From: s0499528@let.rug.nl (R. Dijkhuis)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Faulty IQ reasoning (Was: Re: iq<->religion: connection?)
Date: 6 Jan 93 10:57:36 GMT
Organization: Faculteit der Letteren, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, NL

In article <2935343385.2.p00168@psilink.com> "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com> writes:
>From: "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com>
>Subject: Re: Faulty IQ reasoning (Was: Re: iq<->religion: connection?)
>Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 17:42:43 GMT
>>DATE:   5 Jan 93 11:23:35 GMT
>>FROM:   R. Dijkhuis <s0499528@let.rug.nl>
>>
>>In article <2935295193.0.p00168@psilink.com> "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com> writes:
>>>From: "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com>
>>>Subject: Re: Faulty IQ reasoning (Was: Re: iq<->religion: connection?)
>>>Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 05:12:03 GMT
>>>>DATE:   Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:35:44 EST
>>>>FROM:   John A. Johnson <J5J@psuvm.psu.edu>
>>>>
>>>>In article <X9yuwB4w165w@mantis.co.uk>, mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk> says:
>>>>[in response to an incredibly long thread I stopped reading months ago]
>>>>
>>>>>The "sincere observation" that high IQ correlates with atheism is certainly
>>>>>an interesting one.  I'm afraid that the last time I did an IQ test it
>>>>>indicated that I had an IQ of 68, and so I'm rather predisposed to (a) doubt
>>>>>the correlation you suggest a
>>>Post us 
>>>a non-shoddy study, Mr. Johnson, that supports your position (other than 
>>>the four that I included with your preferred result).  
Anything would be 
>>>better than "proper research indicates the correlation is about 
zero,"  >>>including leaving this empty, infuriating, condescending, 
stultifying,>>>(dare I say stupid?) >>
>>Those are exactly the words I would use to describe statements implying 
>>that being an atheist makes you smarter>>>
>I don't see anyone even suggesting that atheism raises IQ.

Neither was I. Since your sig file indicates that in your own crude and 
indiscriminate way you know how to use irony it surprises me that you've 
missed my point so badly. From the start, the attitude in this discussion 
has been one of "let's boost our egos and prove that we atheists are the 
smart people." I admit that I haven't seen your evidence, having been away 
from the net for a few weeks. It may be valid.  

 Since your 
>signoff indicates that English may be a second language, let me 
>explain:  Almost 
>everything I have seen [and posted] indicates that the 
>more intelligent the individual (measured variously, from SATs to eminence 
>in science societies) the less likely it is that the individual will 
>believe in god.  There are both stupid atheists and geniuses with faith, 
>just that the odds favor atheism as intelligence (according to a variety 
>of measures of intelligence) increases.  You are the first to introduce a 
>_post hoc ergo propter hoc_ twist to the thread.  Congratulations, 
nitwit.>>[...]
>>
>>Reinder D uit de Bijlmer B.
>
>  ,...,.,,
> /666;    ',    jim tims
>////;    _~ -   p00168@psilink.com
>(/@/----0-~-0
> ;'  . `` ~ \'
>  , `    ' , >
>;;|\..((   -C---->That's some heady opinion you got there, Reinder. You must
>;;| >-  `.__),;;  be real smart, huh?

You on the other hand are not the first to make a hasty generalisation on 
this newsgroup, Tims.  Just because I miss a point once (in YOUR 
pompous opinion) doesn't mean I'm stupid in general (although responding to 
your inane and misplaced sarcasm is not the most clever thing to do 
probably. Even the way you resort to name-calling and abuse where you just 
as well might have stated that I missed the point is sadly nothing unique in 
itself.


Good Ford, maybe Harry Platypus was right after all...

Reinder
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:24887 talk.religion.misc:25082 alt.pagan:14917