Oct 17, 2014 12:00
training,
education,
germany,
pasta,
genetics,
carbohydrates,
scotland,
society,
women,
phones,
twitter,
tablet,
feminism,
inequality,
economics,
usa,
marriage,
books,
cooking,
billgates,
wildlife,
links,
history,
drugs,
ohforfuckssake,
technology,
uk,
funny,
data,
apple,
communication,
facebook,
labour,
intelligence,
green,
marijuana,
legalisation,
warrenellis,
relationships,
apprentices,
gender,
sms,
names,
food,
lgbt,
privacy,
newyork,
politics
That is truly bizarre.
Wrt the article on intelligence, I'm deeply unimpressed with the bit "These five findings arose primarily from twin studies." - Given that twin studies (IOW, studies that look at the same 40 or so pairs of separated-at-birth twins who have since learned of one another) are inherently junk for a multitude of reasons, the rest of this seems built on sand.
Reply
Edit: Particularly as the sample sizes they're talking about the genetic tests are in groups ranging from 3,000 to 11,500 people. That's certainly a large enough sample size to be interesting.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
As a side-note, here's a fascinating article about how (at least when measured as IQ) intelligence scores can and do change for individuals and that the role genetics plays is likely vastly overstated.
Reply
Leave a comment