De-evolution, it's real !!!
 

OK this study puts a lot of issues in perspective for me.....

Now I understand how and why liberals and socialism is becoming more and more predominate in our society, cause the people are really that stupid.

I had no idea how many folks are just ten points above "mentally challenged"...... Bring on the nanny state....






Are we becoming more STUPID? IQ scores are decreasing - and some experts argue it's because humans have reached their intellectual peak

IQs have largely increased since the 1930s thanks to better living conditions and education - a trend known as the Flynn effect But IQ test results suggest people in the UK, Denmark and Australia have become less intelligent in the past decade
Opinion is divided as to whether the downwards trend is long-term Some studies have shown the average IQ of Westerners has plunged 10 points or more since Victorian times and others claim it will keep decreasing But other experts argue that even if we are becoming more stupid, better healthcare and technology means the 'problem' will regulate itself

By Sarah Griffiths for MailOnline

Published: 08:50 EST, 21 August 2014 | Updated: 09:42 EST, 21 August 2014

Technology may be getting smarter, but humans are getting dumber, scientists have warned.

Evidence suggests that the IQs of people in the UK, Denmark and Australia have declined in the last decade.

Opinion is divided as to whether the trend is long-term, but some researchers believe that humans have already reached intellectual peak.

An IQ test used to determine whether Danish men are fit to serve in the military has revealed scores have fallen by 1.5 points since 1998.


And standard tests issued in the UK and Australia echo the results, according to journalist Bob Holmes, writing in New Scientist.

The most pessimistic explanation as to why humans seem to be becoming less intelligent is that we have effectively reached our intellectual peak.


Between the 1930s and 1980s, the average IQ score in the US rose by three points and in post-war Japan and Denmark, test scores also increased significantly - a trend known as the ‘Flynn effect’.

This increase in intelligence was due to improved nutrition and living conditions - as well as better education - says James Flynn of the University of Otago, after whom the effect is named.

cont:
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz3B3Ij5Wt4
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Public education
 

Public education

It seems like everyday, Mike Judge's "Idiocracy" is less a comedy and more an accurate vision of the future. Anyone for some Starbucks?

Some of you may recall the Zager and Evans song In the year 2525

"Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lie
Everything you think, do and say Is in the pill you took today."

Maybe this came early for some folks, people do not have to think like they used to. If you do not have to think and to reason you sure as heck are not going to get any smarter. Why learn anything if you do not have to?

Does it come with a happy ending? :p

So I'm skeptical of the article here. IQ is defined as a ratio of your ability to learn (capacity for cognitive learning) compared to the average person your age''s ability to learn. It's impossible for the population's IQ score to drop because the average is ALWAYS 100. No matter whether we are smarter or dumber as a society, the average score doesn't change. The relative value of that 100 can change (a 100 now may be the equivalent of a victorian age 110) but the average is always 100.

IQ tests have historically been biased towards English speakers. The two most common are the CTMM (California Test of Mental Maturity) and Stanford-Binet (Designed by Lewis Terman at Stanford University) They are also strongly biased towards hard science vs artistic endeavor. I would suggest that if there is a drop in the relative value of the average score, it is more a reflection of the changing demographics of the people taking the test and a swing in the population towards the creative over the logical. It doesn't mean we as a society are any dumber than we have been in the past, it just means that we have a different set of pursuits and competencies.

In other words, a larger percentage of the population are starving artists or not proficient in the english language than ever before and are undermining the results of traditional IQ tests which are specifically designed NOT to score creativity.

Entropy.

TR

This might have something to do with falling IQ's...

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2010081...d-society.html

Someone once posted a high school test circa 1900. Boys and girls, I'm here to tell you that was some hard questions.
One of my favorite quotes paraphrased 'the department of education, making children dumber since 1976.' Chuck Woolery.

I've been saying this since I first saw the movie. Also relevant is 'demolition man'.

So wait...

...am I to believe that "Idiocracy" is set in the future?


Ponder these two statements about US states, and tell me, was Idiocracy really set in the future?

-"Florida's in Georgia... dumbass"
-"I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go but wont be able to make it to Alaska or Hawaii".

U.S. President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho was elected purely because of his celebrity status and his cabinet was pretty god damned spot on similar to the emtpy suits patrolling the landscape around washington dc

...set in the future.
You people are so silly

Darwin's survival of the fittest, includes both physical strengths and mental..

The "problem" is the mentally fit HUMANS have developed fixes and solutions for those that would not have survived 100 - 200 yrs ago. Something as simple as the common aspirin has saved millions of people that would have died from fevers & colds.

This creates an environment that inversely BOOSTS the population in the wrong direction.

The CANS help the CAN NOTS survive, allowing the CAN NOTS to propagate.

This is the bane of being a human.

Other species are much less tolerant of failure. They do not seek solution to problems that hurt the overall population.

One major reason is that most other hunter-gather species recognize the limits on available resources. They understand that if they "help" the weak, things like food will have to be sub-divided to a larger population.

WE as humans are willing to hurt the strong just to keep the weak going. Consuming our limited resources without fixing the real problem of the finite limits that the EARTH has as an ultimate constraint.


My $00.00002 :munchin

It's got 'lectrolites in it.