egos and pretending that I give a shit what they think. I have a nice shiny degree and professional engineering license to prove my intelligence, and that's worth more than any of this ridiculous Internet nonsense. Really, what kind of imbecile thinks you establish your abilities by futzing around on the Internet? You establish your abilities by accomplishing things in the real world.
If he really didn't care, he would have not posted. As simple as that.

Now, again, what's that shit about SDN? We know that it will stir more trouble than anything else.

They don't even want to look to the arguments we offer. They just wrap the bag, paint us all with the same slap-brush and that's all, and the few SDN representatives who have attempted a semblence of intelligent presence here have hardly brought anything worth any discussion.

This doesn't mean that all SDN people are of the same calibre, but I also know that it's a special community, that draws a given audience I don't fancy that much.

But again, who gives?

It's just another community. This one here is much more civilized and open to discussion. We don't mind having members quote other people. We don't mind necromancy, when it's done for good.
We're small, which we balance out with quality.

We have many points waiting to be adressed, and for one, this forum has enabled people to voice opinions and present points in ways which were never possible on SB.com or even SDN, without the usual bundle of biased moderation, trolling and flames.

I am not saying this place is perfect, far from it, but it's refreshing and very enjoyable, as long as it stays like that.

watchdog
Jedi Knight
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:26 am
Location: Not at home

Post by watchdog » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:02 am

"A fool thinks himself to be a wise man, a wise man knows himself to be a fool"
An old quote that I unfortunatly don't remember who said it. MW has always thrown his BA around as proof of something, I recall him complaining once about a high school teacher debating him over the trekwars debate and apparently being offended that a mere high school teacher would question his science. He apparently thought of himself as more intelligent than a simple teacher of high school physics. I never understood that, as the teacher probably had the same training as he had, hell I knew a guy once who was an employee at JPL (an actual rocket scientist) who disagreed with nearly everything MW wrote. He certainly does not seem to know the difference between education and genuine intelligence.

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2161
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Wed Sep 19, 2007 2:44 pm

I have a nice shiny degree and professional engineering license to prove my intelligence, and that's worth more than any of this ridiculous Internet nonsense.
The claim that Mr. Wong's engineering degree is special and somehow a peculiarly apt qualification has been trotted out fairly frequently, and debunked fairly frequently. I've polled this board and found that, as with most internet communities, a large percentage of this board's denizens appear to be as well or better educated.

It's also worth noting that, while engineering in general, and materials science specifically, ranks high in terms of estimated IQ for those intending to go on to graduate study (ref - for the record, M. Wong did not go on to graduate study), the IQ spread of actual working engineers (who, of course, almost invariably have professional engineering licenses as well as a college degree of some variety) is fairly large and centered on a value of 116 on a 15-point standard deviation scale (ref). While above average in the general population, it is hardly unusual. This is actually indistinguishable from average for some populations (Asians in N. America average 110 on 15 pt SD IQ tests, and Ashkenazi jews 115), and hardly unusual among the more-educated-than-average populations typical of internet communities.

So far as M. Wong's education and licensure is concerned, I have every statistical reason to consider him to be of inferior intelligence and education to a rather significant fraction of this board's population - and not just myself.

One's intelligence being "proved" does not change the basic nature of argumentation, however. Everybody should know by now that MENSA membership* will not make an invalid argument correct, and even the demonstrably brilliant are often quite wrong in ways that seem ridiculous later.

*MENSA members test 2+ SD from the mean, or IQ 130+ on a 15 pt SD scale, and are in a much better position to claim that their intelligence is "proved" than anyone not doing demonstrably better than average in graduate study.

User avatar
Who is like God arbour
Starship Captain
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:00 pm
Location: Germany

Post by Who is like God arbour » Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:38 pm

Jedi Master Spock wrote:It's also worth noting that, while engineering in general, and materials science specifically, ranks high in terms of estimated IQ for those intending to go on to graduate study (ref - for the record, M. Wong did not go on to graduate study), the IQ spread of actual working engineers (who, of course, almost invariably have professional engineering licenses as well as a college degree of some variety) is fairly large and centered on a value of 116 on a 15-point standard deviation scale.
Assuming that my IQ - because I have studied and most Germans don't study - is higher than the IQ of the average German, I have good chances to be more intelligent than the average working engineer and to be more intelligent than Mr. Wong.
        • TIMES ONLINE wrote:March 27, 2006
          Germans are brainiest
          (but at least we're smarter than the French)

          By Helen Nugent

          BRITAIN and France have experienced long periods of conflict and rivalry but now victory in one area can be claimed: Britons are more intelligent than the French.
          A new European league of IQ scores has ranked the British in eighth place, well above the French, who were 19th. According to Richard Lynn of the University of Ulster, Britons have an average IQ of 100. The French scored 94. But it is not all good news. Top of the table were the Germans, with an IQ of 107. The British were also beaten by the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Italy, Austria and Switzerland.

          Professor Lynn, who caused controversy last year by claiming that men were more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, said that populations in the colder, more challenging environments of Northern Europe had developed larger brains than those in warmer climates further south. The average brain size in Northern and Central Europe is 1,320cc and in southeast Europe it is 1,312cc. “The early human beings in northerly areas had to survive during cold winters when there were no plant foods and they were forced to hunt big game,” he said. “The main environmental influence on IQ is diet, and people in southeast Europe would have had less of the proteins, minerals and vitamins provided by meat which are essential for brain development.”

          He added that differences in intelligence across Britain could be attributed to bright people moving to London over hundreds of years. Adults in England and Wales have an IQ of 100.5, higher than Ireland and Scotland, both with 97. People living in London and the South East average 102. “Once in the capital they have settled and reared children, and these children have inherited their high intelligence and transmitted it to further generations.”

          The pattern is repeated in other countries, Professor Lynn claimed. In France, IQ scores in Paris were much higher than those in rural areas.

          Professor Lynn has spent three decades analysing thousands of test results to scrutinise the role of evolution in IQ. He has published his findings in a new book. Britons excel in another area of Professor Lynn’s research. He found that university students had, at 109, the second-highest undergraduate IQs in the world, beaten only by their US counterparts on 110.

          Professor Lynn ascribes the differences between British and French intelligence levels to the results of military conflict. He described it as “a hitherto unrecognised law of history” that “the side with the higher IQ normally wins, unless they are hugely outnumbered, as Germany was after 1942”.

          A “normal” IQ ranges from 85 to 115 but exceptionally gifted people have scores starting at 145.
          OR
          German Ambassy, Washington, D.C. wrote:March 31, 2006

          Germans and Dutch called brainiest Europeans

          A controversial British psychologist this week claimed that the Germans and the Dutch are the smartest Europeans.
            • Image
              Albert Einstein was estimated
              to have an IQ of 160, far above
              average in any nation.
          Dr. Richard Lynn of the University of Ulster said the two nations top the intelligence league table with an average IQ of 107, followed by Poles (106), Swedish (104), and Italians (102).

          IQ, or intelligence quotient, tests are designed to measure the general intelligence of an individual compared to other people with the same age.

          They have always sparked controversy, particularly among psychologists who point to cultural biases built into the tests that favor Western test-takers.

          Just last year, Lynn made headlines when he claimed that the average male IQ is five points higher than the average female IQ. His colleagues in the field, however, saw inconsistencies in the studies used to compile the data.

          Lynn believes his most recent study could provide evidence of a link between climate differences and brain size.

          "The early human beings in northerly areas had to survive during cold winters when there were no plant foods and they were forced to hunt big game," Lynn told the Times of London.

          "The main environmental influence on IQ is diet, and people in southeast Europe would have had less of the proteins, minerals and vitamins provided by meat which are essential for brain development," he added.

          German intelligence researchers refused to endorse the study's findings, though, with most citing longer periods of mandatory schooling, not diet, as a main reason for the IQ differences.
But that doesn't mean, that I think, that I know more about all things than someone who has a lower intelligence than me. There are many subjects from which I don't know anything. And I'm sure that Mr. Wong knows a lot more about physic than I know - even if he would have a lower IQ than me (not that I want to claim that).

The problem is, that sometimes such people are not able to convey their in many years hard learned knowledge. They say that they have studied something and expect that you believe all what they are saying without any try to explain it in a way that someone who has not studied that subject can understand the explanation.

For example, I have studied jurisprudence. Like me, a judge or each other lawer has not studied medicine or engineering. But nevertheless he has to decide, if a medic or an engineer has made mistakes and is liable to pay damages or not. The judge will assign an expert to examine the situation. Then the expert will not decide. He will make an opinion in which he only exlpains for the judge what has happened and why. The judge has to understand in the end the whole opinion. He has to understand what has happened and why it has happened and what consequences occured. And only if he has understood that, the judge can decide.

That's why it is important that a judge (or each other lawyer) is intellectual able to understand such an opinion - and that the opinion is written in a way that a judge can understand it.

To be honest, I'm not able to understand, what members from SDN are saying sometimes. And I imagine to have an above-average intelligence and should be able to understand what an intelligent people is explaining to me. I know, it could be, that they are right. But what use has it, when I and nobody else is able to assess that because nobody understand them.
    • In German, we call people that are good in only one subject but are really not able to explain what they know Fachidioten (subject-idiots). It's a little bit like that autistic savant boy named Simon Lynch from Mercury Rising who is able to do something that could be considered as an intellectual masterstroke, but is not able to explain how he has done it and doesn't show any sign of intelligence in other fields. Such people are usually not really considered as intelligent.
Sure, the members of SDN can impress the less educated people who will maybe think that someone who is using big words has to be intelligent and educated and therefore has to be right. But with such an attitude they are not able to deceive really intelligent or educated persons.

My conclusion in most cases has to be that either their arguments are wrong or they are not wrong but not comprehensible explained what would make them useless. The first is a sign of absent education and the latter is a sign of stupidity. If someone is able to explain something, he should do it and win a debate with convincing arguments and not lose it because nobody can understand him. The goal of a debate is not to convice one self and often not to convice the opponent but to convince the judge (referee, jury etc.).

But an educated judge is not impressable with superficial explanations and effects. He wants facts and comprehensible explanations.

Only an uneducated auditorium is impressed with big words and cheap effects.

Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3901
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Post by Praeothmin » Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:51 pm

I lurk at SDN now and then, and I read their posts on many subjects, not just SW vs ST, and I find that their attitude in those other forums are the same.

The way they appear to me is that they are very opiniated people who have already decided what the conlcusion in a debate is, and will do anything so that their opinion becomes truth.

But they're not all morons, most of them in fact express themselves pretty well, even those who's opinion I do not share.

But it is true that Mr. Wong seems to believe that a Engineering Diploma and being member of an order means a person cannot be wrong in his own field of study, nor can that person be dishonest.

What then, does he make of all the proven and valid lawsuits for malpractice against Doctors, who are PhD holders and members of their Medical order.
Some of them are bad, make mistakes, and some even are dishonest.

To me, this proves that Diplomas and being member of an order isn't at all proof of one's honesty.

User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:51 pm

Well, that's a perfect waste of words just to say that one's qualifications don't necessarily make this same one correct nor honest.

Why all this focus? Are you trying to stir a bit of trouble, under civilized forms, so heat builds up and a few of them gets there? or what?

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:48 pm

This is nothing but a bloody waste of everyones time anyways, and though it may seem hypocritical of me to say so gven my participation, I think this should be dropped and a ban placed on these topics. They lead nowhere and just lead to endless mudslinging.

GStone
Starship Captain
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Undercover in Culture space

Post by GStone » Wed Sep 19, 2007 8:15 pm

[hits Kendall in the back with a wet and soppy mud ball]

:-P

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 1967
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Post by 2046 » Sun Sep 23, 2007 5:12 pm

I'd skimmed the thread previously but just now saw this part:
Narsil wrote:A lefty plant in context refers to someone from the left-wing government who was planted in the military to deliberately make the military look bad.
Do not attempt to inject your own context into my words. "Lefty plants" referred to those such as Scott Thomas Beauchamp (who was previously referred to in the thread). I was listing the undesirables who got sent along, in addition to those with criminal possibilities, as part of the overall point that what few illegal incidents involving US troops have occurred are minimal compared to the population of troops we have there.

(Though, as the reference to Beauchamp was meant to note, we've had even more demonstrably-false claims of such behavior due to leftists joining up just so they can, for instance, write a book about how bad the US is.)

The concept of deliberate planting of soldiers by anti-war groups to claim the commission of atrocities as you have suggested is a very frightening idea. I mean we've seen leftists claim to have been in Iraq and part of atrocities, but to my knowledge they haven't planned and executed a plan as intricate as you describe.

But more to the point, it is your idea that you're stating, not mine. Keep your words in your own mouth . . . don't try to put them in mine.

Cpl Kendall
Jedi Knight
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:30 pm
Contact:

Post by Cpl Kendall » Sun Sep 23, 2007 5:36 pm

Yeah I'm sure that peope join the military for the express purpose of exposing how bad things are. Rather than just joining up for the typical reasons and either having a bad go of it or decide to attention whore. Tell me do you have any idea of why people actually join the military or how the military works in general?

Jedi Master Spock
Site Admin
Posts: 2161
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 8:26 pm
Contact:

Post by Jedi Master Spock » Sun Sep 23, 2007 6:54 pm

Cpl Kendall wrote:Yeah I'm sure that peope join the military for the express purpose of exposing how bad things are. Rather than just joining up for the typical reasons and either having a bad go of it or decide to attention whore. Tell me do you have any idea of why people actually join the military or how the military works in general?
To offer a pre-emptive olive branch towards any disagreement there, the answers to those questions are very different depending on what country you're in - and for a country with a large military, which branch you're talking about.

And then, regarding the first question, still vary fairly substantially.

Post Reply