Modern single females put sex and pleasure before reality!

and

Source: http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/brain-size2.htm

 

As soon as anyone cites a psychologist as expert in neurology its game over, with rushton being the go to guy for all mysoginists and racists....if you're going to consult experts in brain function why do you cite behaviouralist in psychology? Why aren't you citing the experts in brain function NEURLOGISTS...
Psycologists are not experts in brain function, their measurements are nothing more than phrenology, its like predicting how fast someone can run by the size of their feet....intelligence is the result of how the brain is structured and performs not the volume of the cranium....a sperm whale has brain 5 times the weight of sapiens, is it smarter than us?....Einstiens brain was smaller than average which totally destroys any size/intelligence correlations, clearly if he didn't have a large brain something else is at play, it was his brains internal structure that made him as brilliant as he was...

 

Did you even bother to glance at the sourced article?

Thicker skull translates to a lower cranium volume...cranium volume can be a determinant of cognitive abilities.

What does that have to do with misogny? It's science based.

On average females have thicker skulls than males; thus lower cranium volume.

Again on average...

Brain size, particularly the frontal lobe, does indeed correlate to cognitive abilities. You want to deny that, be my guest.

 

You cited psychologists(behaviouralists) as experts in the field of neurology...IQ tests are hugely suspect as an accurate measurement of intelligence...my neice a psychologist made the common claim(myth) that we use only 10% of our brain which I ridiculed "well what do you know I'm a psychologist!" was her reply...my neurologist buddy backs me up, " Anyone who uses only 10% of their brain will have their life support turned off"...



Citing psychologists as experts in neurology is the equivalent of claiming a hard rock uranium miner is an expert on nuclear physics...

psychologists try claim correlations on volume... neurologists(the only real brain experts) look for correlations in surface area (crenulation), percentage of grey and white matter, number of neurons (correlated to crenulation), number of synapses, corpus callosum between hemispheres....none of those potential factors are dependent on cranial volume...

Einstein's brain weight was1230gms, average is 1400gms...since we don't have 3.5 billion people on the planet smarter then Einstein clearly brain size has nothing to do with intelligence...

 

Weight is not volume.

Areas of Einstein's brain were in fact larger in volume.

 

wowzer, weight is indicitive of the number of neurons and synapses...greater the weight the more neurons and synapses....

No where does your link correlate cranial volume to intelligence, it does support what I've been trying to explain to you, internal structure is not linked to skull circumferance/volume....you cannot measure a skull and determine its internal structure...

 

I suggest you glance at this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_size

Volume...not weight, is the correlation with increased cognition, particulary in areas involving gray matter like the frontal lobe. A brain is both white and gray matter...white matter is passive tissue.

White matter

Do you know what lipids are?

It's basically fat...is what it is...fat tends to add weight to something.

 

Well....no.

Our ancestors....such as what we called Cro-magnon and Neanderthal.....had larger...more volume....as well as was heavier...more density.

Human Brains are like COMPUTERS.....as year after year...decade after decade pass....we can make Computers smaller, less volume and less weight and yet capable of much greater processing ability memory storage and Ram.

Same thing with Humans.

As we evolve our BRAIN IS ACTUALLY GETTING SMALLER AND LESS VOLUME AND LESS WEIGHT!!

Why.....because as we evolve our Neural Transmitters have become evolutionary driven more efficient and do not nead as much area nor as they as heavy.

Years ago....in 1969....they figured it would take a 1969 Technology built Computer to be as large as the Empire State Building to be as complex as our brain.

We currently have working 100 and 1000 Quibit Quantum Computers that weigh like NOTHING and a new 10,000 Quibit Quantum Computer about the size of an old stereo....will soon be built that will SURPASS the Calculation power of the Human Brain....and I have heard Whispers....A.I. is already a reality.

AboveAlpha

 

I like that answer!

 

Who knows which way a thread will go? This is the beauty of this forum you get such a divergent set of views, some intelligent some just a little extreme, but all someones opinion. Isn't it interesting?

 

i suggest you stop using wiki and get I neurologist friend like I have...white matter isn't passive...two brains of equal volume can have differing weights dependent on the number of neurons synapses and white matter...loss of volume can be measured, loss of weight/density number of neurons and synapses cannot.....you misunderstood what you read...

IQ correlates with surface area/number of neurons/number of synapses all of which are independent of volume, a smaller than average brained Einstein was smarter than half of the worlds male population with greater brain volume than his, according to you that's impossible... but yet he was brilliant despite his small volume brain because intelligence had nothing to do with volume...

 

I think some may get pregnant BECAUSE they know they can get free, government help. I knew a young lady in Missouri who had 5 daughters by the time she was 21 and got free rent and food as a result. She did nothing productive whatsoever (other than to produce babies).

 

The entire foundation for this thread is really misogynistic. It implies that men are responsible when it comes to sex but women are not. That's utter BS. Why aren't men always using a condom when they have sexual relations? Why are men being irresponsible when it comes to sexual relations?

 

It was probably because Republicans have closed virtually all of the Planned Parenthood clinics in Missouri instead.

The woman mentioned would be living in abject poverty and I can think of few people that would choose to live in abject poverty.

 

LOLOL... You're right.

 

I agree. When it comes to males and sex there is a nominal inverse intelligence ratio effect at play consisting of a hapless intellect on one side that's often overwhelmed by an urgent combination of sexual-drive and sexual-intensity component, whenever an erotic situation presents itself. The more his testosterone is figuratively bellowing at him in regards to a female or another male, "See, want, need, gotta get me some!" the lower his I.Q drops until some little time has passed after the 'little death' occurs.

It is usually only after a climax that the male brain fully kicks into gear again with an attendant internal commentary of "You needs-driven IDIOT! Now what have you done to us?!" So no, I really would not consider human males the responsible gender when it comes to sex.

 

guys can always get a vasectomy, you know. And they're crazy to not do so. It takes 1/2 million $ per kid to raise one properly, and that's in current $. It'll be well over a million $ each by the time you get them raised. It's just flat crazy to have a kid. You can retire in 10-15 years on your investments, or you can have a couple of kids and still be working 40 years later, never have a thing, never go anywhere, never do anything. Take your pick.

 

It is now the 21st century and plenty of things have changed. In my opinion, birth control is the answer.