/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8948621
>11 years old
>thought that picture was real and cried like a babby

>mfw Baron is a confirmed brainlet

>>8930242
>Considered likely to be associated with intelligence in a statistically significant way
>52 out of thousands of genes

These threads piss me off. Not only is it a tiny number of genes for a very complicated and poorly defined (and thus difficult to test objectively) phenomenon but 'associated with' can mean fucking anything. There are genes that were once associated with hearing that have nothing to do with hearing but everything to do with cell wall integrity. The reason: a mutant version of that gene caused some people to have malformed bones in their ears and thus end up deaf.

Now consider that deafness is:
>a lot simpler
>much more understood
>easy to test for objectively
>binary
>etc...

This is completely different from intelligence. Even if they were testing for genes that were likely to have a statistically significant effect on your ability to hear well, it would still be a much simpler problem than intelligence.

Do you understand how weak of a claim it is to say that you've found some genes that are likely to be associated with intelligence?

tl;dr: Only a brainlet would be convinced that they can draw meaningful inferences from this research.

>>8646511

>libtard
mfw I just realized the re in retard stands for republican.