The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle
Chinese biggest killer of endangered animals!!
Chinese illegal trade in endangered animals, worlds largest illegal industry;
Chinese illegal trade in tiger body parts, leading to its extinction,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG3-rSQH7pA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLJQsk08J9Y&feature=related
Shark fins trade; Over 100 million are killed!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQASelIMJjc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNcG-hJ4L9g&feature=related
Chinas illegal trade in Ivory, causing extinction of Elephants;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PkRtXXImVA
Eating wildlife, snake dinner in China; LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj5rPECuPKE
Chinese cooking and eating rats and dogs!! LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu-n9jxhqLo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIsyqhDTXgs&feature=related
Grilled dog on menu in Nanning china,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gAU2ex2LvM&feature=related
Dog slaughter in China,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNxw-tEn2SE&feature=related
More real China Videos Enjoy;
Dirty and filthy China!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KffebqxPoYE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkzwnQvWR38&feature=related
A walk in chinese countryside;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMPRO1R7Q48&feature=related
Old filthy village in Ghoungzhou China;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bDlfxbW8sk&feature=related
Chinese eating dogs!! LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_x_SO5Q0dk
Chinese eating baby fetus!! serious mate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8Uiavn_EN0
After looking at this one can eassily guess the real intelligence of Chinese people is no better than abroginals and tribals, it is because the IQ test can be taught and taking them again and again improve your score, some Chinese have done allright, otherwise all the chinese I have met was dumb and have poor communication and interpersonal skills, they used to sit hours and hours in the librarary to get the same grades as any other students. Its the practice and familarity with the IQ tests which makes certain people perform better than the others. Most IQ tests are designed to judge your familarity with the modern world, like the use of figures, analytical skills and reasoning. If you are a graduate, live in a urban area and live in a modern world with the use of technology, you are bound to score better in the IQ tests than the rural and uneducated tribal folk. The documentary Race and intelligence science last taboo, made for channel 4 in 2009 has taken a unbiased view of race and intelligence, and proved that race is a social construct, in reality there is not much difference between intelligence of various human populations. IQ test also can measure creativity, intellectual ability, pragmatism, musical ability, individual performance and dedication and general grasp of knowledge, attention to detail etc.
Race and intelligence science last taboo, an unbiased view about the IQ test scores and intelligence myths: inclusing interview from Flynn, Rushton and other scientists!!
m n indian…
extc engineer..
workin as a survey engg. in d gulf…
(i think i shd delete dis info.; few ppl myt get biased by it..nvm, i’ll leave it)
i read half f d comments here… nothin really interestin…zzzz…yawn..!
abt science n physics… i thinks its a religion developed in d late 18th century… gained a strong foothold cuz it was able 2 satisfactorily xplain lodsa phenomena..
but now, in d 21st century where v can aid our eyes wid more powerful telescopes n microscopes…
science is in trouble.. physics has turned to metaphysics… many things cant b xplained by dis religion..
theories were reformulated 2 breakdown atoms further into protons,etc n den dey r further split into quarks n now strings??
n den wt abt d largest body in d universe
...n d farthest one??
ders certainly no limit.. 4 d wts smallest or d largest… its only our scope f comprehension dat limits it…
in theory, der will always b another rational no. between any two…
formulatin d laws f d universe is lyk formulatin n equation for d randomness f prime nos…(which cant b done..so tym 2 adopt a new religion now..)
newly proposed theories r resortin 2 n-dimensions n multiple universe…
inexplicable phenomenas observed in sky gave rise 2 concept f black holes n den white holes…
n den worm holes 4 travel between d two… n den d anti matter…wtf!!
had science always been so absurd..!
wtf has happend 2 d scientific community..!!
science in d future will b registered as another religion(more rational den other, though) f d history..
leme also tell u ...
chinese culture is very original n fascinatin 2 me afte my own culture.. a lot can b learnt frm it..
I’ve studied Feng Shui.. n also d subtle differences between it n d Vastu Shastra
I admire d chinese hospitality.. n politeness.. but i also think dat d chinese govt. is really thinkin f d world as a chess game..
I luv chinese, paki, srilankan, nepali n dun hate bangladeshi.. (luv thy neighbour as thyself)
I hav worked wid dem UK, US guys, filipinos, n other europeans, also arabics…
all r very good n very human like..
I dun know where dese haters who posted d above comments come from.. dey def. r not frm one f dese countries..
Most folk methods of gauging intelligence are useless and not representative of real general intelligence.
I believe Indian intelligence is frequently overestimated using these methods because of factors like how their culture emphasizes social interaction and discourages violence.
This means they adopt most social behaviors that people of higher intelligence and soft upbringing adopt and therefore are hard to tell apart.
Lack of intelligence is much easier to identify when you do things like frequently criticize or rant about things you don’t understand. Indians may do this when they think the target or it’s champions have no social repercussions, but it goes against their social conditioning for the most part (which is different than understanding why it is silly behavior, or understanding better the thing they would criticize).
Intelligence measures things like how easily can you extract meanings of words from their contexts, or how complex of a pattern of change between numbers can your mind automatically identify. It controls how many abstract classes you can generate from the things you experience, which allows you to better deductively reason. For instance challenged people may not generate enough such classes to tell a dog from a cat. If all you have to reason with is {furry} and {four-legged} then you would think it is just as likely to meow as it is to bark.
So people with low IQ’s might seem smart if they act a certain way, but they may not be good at solving novel problems using novel solutions.
Also, it’s my belief that in developed nations it is taboo to use whatever intelligence you have efficiently.
The speedup in learning it causes creates friction between you and others as you are challenging other people’s feelings of self-worth. Intelligence may not make much of a difference in a 200 yr old company that values the ability to suck up to bosses more than the ability to solve problems, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t still measure some universal ability to extract information from your surroundings.
@dave that’s funny because every single question asked in the International Math Olympiad has already been answered. The IMO is nothing more than a hard math exam. The IMO measures nothing more than education. If the Chinese are so good at mathematics then why can’t they answer unanswered math questions? Why can they only answer math questions that have already been answered?
Also you’re wrong about population size, population size isn’t relevant, literate population size is, India has a literate population of around 700 million where as China has one around 1.2 billion, meaning China has 500 million more literate people.
That’s funny how France never won the IMO even once, the very highest ranking France achieved since entering the IMO in 1967 was #5, France usually gets a ranking of 20 or lower in the IMO, yet France has already won 10 Fields Medals where as China has won the IMO so many times yet never won even one Fields Medal. How is that possible?
After winning the worlds most useless math competition - the International Math Olympiad what does China have to show for it? NOTHING! France on the other hand never won the International Math Olympiad even once and already has 10 Fields Medals. Russia who achieves high rankings in the IMO has already won 9 Fields Medals. China who always wins the IMO has 0 Fields Medal.
The conclusion: International Math Olympiad = Useless Indicator
One each of the American and Australian winners has been Chinese (Shing-Tung Yau and Terrance Tao). Of the French winners, one is Jewish, one German and one Vietnamese. Three Japanese have also been recipients.
Just in case there’s any doubt that North Asians can’t do the heavy lifting themselves.
@Crunchy Hong Kong does well some times in the Math Olympiad, but so what? Every single question asked in the Math Olympiad has already been answered. If the Chinese and East Asians were doing more than simply mimicking and copying answers we would’ve expected them to be the best mathematicians, yet the Chinese and East Asians don’t make good mathematicians, they make good people who can win math contests.
France does poorly in the International Math Olympiad, yet French Mathematicians contribute much much more than Chinese mathematicians do and have already won 10 Fields Medals with a staggeringly lower population size. How is that possible?
If India can rank high in the IMO some years and bad in others and France can perform badly yet still produce many mathematicians who contribute that just shows that IMO indicates nothing more than education rather than mathematical talent.
Contributions show what you can do beyond memorizing and copying, so if the Chinese were doing more we would be able to see it in the Chinese contributions towards mathematics. Instead China has never won any Fields Medal, and the 2 Chinese who have won the Fields Medal made their contributions in non-Chinese countries.
It’s strange how a country like India with such a low standard of living can still produce poor uneducated geniuses but China with millions of poor people never produces poor uneducated geniuses…how is this? There’s poor uneducated geniuses found among Europeans, Jews, and Indians, but not the Chinese, how is this? If someone’s poor and uneducated then we know much of their genius is innate. China has more than 500 million literate people so it can’t be population size, and China supposedly has a faked\guessed higher IQ, so it can’t be IQ, so what’s left?
Obviously the Chinese are either less intelligent, less creative or don’t produce as many geniuses as India does. The percentage of geniuses produced is much more relevant than average IQ. If a population with an average IQ of 100 produces no geniuses they will contribute much less than a population with an average IQ of 80 with a very high percentage of geniuses.
The modern day Indian mathematician Manjul Bhargava who is the 2nd youngest full professor at Princeton is more impressive than modern day Chinese mathematician Terrence Tao according to Princeton Generals. Terrence Tao didn’t do well with Princeton generals. Manjul Bhargava’s contributions have already found more applications than Tao’s contributions as well.
Actually,Tao is pretty much a legend in the mathematical community.The majority of experts rate him as the best,or at least one of the best,mathematical minds in the entire world.
The thing with Princeton Generals and Tao happened when Tao was 18.He is 34 now and has come a long way since.It can be safely said that Tao has now surpassed all his Princeton examiners.
Some have even compared Tao to the all time greats and said that he can be easily put in the same bracket as Einstein or Newton.That’s quite a complement for a person who is still alive and only 34 years of age.
I agree that Indians have a lot of mathematical ability,but no need to put down others to prove that.
@citizen
You are wrong,pattern recognition depends a lot on familiarity with patterns and you can’t be familiar with patterns right from birth.People with higher IQs are usually familiar with a lot of abstract patterns.So there is a component of IQ that can be practiced.
One of the problems with India is that there are many flaws in the school and education system.
Despite that,I am sure if IQs of educated Indians in middle class families of 2011A.D ,and not the rural ones,are much higher.
As far as I know the only person who has solved a millennium prize problem so far is Grigori Perelman.That guy is quite incredible.You guys should also check his IMO scores.He only appeared once and got a PERFECT score.Although that doesn’t change the fact that Tao too has an extra-ordinary reputation.In any case I don’t know how to rate or compare mathematicians.It’s a meaningless waste of energy,so I am going move back to the IQ topic.
Anyway,I recently read 2 very interesting books -one is called “Genius Explained” by Michael Howe and second one is “the number sense” written by a mathematician who turned into a neurobiologist.The first book takes a psyco-biographical approach and the second book takes a neurobiological approach,but both come to the same conclusion that extra-ordinary achievements in mathematics or any other field is very much more dependent on the quantity and quality of training,rather than any specific genes.It seems that all humans are born with a capacity for abstraction,but only few have the right kind of personalities and opportunities to get the right kind of abstract training.
Howe’s book is particularly interesting and it deals specifically with the topic of genius and also touches upon IQ concepts.IQ can actually be increased.Howe argues that studies show that it takes at least 10thousand hours of training to Really excel at anything.Yet only 100 hours of intelligence programs have shown notable gains in IQs.He also points out the difference between experience and environment and it is experience and not environment that directly shapes a person.It’s also a flawed concept that genes can determine complex traits like intelligence in such a one to one fashion.Genes and environment continuously interact to produce the individuals.His book shows that if you examine geniuses,you find that all of them had spend a lot of time training and they all got the right kind of personalities as well as the right opportunities.Also,high IQ and genius have no correlation,even though geniuses do tend to have above average IQ.
Tao himself thinks that being a high achieving mathematician is more about being hard-working,systematic and devoted than about any “innate” intelligence.(read his blog)He also admits that a bit of luck is sometimes necessary.
I don’t know how many of you know this ,but there are computer programs that can score 160+ in IQ tests.But do you honestly believe that a computer is smarter than the average human?Also,there are many myths about IQ.The reason for this is that IQ itself is a flawed concept.Yet here in India ,there is very little emphasis on development and too much emphasis on ‘in-born talent”.India certainly has the genes,but very few get the right kind of opportunities to develop.
So,stop the racism and think constructively,rather than destructively.
In any case I don’t know how to rate or compare mathematicians.
Being a mathematician would help. *waves* 
Howe argues that studies show that it takes at least 10thousand hours of training to Really excel at anything.
Complete rubbish.
It’s also a flawed concept that genes can determine complex traits like intelligence in such a one to one fashion.Genes and environment continuously interact to produce the individuals.
This is true. Instead of ‘one to one fashion’, you should be saying ‘one-to-one correspondence’.
His book shows that if you examine geniuses,you find that all of them had spend a lot of time training and they all got the right kind of personalities as well as the right opportunities.Also,high IQ and genius have no correlation,even though geniuses do tend to have above average IQ.
Not true.
Tao himself thinks that being a high achieving mathematician is more about being hard-working,systematic and devoted than about any “innate” intelligence.(read his blog)He also admits that a bit of luck is sometimes necessary.
Of course he would think that way, if he has to use the ideas of others. He’s obviously an example of the pinnacle of Asian intellect, but that doesn’t mean he is on par with the top Europeans. And applied math is icky. =)
@Goethe
Being a mathematician would help.
Not that much really.Mathematics isn’t a 100m sprint.It’s pretty much impossible to produce a single quantity to judge a mathematician.There is no mathematician or scientist or inventor that produced a completely original work.All ideas are built upon other more elementary ideas.This is different to sprinting for example.
Einstein always knew that true originality does not exist,the best you can do is to do your best “to hide your sources”.
As for the rest,you are merely stating your opinions by denying facts and carefully done studies.The amount of time spent to train/practice on a subject systematically is the single best predictor of success in any field.The majority of people regarded as geniuses with known IQs have IQs in the range 110-135.
And it’s not just Asians ,your western Stephen Hawking said that those who boast about their IQs are losers.
It’s impossible for anyone to be completely original at anything.
Einstein certainly knew that, which is how he obtained credit for Poincare’s idea.
It’s the most direct predictor, but you must keep in mind that there are prerequisites to almost everything.
When I say ‘genius’, I mean 160+ IQ =)
“India certainly has the genes”. Brahmins and Parsis provide a disproportionate number of India’s cognitive elite.
As for the average Indian :
@Goethe
That’s not the definition of genius.Only IQ experts and psychologists trying to sell their product(IQ tests) want to make us believe in that kind of definition.In the west they certainly know how to do marketing and politics.If that definition were true the likes of Rick Rosner or Chris Langan who have done nothing in their lives will be considered geniuses,but the likes of Feynman ,Poincare or Al Gore will not be.That’s quite ridiculous to say the least.
@Al Ross
That’s a bogus article with no evidence.I am a brahmin myself ,but I don’t buy that-even more so because it’s from Rushton..
Just to give an example-Jews are nowadays considered very smart,but at the beginning of 20th century they actually scored below average in IQ tests.
Someone already posted a documentary called “Race and intelligence”.That was a nice documentary.Watch that and all myths will break.Rushton’s arguments were refuted systematically.
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/06/indias-average-iq-in-2100.html
@ Another Indian,
Since you yourself is a brahmin, you should be able to comprehend the notion that there are difference between brahmin Indians and non-Indians just as there are difference between dalits, adivasis and people of the OBCs and SCs and brahmins.
评论
优点英语 For Android
手机扫描二维码下载到手机直接点击二维码下载到电脑
