15
   

IF GEORGE WILL FEELS THIS WAY...

Forums:
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  4  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 09:45 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
I guess he thinks he is another stable genius like his hero!

Actually I know for a fact that my IQ is 170.


You are a stable genius.

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/donkey-jackass-farm-mammal-mule-domestic-animal-jackass-mule-donkey-country-farming-agriculture-animal-enclosure-rural-151313221.jpg
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 09:49 am
@Frank Apisa,
Why does it bother you that my IQ is 170?

Although, I guess there is nothing else to talk about since no one wants to address the fact that BLM is really all about trying to murder police officers.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 10:45 am
@oralloy,
How Oralloy measures his IQ.

https://losinganonymously.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/32-scale-april-8-170-7-lbs.jpg?w=676
izzythepush
 
  4  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 10:54 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Why does it bother you that my IQ is 170?


I can only imagine that Frank has invested in the company in charge of IQ tests. If it ever breaks that they gave you a score of 170, his investment will be wiped out.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 10:59 am
@maxdancona,
Max engages in childish name-calling because he can't provide any intelligent arguments.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 11:00 am
@izzythepush,
You should leave the thinking to those of us who can actually do it.
engineer
 
  5  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 11:13 am
@izzythepush,
Numbers like 170 are thrown about by people who don't understand the IQ scale when they want to make up a number. You see it all the time on BS Internet hoaxes like this one. If you want to claim you are a top flight genius and sound believable, you say 145-150.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 11:17 am
@engineer,
I understand the IQ scale quite well. My intelligence is such that, out of a random population of ten million people, I would be the smartest out of that ten million.

If you choose to not believe in reality, that says more about you than it does me.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 11:23 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
My intelligence is such that, out of a random population of ten million people, I would be the smartest out of that ten million.


With an IQ of 170, it is a bit surprising you lack a basic understanding of statistics.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 11:30 am
@maxdancona,
Your logic sucks. IQ doesn't measure knowledge.

That said, I say you're bluffing again, and you cannot demonstrate any error (statistical or otherwise) in what I've said.
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 11:35 am
@engineer,
When has anything that party posted sounded believable?

I’ve been ignoring him since the beginning of the year, but I just couldn’t help myself.

I’m not planning on doing it again.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 11:39 am
@izzythepush,
You do realize that when you refuse to believe reality it doesn't actually stop being real?

The ostrich defense doesn't actually work.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 03:17 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
That said, I say you're bluffing again, and you cannot demonstrate any error (statistical or otherwise) in what I've said.

That's what I thought.

Didn't you say you play poker? Your bluffing skills suck.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 03:44 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

Quote:
My intelligence is such that, out of a random population of ten million people, I would be the smartest out of that ten million.


With an IQ of 170, it is a bit surprising you lack a basic understanding of statistics.


I will explain your basic mathematical error (just because I was a teacher... and you asked nicely).

Let's (as you imply) a 170 IQ is a one in 10 million proposition. That would mean that with 7.8 billion people on the planet, there are 780 people who are as smart as you or smarter.

Even if this is all true... there is no reason to assume that a "random population" of 10 million people that included you wouldn't also include one of these other 779 people.

Both you and someone with an IQ of 171 wouldn't be in the same random group. This wouldn't be that unexpected. And it would mean that even with your alleged IQ of 170 you wouldn't be the smartest person in the group.

Are you smart enough to follow this logic, or do I need to simplify it for you?

(I would love to have you at my poker game... just bring money).
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 04:04 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Let's (as you imply) a 170 IQ is a one in 10 million proposition.

So if I used the wrong statistical terminology, what would be the correct statistical terminology to refer to a one in ten million proposition?
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 04:12 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

maxdancona wrote:
Let's (as you imply) a 170 IQ is a one in 10 million proposition.

So if I used the wrong statistical terminology, what would be the correct statistical terminology to refer to a one in ten million proposition?


That isn't the part you got wrong. Your terminology was fine.

There is a basic logical error that is further along in your thought process... keep thinking, you'll get it.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 04:29 pm
@maxdancona,
If I used the correct terminology for one in ten million, then what's the problem?

One in ten million was the concept that I intended to convey.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 05:49 pm
@oralloy,
What I am trying to explain to you is that...

You claimed that you would be the smartest person in a "random group" of 10 million people.

In fact, if there are 779 people smarter than you in the world (with 7.8 billion people), if you take a random group of 10 million people, the likelihood that someone in this group will be smarter than you is greater than 50%.

Even with the ridiculous claims you are making are true... you still are likely not the smartest person in a group of 10 million people. (I did the math, there is a 63% chance that someone smarter than you is in the random group.)

Read this slowly, you can get it.




oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 05:58 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Read this slowly, you can get it.

You are forgetting that I am nearly infinitely smarter than you are. If anyone here needs to read slowly, it is you.

You said above that I used the proper terminology for a one in 10 million proposition.

If you are unhappy with the proper terminology, you should direct your complaint at the people who developed the terminology.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Jun, 2020 06:09 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
t I am nearly infinitely smarter


I think you are using the word "infinitely" wrong.... unless you are claiming that I have an IQ of exactly 0 (which seems unlikely, since I am able to use a keyboard).

Do you know what the word "infinite" means?
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » IF GEORGE WILL FEELS THIS WAY...
  3. » Page 7
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/05/2025 at 08:05:35
▲ ▼