Your Privacy Settings
Our website uses cookies to personalise content, keep contents in your shopping cart and as part of the checkout experience.- Your personal information you provide will be transfered and stored as encrypted data.
- You have the ability to update and remove your personal information.
Allow cookies for
- New! We now accept ACH Payments, View Payment Options
Forums > Social Chat > Sorry my fault. I forgot you were an idiot
Login/Join to Participate
Posted:what shoud i do if i think everyone is an idiot
for other peoples sake talk loudly and slowly .
for other peoples sake talk loudly and slowly .
Delete Topic
Posted:Use small words too, we call it breaking it down barney style!
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
Delete
Posted:What should I do if I don't understand the grammer, scratch my head in confusion?
[ 23 August 2002, 09:13: Message edited by: Thistle ]
[ 23 August 2002, 09:13: Message edited by: Thistle ]
Are we nearly there yet?
DeleteRozi
SILVER Member since Jan 2002
100 characters max...
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Total posts: 2996
SILVER Member since Jan 2002
100 characters max...
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Total posts: 2996
Posted:yes, but "thats" is a small word & is just as easy to get wrong. I am so sorry, that was mean but I just couldn't resist.
At least 50% of the world's population is below average in intelligence. Why does this surprise you? Why is it a problem? Just because someone is not as "smart" as you, does it mean that they are somehow less than you? If you apply that logic, then everyone in the world who is smarter than you is better than you.
What is intelligence anyway?
At least 50% of the world's population is below average in intelligence. Why does this surprise you? Why is it a problem? Just because someone is not as "smart" as you, does it mean that they are somehow less than you? If you apply that logic, then everyone in the world who is smarter than you is better than you.
What is intelligence anyway?
It was a day for screaming at inanimate objects.
What this calls for is a special mix of psychology and extreme violence...
Posted:I'm sorry if I offended you tiamat. It was never my intention. I was just trying to draw attention to the irony of you, with your apparent lack of literacy skills, calling someone else an idiot.
In answer to you original question of what you should do if you think every one else is an idiot. My advice to you would be to seek professional help as you may be suffering from some kind of delusions.
Onelove Thistlefirepixie
PS. I work with disabled people and get quite upset by the casual use of the word idiot.
[ 23 August 2002, 11:05: Message edited by: Thistle ]
In answer to you original question of what you should do if you think every one else is an idiot. My advice to you would be to seek professional help as you may be suffering from some kind of delusions.
Onelove Thistlefirepixie
PS. I work with disabled people and get quite upset by the casual use of the word idiot.
[ 23 August 2002, 11:05: Message edited by: Thistle ]
Are we nearly there yet?
DeletePosted:At least 50% of the world's population is below average in intelligence.
Thats not necessarily so Rozi. An average is the midpoint of two extremes. The average has nothing to do with the how many are above or below the median (more on that later). If you said that "At least 50% of the world's population is below the median in intelligence", than that would be correct (and redundent). The median is the value in an ordered set of values below and above which there is an equal number of values or which is the arithmetic mean of the two middle values if there is no one middle number.
This first statistics lesson is free, but any more will cost you. I hope this has enlighted you all and brought joy and happiness to the masses.
PS. Intelligence: the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
Thats not necessarily so Rozi. An average is the midpoint of two extremes. The average has nothing to do with the how many are above or below the median (more on that later). If you said that "At least 50% of the world's population is below the median in intelligence", than that would be correct (and redundent). The median is the value in an ordered set of values below and above which there is an equal number of values or which is the arithmetic mean of the two middle values if there is no one middle number.
This first statistics lesson is free, but any more will cost you. I hope this has enlighted you all and brought joy and happiness to the masses.
PS. Intelligence: the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do
Delete
Posted:That isn't exactly true, now is it feiryfiend? Because an average measures largely where the most common grouping lays between two defined points. So it would be impossible for 50% of people to be of below average anything (in as much as you need to have a high end and a low end with people on both ends). It would be much more accurate to say that the average intellegence is dropping. This is unless the word "average" is used as a blanket term to describe an arbitrary point on the intellegence scale, in which case Rozi's statement would be correct (Depending, of course, on the accuracey of the determination of this afore mentioned arbitrary point).
Jesus helps me trick people.
Delete
Posted:ow ya'll make my head hurt with your funny talks.
There are no obstacles only challenges.
Very funny scotty now beam down my pants.
[colour."green"}What would willie do?
AHH theres too many wee leprechauns i cannae squash them all
Charles
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
![Charles]()
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
Posted:Well said, Sickpuppy.
Although, for those 50% who may be reading it, lets use a less obtuse approach.
A statement concerning 50% of a survey is likely to come up with the 50% being less than average IF the measures and result are over a large scale.
Such as, the average number of hairs on a persons head. The number of variance in the answers is likely to be huge, with each individuals statistic being unlikely to match anyone else's. This type of statistic is very similar to "intelligence" as such (not that i feel there are any good measures for it yet). And of course, it requires a large sample to be worthwhile
Under the above conditions, Rozi's statement very likely to be correct. And I feel that intelligence easily falls into that category
If we were talking smaller variance of answers, such as, how many times you chew your food before swallowing, if you chew at all , the 50% rule is likely to be wrong. There are liekly to be people who have the same answer as each other and the answers are likely to fall into a small area of distribution. so the 50% rule is unlikely to be correct for those types of stats.
Although I must admit, I find Tiamat's statement to be confusing. If everyone is an idiot, then why are you asking our opinions on what to do?
Also, if everyone is an idiot, that defies the definition of an idiot. Everyone would be average and normal, and it would be Tiamat who would be a genious, rather than the rest of us being stupid..
Besides Fiery feind started a post like this...
quote: Anyone else see the poi duo on tonight? I don't think it was a rerun. Every time I watch the show they have someone on there with fire.
Tiamat then answered like this quote: when/ where is this on? When Fiery Feind answered with a very pleasant quote: on the FOX network (surprise) in the states. I doubt its on anywhere else. Its a takeoff on the classic gong show. Its on at 8 Pacific time for anyone that wants to watch a random bunch of entertainers. So Tiamat said quote: i live in canada we dont get tv here
we live in igloos , secluded from the rest of the world only talking to other people though this tiny box you people call a computer Tiamat, if you choose to believe that youn live in an igloo, why did you ask where and when the show was on?
Doesn't sound all that sensible to me...
[ 23 August 2002, 13:01: Message edited by: Charles (INFERNO) ]
Although, for those 50% who may be reading it, lets use a less obtuse approach.
A statement concerning 50% of a survey is likely to come up with the 50% being less than average IF the measures and result are over a large scale.
Such as, the average number of hairs on a persons head. The number of variance in the answers is likely to be huge, with each individuals statistic being unlikely to match anyone else's. This type of statistic is very similar to "intelligence" as such (not that i feel there are any good measures for it yet). And of course, it requires a large sample to be worthwhile
Under the above conditions, Rozi's statement very likely to be correct. And I feel that intelligence easily falls into that category
If we were talking smaller variance of answers, such as, how many times you chew your food before swallowing, if you chew at all , the 50% rule is likely to be wrong. There are liekly to be people who have the same answer as each other and the answers are likely to fall into a small area of distribution. so the 50% rule is unlikely to be correct for those types of stats.
Although I must admit, I find Tiamat's statement to be confusing. If everyone is an idiot, then why are you asking our opinions on what to do?
Also, if everyone is an idiot, that defies the definition of an idiot. Everyone would be average and normal, and it would be Tiamat who would be a genious, rather than the rest of us being stupid..
Besides Fiery feind started a post like this...
quote: Anyone else see the poi duo on tonight? I don't think it was a rerun. Every time I watch the show they have someone on there with fire.
Tiamat then answered like this quote: when/ where is this on? When Fiery Feind answered with a very pleasant quote: on the FOX network (surprise) in the states. I doubt its on anywhere else. Its a takeoff on the classic gong show. Its on at 8 Pacific time for anyone that wants to watch a random bunch of entertainers. So Tiamat said quote: i live in canada we dont get tv here
we live in igloos , secluded from the rest of the world only talking to other people though this tiny box you people call a computer Tiamat, if you choose to believe that youn live in an igloo, why did you ask where and when the show was on?
Doesn't sound all that sensible to me...
[ 23 August 2002, 13:01: Message edited by: Charles (INFERNO) ]
HoP Posting Guidelines
* Is it the Truth?
* Is it Fair to all concerned?
* Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
* Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Posted:I agree with Thistle... If you really feel that everyone is an idiot, I think you might have a problem and are a bit over judgemental!! Besides, are you answering your own question here by saying you should talk loudly and slowly??? Your statement has no relevance to me and only makes me feel sorry that you feel such negativity towards others... That must suck.... You live in the Yucon or what?? I know many Canadians and none of them live in igloos... It appears you don't really give much thought to what you write on this board...
Delete
Posted:quote: So it would be impossible for 50% of people to be of below average anything Alright, I can't believe this thread is still going. Here is a quick (and simple) example of why the above statement is incorrect. You'll have to use your imagination to think of it on a more grandiose scale. Here is a group of numbers 1,2,8 and 9. The average of this group is 5 (1+2+8+9=20 20/4=5). If 5 is the average than 50% of the numbers in the group are above the average and 50% are below.
quote: Because an average measures largely where the most common grouping lays between two defined points. This isn't necessarily true either. It can be, but misses the definition of average by a long shot. Lets say a group had IQ's of the following, 60,150,145,165 and 180. The average of these numbers is 140. Yea I know its an odd group of people. My point (however unlikely it may be) is that the average intelligence might be greater/lessened by a small group of extremely intelligent people or a group of extremely dumb people. 50% of people don't have to be on either end of the spectrum(as evidenced by my second example where only 1 person is on one side of the average and 4 are on the other).
I just was making the point that it might be a much higher or lower percentage of people less intelligent than average. It does not have to be 50%!!!
I hope this all makes since as I am growing tired of this topic.
[ 23 August 2002, 14:37: Message edited by: fieryfiend ]
quote: Because an average measures largely where the most common grouping lays between two defined points. This isn't necessarily true either. It can be, but misses the definition of average by a long shot. Lets say a group had IQ's of the following, 60,150,145,165 and 180. The average of these numbers is 140. Yea I know its an odd group of people. My point (however unlikely it may be) is that the average intelligence might be greater/lessened by a small group of extremely intelligent people or a group of extremely dumb people. 50% of people don't have to be on either end of the spectrum(as evidenced by my second example where only 1 person is on one side of the average and 4 are on the other).
I just was making the point that it might be a much higher or lower percentage of people less intelligent than average. It does not have to be 50%!!!
I hope this all makes since as I am growing tired of this topic.
[ 23 August 2002, 14:37: Message edited by: fieryfiend ]
Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do
DeleteRozi
SILVER Member since Jan 2002
100 characters max...
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Total posts: 2996
SILVER Member since Jan 2002
100 characters max...
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Total posts: 2996
Posted:Okay, I will admit that my initial comments were more of a generalisation that a statistically proven statement, so:
I am with fieryfiend. Let us suppose that we have a population "x", within that population there will be individuals of high intelligence and low intelligence, whatever scoring system you use. The average ("Ax") will be dependent both on the number of individuals in the population, and upon their levels of intelligence. Ax is not necessarily a midpoint, therefore it is entirely possible that there will be more or less than 50% of people of below average intelligance in the group.
To return to the original points, no matter what the actual percentage it would be agreed that there are people with intelligence levels below the Ax point. My point is more philosophical that mathematical, are these people of "less value" than those who score on or above the average? (btw: Without them the scale and the associated concept of intelligence is meaningless) And why, exactly, do we always make the assumption that we are in the above average group?
I love you all, thankyou That discussion really brightened my day...
I am with fieryfiend. Let us suppose that we have a population "x", within that population there will be individuals of high intelligence and low intelligence, whatever scoring system you use. The average ("Ax") will be dependent both on the number of individuals in the population, and upon their levels of intelligence. Ax is not necessarily a midpoint, therefore it is entirely possible that there will be more or less than 50% of people of below average intelligance in the group.
To return to the original points, no matter what the actual percentage it would be agreed that there are people with intelligence levels below the Ax point. My point is more philosophical that mathematical, are these people of "less value" than those who score on or above the average? (btw: Without them the scale and the associated concept of intelligence is meaningless) And why, exactly, do we always make the assumption that we are in the above average group?
I love you all, thankyou That discussion really brightened my day...
It was a day for screaming at inanimate objects.
What this calls for is a special mix of psychology and extreme violence...
Posted:does anybody have cheeze in a can
that would be an example of where you would wave your hand and say bah
that would be an example of where you would wave your hand and say bah
Delete
Posted:Without stupid people I wouldn't be nearly as smart as I think I am.
Two wrongs don't make a right but three lefts do
Delete
Posted:lol @ dom
Keep your dream alive
Dreamin is still how the strong survive
Shalom VeAhavah
New Hampshire has a point....
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [sorry fault forgot idiot] we found the following similar topics.1. Forums > Sorry my fault. I forgot you were an idiot [18 replies]
2. Forums > BIIIIIIG SORRY for sunday not filming !!!!
3. Forums > Starbucks Coffee Cup Fault [4 replies]
4. Forums > Sorry guys i think we have a problem [14 replies]
5. Learn > Dragon Staff > Dragon Staff > chi rolls *help/resource
Show more..
© 1998 - 2018 Home of Poi Ltd,
New Zealand unless otherwise stated.
All rights reserved
*All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com.