you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I'm not going to do your work for you. It is pretty common practice for the dishonest to not use adult IQ but rather teenage or 7-year old IQ because it allows them to paint the picture they want to paint, knowing that using adult iq would give a different result that they don't want.

The irony here is your lack of knowledge and your arrogance. We have all been where you are, you are not unique.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm not going to do your work for you.

Okay, let me be clear then: You're wrong. The reason that there are no scholarly refutations of that paper in line with your argument is because your argument is not valid.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Did your paper use adult iq?

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It used AFQT and NAEP scores.

Is AFQT adult in your book?

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

How old are the ones taking the AFQT? 25-30?

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know.