'Higher' IQ
Today I read an article (http://www.slate.com/id/2148759/?GT1=8592) that talked about a new study that concluded that tall people earn more because they are more intelligent. The study looked at 2 groups of kids born in different years in the UK. What they found was that from an early age, height is related to intelligence. The major finding is that height, on its own bears a strong relation to pay. When it is included with measures of childhood intelligence, "it no longer does the explanatory work on its own". The conclusion is that "height appears to matter when intelligence is not included, because taller people are, on average, smarter".
Let me just say that that is the dumbest piece of horse dung I have ever read.
It doesn't make a lot of sense. It's also bad econometrics. The two numbskulls from Princeton who did this study forgot one of the most basic aphorisms in econometrics and/or statistics, that correlation does not mean causation. They point out that kids who are tall at age 16 experienced adolescent growth spurts at an early age and "turn out to be the well-fed and nurtured kids of parents who are on average smarter and richer than the rest, and who also pass on extra IQ points".
Can I please roll around on the floor and laugh hysterically now?
So that must mean that all them basketball players are geniuses! Oh my gosh! Well, they do earn a lotta money and get laid everywhere they go so I guess they're pretty damn smart. This must also mean that, on average, Asians are dumber than North Americans! Oh my garutay! What is the world coming to! There are so many flaws in this study that it has permanently altered my view of Princeton. Unfortunately, modelling this kind of thing is close to impossible, because a million different factors can come into play in an employment setting, such as education, self esteem, personal endearment, racial bias, gender, type of occupation, sleeping with the boss, being good looking, having large feet, etc. I ain't offended by this sort of thing cuz it's been known for a long time that tall folk tend to earn pretty good coin. Ok, maybe I'm a little offended. But what's really annoying is how incredibly moronic and negligent the methodlogy and underlying theory of the study is. Just cuz it seems to explain the evidence doesn't mean that it does. What comes to mind is one econometric model constructed by a prominent academic that uses production of shoes in India to explain the GDP growth of the US. Stunningly, the number of shoes produced in India explained close to 90% of U.S. GDP growth! Now that just doesn't make make much sense. Unfortunately, neither does this study. It doesn't take much height or IQ to figure out why.
Let me just say that that is the dumbest piece of horse dung I have ever read.
It doesn't make a lot of sense. It's also bad econometrics. The two numbskulls from Princeton who did this study forgot one of the most basic aphorisms in econometrics and/or statistics, that correlation does not mean causation. They point out that kids who are tall at age 16 experienced adolescent growth spurts at an early age and "turn out to be the well-fed and nurtured kids of parents who are on average smarter and richer than the rest, and who also pass on extra IQ points".
Can I please roll around on the floor and laugh hysterically now?
So that must mean that all them basketball players are geniuses! Oh my gosh! Well, they do earn a lotta money and get laid everywhere they go so I guess they're pretty damn smart. This must also mean that, on average, Asians are dumber than North Americans! Oh my garutay! What is the world coming to! There are so many flaws in this study that it has permanently altered my view of Princeton. Unfortunately, modelling this kind of thing is close to impossible, because a million different factors can come into play in an employment setting, such as education, self esteem, personal endearment, racial bias, gender, type of occupation, sleeping with the boss, being good looking, having large feet, etc. I ain't offended by this sort of thing cuz it's been known for a long time that tall folk tend to earn pretty good coin. Ok, maybe I'm a little offended. But what's really annoying is how incredibly moronic and negligent the methodlogy and underlying theory of the study is. Just cuz it seems to explain the evidence doesn't mean that it does. What comes to mind is one econometric model constructed by a prominent academic that uses production of shoes in India to explain the GDP growth of the US. Stunningly, the number of shoes produced in India explained close to 90% of U.S. GDP growth! Now that just doesn't make make much sense. Unfortunately, neither does this study. It doesn't take much height or IQ to figure out why.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home