/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3141214
how does it feel to know you are the only one who cares

I like that outfit

>>3141225
Don't vent on me just because some 2 year old can test laps around you, bro.

It doesn't feel, IQ before the age of 4 is not a predictor of IQ in adult age

"I have no idea [what my IQ is]. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
Stephen Hawking

Hah.

>>3141236
Stephen Hawking is a liar, if fox news knows his IQ and he doesn't there is something wrong with that.

>>3141233
good for her.

i can see why your jealous. im just not threatened enough by her to join you

What's with people's obsession with IQ? If someone has low IQ but achieved a lot, would you still look down on him?

Do people forget that IQ belongs to that horrid field of social science? Fucking hell, the hard sciences are disgusted with people trying to predict human behavior, yet the general public still thinks that IQ is something scientists are proud of.

IQ is nothing. It is based on incredibly faulty data. There may be trends and patterns from that data, but it is hard to correlate scientific achievement with iq. Still, IQ DOES mean something; it means as much as how far someone can skip a stone, or carve a pumpkin. It does have meaning if you treat it as a competition. But you aren't supposed to treat it seriously, or bring it into the realm of intelligence.

moar?

>>3141236
He's so awesome.

2 yaers old is too young to measure IQ accurately.

You can't make them sit a test because they won't concentrate, so you have to get a child psychologist to encourage them to play with things and time them, which is still vague and subjective.

>>3141279
>the hard sciences are disgusted with people trying to predict human behavior

You do realise that hard sciences cannot totally predict all known properties of the universe, as well, right?

You do realise that social sciences fuel the entire advertising industry, and that human behaviour is capable of being predicted and modelled to a degree that reproducible and therefore categorically a science like any other, right?

Probably not, but continue enjoying your false sense of certainty. Just wait until you study a hard science field beyond babby tier level and you'll soon realise why it's told o'clock right now.

>How does it feel knowing this 2 year old is smarter than you were when you were 2?

>FTFFYT

i hope she gets to fully utilize her intelligence and doesnt become like the "world smartest man" in america, you know the one.

iq is measured against your age group.

so its like saying this 2yo is a smart as a 4 yo >> not really comparable hawking and the adult population.

>>3141279

Usually I despise psychology, but you should remember that humans are systems, and thus, their behaviour is predictable in standard conditions. The fact that they're more complex than a nuclear reactor doesn't mean you should hate efforts on trying to find patterns on it no matter how stupid and hopeless the results can be.

>Karina Oakley of Guildford, Surrey, near London, has an IQ of 160 — the same as physics professor Stephen Hawking and Microsoft founder Bill Gates, London's Daily Mail reports.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_hawking#Personal_life
>Hawking was asked about his IQ in a 2004 newspaper interview, and replied, "I have no idea. People who boast about their I.Q. are losers." Yet when asked "Are you saying you are not a genius?", Hawking replied "I hope I'm near the upper end of the range."
Stay classy daily mail/fox news.

good for her

>>3141316

OP is boasting about the kids IQ, not the kid. Seriously guys, don't be so insecure

>>3141316
>i hope she gets to fully utilize her intelligence and doesnt become like the "world smartest man" in america, you know the one.
Sidis?

>>3141387
Not Sure

>>3141387
that farmer guy who think he has a theory of human consciousness and a iq above 200. Chris Langan.

>>3141419
Lol. oxymoronic. IQ over 200...

>>3141316

Hopefully she gets a private education so she can utilize her potential.

"In one of the studies I saw, there was a kid in the fourth grade, and he could score above the national average on the college board SAT in math. So it was suggested to the principal this kid should be given something other than fourth grade math. The principal reacted and he said, 'no, that would be a violation of social justice'." -- Thomas Sowell

>"What do you use your eyes for?" brought the answer, "You close them when you go to sleep" and "You put your contact lenses in them."

Sorry, what?

>>3141500
Fuck that principal. Fuck him hard.

>>3141509
she is 2 years old

This is obviously photoshopped. I only know one guy smarter than me, and I do his Taxes for him.

>>3141530
So? Not everyone puts contact lenses in their eyes, and you don't even close your eyes when you go to sleep, you shut your eye lids — and, that's not the reason your eyes exist.

It's just a stupid answer, one that an average kid would give (oh, imagine that).

you can't leap from a "compared to people their age" comparison to a "compared to all people" one. If you want to compare this child to adults then make her sit an adult iq test, otherwise your comparison is invalid.

That's why "child prodigies" rarely live up to their "potential". They're usually peaking earlier in their intellectually, rather than neccesarily on their way to an unimagineably high peak.

An IQ for a 2yo is especially suspect. Most kids at that age can barely speak. Reaching certain milestones earlier is not neccesarily a good indicator of future intelligence either. Imo there is good reason to believe a longer development leads to higher adult intelligence, and this will, of course means a development slower than what it could have been.

>>3141538 is me
"Most little girls of Karina Oakley's age are chatterboxes, just like her. But few can talk as much sense."
..is the quote I'm looking at.

>But few can talk as much sense
Answering "What are your eyes for?" with "You put your contact lenses in them" makes total sense.. RIGHT?!?

you can't leap from a "compared to people their age" comparison to a "compared to all people" one. If you want to compare this child to adults then make her sit an adult iq test, otherwise your comparison is invalid.

That's why "child prodigies" rarely live up to their "potential". They're usually peaking earlier in their intellectual development, rather than neccesarily on their way to an unimagineably high peak.

An IQ for a 2yo is especially suspect. Most kids at that age can barely speak. Reaching certain milestones earlier is not neccesarily a good indicator of future intelligence either. Imo there is good reason to believe a longer development leads to higher adult intelligence, and this will, of course means a development slower than what it could have been.

>Female

>Implying she won't grow into a stupid bitch anyways

>>3141538
I'd say the obvious answer is "too see with" Her answers are pretty weird.
I don't know if they should be praised or derided, but they're different. And y'know, she's 2.

IQ is for faggots.

same thread everyday
>IQ scores are derived by evaluating how well a subject does compared to others of his or her own age.
/thread

>>3141369
A "nuclear reactor" is not very complex, when you learn about one you'll think to yourself,

"Wow, so our most powerful form of energy is just a (what ancients would have called) magical rock that gets super hot when you put it close to other magical rocks of its kind, and we stick that in water to create steam for a long period of time.

TL;DR "nuclear reactor" is just hot rocks making steam. Nuclear Reactor is just a steam creating group of hot rocks.

>Daily Mail

>>3141558
I agree, it's absurd. The reasoning part of the brain is practically non-existent at 2. You can't measure what isn't there.

FOX FUCKING NEWS

2 LINKS ON SCI TO FOX NEWS

FUCK YOU SCI

BAN ME NOW OR CP IS A COMIN

>why it's told o'clock right now

what?

>>3141576

even worse. fox news quoting daily mail

>>3141592

>>3141248
Fuckin' modesty, how does it work?

>what are your eyes for?
>you close them when you sleep

THIS KID IS A GENIUS!

GOOD maybe shell be able to disprove science fairytales like fish gives birth to ape gives birth to human crap tehory and explosion in space made universe hurr durr(which was also already been disproven by a autistic child, suck it up scienctists)

scientists are the stoopedist people i know, a

>>3141661

Stop smoking weed, Jesus. Its not good for your soul.

>>3141682
shut up i do what i want, you don't control me anymore, dad.

she will commit suicide before she's 16. 20 max.

>>3141802

nah, she'll probably become a reverse trap. Even if she does retain that iq into adulthood she'll use it to become countdown champion or a chess grandmaster or pscyhologist or some other form of intellectual wankery completely useless to mankind.

Still though, the idea of an IQ score at 2 being any indication of greatness in adulthood is beyond ridiculous.

>foxnews

s'aiight

This is Fox News. A retard has a higher IQ than Stephen Hawking to them.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525222,00.html

I also found this on the same site. Your arugment is invalid.

Further proof that IQ is nothing more than a badly thought out concept.

you are all fucking morons. IQ test are based on age. it even said so "IQ scores are derived by evaluating how well a subject does compared to others of his or her own age"

I am smarter than her. but my god what the hell is wrong with you guys. you are all fucking morons. why havent any of you picked up on this?

>>3141236
>>3141236
>>3141236
fyi guys he did actually say this

>>3143271
Wait, you're Stephen Hawking?!?!

Good! She has potential then. Maybe she can become more accomplished than Stephen Hawking; that would be worth writing an article about.

>>3143304
Holy shit, Steven Hawking on /sci/!

psychology "expert"
generic descriptions of some kid
"contact lenses" as a description for use of eyes =smartest girl in britain

aside from the insane expectations she'll probably grow up with (something i'm sure a lot of us have shared), only one of the people mentioned in this "news" story will have accomplished anything by the end of his life, and it reminds me why i almost ended up majoring in psychology. i wish this was entertaining or inspiring, but clearly there's some kind of joke when you're comparing any 2 year old to stephen hawking. you might as well say that poodles should all be given phd's for being a relatively smart breed of dog.

IQ != knowledge or being smart