HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Intelligence Institute St...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:20 PM

 

Intelligence Institute Study shows Fox News viewers have an IQ that is 20 points lower than the U.S.

(National Average)

http://news.yahoo.com/intelligence-institute-study-shows-fox-news-viewers-iq-034622242.html

Study shows that the Americans who watch Fox News have an average IQ of 80, whereas the national average is 100. Researchers were not "shocked" by findings.

Birmingham, Alabama (PRWEB) December 04, 2012
The results of a 4 year study show that Americans who obtain their news from Fox News channel have an average IQ of 80, which represents a 20 point deficit when compared to the U.S. national average of 100. IQ, or intelligence quotient, is the international standard of assessing intelligence.

Researchers at The Intelligence Institute, a conservative non-profit group, tested 5,000 people using a series of tests that measure everything from cognitive aptitude to common sense and found that people who identified themselves as Fox News viewers and 'conservative' had, on average, significantly lower intelligent quotients. Fox Viewers represented 2,650 members of the test group.

One test involved showing subjects a series of images and measuring their vitals, namely pulse rate and blood pressure. The self-identified conservatives' vitals increased over 35% when shown complex or shocking images. The image that caused the most stress was a poorly edited picture of President Obama standing next to a "ghostly" image of a child holding a tarantula.

Test subjects who received their news from other outlets or reported they do not watch the news scored an average IQ of 104, compared to 80 for Fox News viewers.

Lead researcher, P. Nichols, explains, "Less intelligent animals rely on instinct when confronted by something which they do not understand. This is an ancient survival reaction all animals, including humans, exhibit. It's a very simple phenomenon, really; think about a dog being afraid of a vacuum cleaner. He doesn't know what a vacuum is or if it may harm him, so he becomes agitated and barks at it. Less intelligent humans do the same thing. Concepts that are too complex for them to understand, may frighten or anger them."

He continues, "Fox News' content is presented at an elementary school level and plays directly into the fears of the less educated and less intelligent."

More at link.

210 replies, 32549 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 210 replies Author Time Post
Reply Intelligence Institute Study shows Fox News viewers have an IQ that is 20 points lower than the U.S. (Original post)
Whovian Dec 2012 OP
Earth_First Dec 2012 #1
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #2
Whovian Dec 2012 #3
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #5
Swede Atlanta Dec 2012 #14
bettyellen Dec 2012 #38
Walk away Dec 2012 #77
Squinch Dec 2012 #146
KansDem Dec 2012 #125
MynameisBlarney Dec 2012 #136
KansDem Dec 2012 #207
patricia92243 Dec 2012 #139
socialist_n_TN Dec 2012 #33
heaven05 Dec 2012 #64
LeftofObama Dec 2012 #4
Earth_First Dec 2012 #7
PDJane Dec 2012 #10
Walk away Dec 2012 #79
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #20
AlbertCat Dec 2012 #34
JBoy Dec 2012 #74
Walk away Dec 2012 #80
pbrower2a Dec 2012 #117
pangaia Dec 2012 #135
pbrower2a Dec 2012 #166
pangaia Dec 2012 #186
HillWilliam Dec 2012 #83
Release The Hounds Dec 2012 #87
jtuck004 Dec 2012 #97
Brainstormy Dec 2012 #126
Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #6
dixiegrrrrl Dec 2012 #49
Evasporque Dec 2012 #191
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #8
libdem4life Dec 2012 #9
dixiegrrrrl Dec 2012 #50
libdem4life Dec 2012 #56
Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #67
progressoid Dec 2012 #92
proud2BlibKansan Dec 2012 #149
libdem4life Dec 2012 #182
pbrower2a Dec 2012 #172
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #202
libdem4life Dec 2012 #209
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #210
NoodleyAppendage Dec 2012 #11
sulphurdunn Dec 2012 #26
sakabatou Dec 2012 #29
Make7 Dec 2012 #45
reACTIONary Dec 2012 #145
Make7 Dec 2012 #159
reACTIONary Dec 2012 #169
mojowork_n Dec 2012 #161
tpsbmam Dec 2012 #178
mojowork_n Dec 2012 #187
tpsbmam Dec 2012 #194
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #47
Duppers Dec 2012 #60
cstanleytech Dec 2012 #96
Duppers Dec 2012 #116
Walk away Dec 2012 #81
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #99
tavalon Dec 2012 #102
Festivito Dec 2012 #129
tpsbmam Dec 2012 #185
Buns_of_Fire Dec 2012 #12
Whovian Dec 2012 #13
Buns_of_Fire Dec 2012 #19
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #31
pbrower2a Dec 2012 #121
Buns_of_Fire Dec 2012 #174
Whovian Dec 2012 #15
Coyotl Dec 2012 #16
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #17
tavalon Dec 2012 #103
Turbineguy Dec 2012 #147
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #18
orwell Dec 2012 #21
Initech Dec 2012 #22
JaneyVee Dec 2012 #23
Rehpotsirhc Dec 2012 #24
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #27
JaneyVee Dec 2012 #28
SammyWinstonJack Dec 2012 #40
Walk away Dec 2012 #82
renate Dec 2012 #138
Hun Joro Dec 2012 #25
Mr.Bill Dec 2012 #30
annabanana Dec 2012 #51
MAD Dave Dec 2012 #59
Victor_c3 Dec 2012 #118
OrwellwasRight Dec 2012 #62
TrogL Dec 2012 #85
Mr.Bill Dec 2012 #94
Rob H. Dec 2012 #142
DollarBillHines Dec 2012 #150
Mr.Bill Dec 2012 #151
hifiguy Dec 2012 #155
Mr.Bill Dec 2012 #156
morningfog Dec 2012 #69
sakabatou Dec 2012 #32
bettyellen Dec 2012 #42
sakabatou Dec 2012 #114
Make7 Dec 2012 #175
sakabatou Dec 2012 #180
Make7 Dec 2012 #183
sakabatou Dec 2012 #184
Make7 Dec 2012 #189
sakabatou Dec 2012 #190
patricia92243 Dec 2012 #141
bluestate10 Dec 2012 #35
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #43
ThoughtCriminal Dec 2012 #63
Iggy Dec 2012 #36
Flabbergasted Dec 2012 #37
Whovian Dec 2012 #55
Chemisse Dec 2012 #78
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #100
Chemisse Dec 2012 #123
sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #188
NotThisTime Dec 2012 #39
spanone Dec 2012 #41
LostInAnomie Dec 2012 #44
Liberal Gramma Dec 2012 #46
WhoIsNumberNone Dec 2012 #48
Sander Dec 2012 #52
LancetChick Dec 2012 #53
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #61
Shampoobra Dec 2012 #54
BainsBane Dec 2012 #57
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #58
certainot Dec 2012 #66
Jackpine Radical Dec 2012 #144
certainot Dec 2012 #206
Cha Dec 2012 #65
ErikJ Dec 2012 #68
The Last Democrat Dec 2012 #70
quaker bill Dec 2012 #71
pbrower2a Dec 2012 #165
quaker bill Dec 2012 #177
eridani Dec 2012 #72
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #73
whistler162 Dec 2012 #75
dinger130 Dec 2012 #76
LittlestStar Dec 2012 #84
Disconnect Dec 2012 #86
Curmudgeoness Dec 2012 #91
pnicholstii Dec 2012 #88
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #89
pnicholstii Dec 2012 #110
Judi Lynn Dec 2012 #120
mojowork_n Dec 2012 #153
bluesbassman Dec 2012 #95
CJCRANE Dec 2012 #164
cbayer Dec 2012 #170
TexasBushwhacker Dec 2012 #193
Historic NY Dec 2012 #90
proReality Dec 2012 #104
Gman Dec 2012 #93
Isoldeblue Dec 2012 #98
tavalon Dec 2012 #101
Zorra Dec 2012 #105
proReality Dec 2012 #106
pnicholstii Dec 2012 #109
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #119
hughee99 Dec 2012 #111
Tab Dec 2012 #107
DirkGently Dec 2012 #197
hughee99 Dec 2012 #108
Takket Dec 2012 #112
Taverner Dec 2012 #113
Sunlei Dec 2012 #115
aandegoons Dec 2012 #122
DirkGently Dec 2012 #124
Pakid Dec 2012 #127
Enrique Dec 2012 #128
mountain grammy Dec 2012 #130
tblue37 Dec 2012 #199
mwb970 Dec 2012 #131
ThomThom Dec 2012 #132
Ligyron Dec 2012 #133
Berlum Dec 2012 #134
ElboRuum Dec 2012 #137
Demeter Dec 2012 #140
SummerSnow Dec 2012 #143
Haywood Brothers Dec 2012 #148
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #152
libodem Dec 2012 #154
gslusher Dec 2012 #157
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #158
La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2012 #160
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #162
Tunkamerica Dec 2012 #205
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #163
cpwm17 Dec 2012 #167
Make7 Dec 2012 #173
JackRiddler Dec 2012 #168
cbayer Dec 2012 #171
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #176
andym Dec 2012 #179
DirkGently Dec 2012 #181
pnicholstii Dec 2012 #192
DirkGently Dec 2012 #195
PossumSqueezins Dec 2012 #200
-..__... Dec 2012 #196
tblue37 Dec 2012 #198
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #201
Tunkamerica Dec 2012 #203
Tunkamerica Dec 2012 #204
The Velveteen Ocelot Dec 2012 #208

Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:22 PM

1. Does this include their grasp of the English language or is this above and beyond?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:25 PM

2. In other breaking news, sun rises in East. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:27 PM

3. Not if you watch Fox news. It doesn't rise, it's just there and moves around. No one understands

 

tides there either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #3)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:30 PM

5. Tide goes in, tide goes out. You can't explain that.

 

Unless you discuss, you know, gravitational attraction and the orbit of the moon and stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:48 PM

14. Hey, you cannot talk about attraction here....

 

That is only for porno sites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:39 PM

38. LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #5)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:54 PM

77. Didn't Marco Rubio say the gravity is "just a theory"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:25 PM

146. Nothing to do with gravitational attraction. The baby Jesus makes the tides move.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:52 AM

125. "...it's just there and moves around."

Yeah, I think it's on the back of a large turtle that crawls slowly across the sky.

At least that's what I think I heard...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #125)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:52 AM

136. The limits!

Of Science!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MynameisBlarney (Reply #136)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 03:00 PM

207. Thanks!



Hadn't seen that one. Kinda reminds me of this classic:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:35 PM

139. Laughed out loud at this one :)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #2)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:29 PM

33. Yep. This is one of those "Well, DUH!" headlines......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialist_n_TN (Reply #33)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:33 PM

64. ya thnk?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:28 PM

4. LOL!

Why do I envision Fox watchers barking at the vacuum cleaner?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:31 PM

7. WTF is your problem?!



lmfao!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:38 PM

10. I have to admit that picture has now embedded itself in my mind.......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PDJane (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:57 PM

79. Forever! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:07 PM

20. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:35 PM

34. Why do I envision Fox watchers barking at the vacuum cleaner?

Me too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:18 PM

74. Every time O'Reilly goes to commercial

They think he's never coming back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JBoy (Reply #74)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:59 PM

80. They look for him behind the TV!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Honey! Is Billo in the coat closet?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JBoy (Reply #74)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:56 AM

117. When FoX News is on...

I always feel more at ease once a commercial begins.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbrower2a (Reply #117)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:49 AM

135. You actually watch FOX? :>)))

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pangaia (Reply #135)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:48 PM

166. My elderly parents do.

I have a nice collection of classical music on CDs and nice headphones. Gustav Mahler, Jean Sibelius, Carl Nielsen, and Sergei Prokofiev are good for drowning out that stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbrower2a (Reply #166)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:46 PM

186. Whew, good for you.

Do you have a recording of the Nielsen 5th Symphony?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:06 PM

83. I have a dog that barks at Joe Shmoe

She growls furiously at Glen Beck but she wags for Rachel and Lawrence.

Clearly, even a dog is smarter than Faux viewers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:34 PM

87. Awesome

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftofObama (Reply #4)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:31 PM

97. Imagine how many people I will have to explain my new sign to.

The ones that aren't barking at it, anyway...



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #97)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:01 AM

126. My dog barks at the vacuum cleaner, too, and

for some reason at Gretchen Carlson???? (But at the garden shop he also barks at the statue of St. Francis of Assisi.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:30 PM

6. This angers and frightens me!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:52 PM

49. LOL!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:44 PM

191. Fox News Viewers Respond

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:33 PM

8. A Fox "News" viewer is basically a frightened dog barking at a vacuum cleaner.

Sounds about right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:34 PM

9. I believed the written reports of Palin's IQ ... 83 ... this kind of gives it some credibility.

Not technically illiterate, but at the lower end of average.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #9)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:54 PM

50. Serious? Her IQ was reported? at 83?

Hell, my cat is smarter than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dixiegrrrrl (Reply #50)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:09 PM

56. Yes...I couldn't find the first one I saw...the one I found online now don't look as "weathered"

or real. But, I'll give her some slack if she'll just go away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dixiegrrrrl (Reply #50)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:51 PM

67. It is a proven fact that the dumbest cat that ever lived was still smarter than any Republican

that ever drew breath on this planet.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dixiegrrrrl (Reply #50)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:47 PM

92. Yep...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:18 PM

149. No way.

Special ed teacher here. She's definitely a low to mid 70s kind of person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #149)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:26 PM

182. ECE...Primary here. Absolutely challenged. But we had to "pass" them every year,

regardless. Full Inclusion became the catchword for "pass it on to next year's teacher". Maybe it was just California?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:44 PM

172. undistinguished

Five years in which to graduate from college, and five different colleges, one attended twice. None is a high-quality college, and she does not have the excuse of having been in the military or stopping out to get some contact with reality outside the Ivory Tower. She had trouble with college in Hawaii with surely a large number of Asian-American students, some of whom are not native speakers of English. Heck, I attended UC Berkeley and I knew the way in which to communicate with people who are not native speakers of English, which is to stick to the formal register because that is the language taught in English classes for anyone who isn't a native speaker of English, and don't make linguistic formations that are clever but unclear. Such is the same whether the original language of the speaker is Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Tagalog, Arabic, Finnish -- or even Dutch (the language closest to English). I was surprised at times at how good the English was of someone born perhaps in Vietnam -- but my English (and word choice) had to be good enough to be understood too.

Sarah Palin frequently goes into the non-formal register that non-native speakers of English find difficult to understand. She coined the word "refudiate" (the spell check is flashing with that word) and uses words in non-conventional ways, as in "Barack Obama pals with terrorists". When she was running for President polls showed that even if she did reasonably well instates with few non-native speakers of English, she did extremely badly with people who weren't native speakers of English. She was doing worse in Texas than she was doing in New Hampshire. Contrast Mike Huckabee, who may be even more reactionary... but nobody finds him confusing.

Poor grammar and misuse of words is inconsistent with someone born into an English-speaking world and who has a college degree... and a high level of intelligence. So is lacking a clue that one is in trouble in a social situation. I recognized that she was not up to campaigning for a President when she made her "Real America" speech in Chillicothe, Ohio that disparaged urban America and had no idea that the microphones picking up her speech were from Columbus, one of the heavily-populated versions of Sodom and Gomorrah for being urban. It went well in Chillicothe but badly in Columbus and then went all over America and proved a flop in places like Indianapolis, Denver, Las Vegas, Charlotte, Miami, and Norfolk. She lacked any clue on how media operate in America even if she had been a sportscaster and lacked the curiosity to ask what TV market she was in.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #9)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:57 AM

202. 80 is borderline retarded. i doubt palin's iq is 80, & i know of no legal way that her actual

 

IQ score would be released to the public without her permission.

maybe your first reaction -- not to believe it -- was the correct one.

palin's academic & career history does not indicate that she is borderline retarded; rather the opposite, she's a sharp ambitious woman, however much you dislike her politics or tactics (some of which i expect include role-playing the good christian female).

palin was in honor society in high school, according to snopes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #202)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 09:13 PM

209. It recurred a number of times, as did failing college scores. Every politician is "vetted" and she

was not.

The sexist stuff is very old...oh and the fact that women were jealous of her because she was attractive. Hogwash. Her college record was abysmal. No matter, putting this person forth as a Presidential prospect, via a slip on the banana peel, wasn't funny from any gender perspective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #209)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:22 PM

210. you want to think she's retarded, you just go right ahead.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:40 PM

11. I call bullish*t.

While I don't doubt that IQs may be a bit lower, but a full 20 point difference in full scale IQ is not likely. This news blurb is doubly suspicious because there is no link to the methodology or statistics used to obtain the reported results.

Unless these data were vetted through the peer-review process, then its worth about as much scientifically as spitting in the wind to measure atmospheric velocity.

J

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:22 PM

26. You're right,

but it is curious that the Intelligence Institute's clients are mostly corporations, if I have the right web-site, and it's hard to tell what they're selling exactly as one wades through the doublespeak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:23 PM

29. Yes, it does seem suspicious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:50 PM

45. Not bullshit, it's satire. (Well, maybe it is bullshit too.)

Does anyone really think a study purporting to measure IQ would do this:

One test involved showing subjects a series of images and measuring their vitals, namely pulse rate and blood pressure. The self-identified conservatives' vitals increased over 35% when shown complex or shocking images. The image that caused the most stress was a poorly edited picture of President Obama standing next to a "ghostly" image of a child holding a tarantula.

How can anyone take that seriously?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Make7 (Reply #45)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:24 PM

145. Yes, that can be taken very seriously...

While I don't follow this topic explicitly, I have noticed a number of studies that have correlated conservative political attitudes to underlying cognitive and emotional styles. Conservatives are more inclined towards emotional reactions of disgust, fear and confusion. They (supposedly) react more strongly to strange, bad smells.

The pictures described seem to be an extension or elaboration testing this hypothesis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reACTIONary (Reply #145)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:35 PM

159. How exactly does that correlate to IQ?

If a subject's vitals increase when shown a poorly edited picture of President Obama standing next to a ghostly image of a child holding a tarantula, does that mean they are afraid of black people? Spiders? Politicians? Ghosts? Perhaps they lost a child that looks similar to the one in the picture? Or maybe they just hate kids? Perhaps they love Obama?

And how does the measure of that reaction (whatever the underlying cause) translate objectively into the measure of their IQ?

35% increase in vitals
 = IQ of 72
30% increase in vitals
 = IQ of 76
25% increase in vitals
 = IQ of 80
20% increase in vitals
 = IQ of 84
15% increase in vitals
 = IQ of 88
10% increase in vitals
 = IQ of 92
5% increase in vitals
 = IQ of 96
no change in vitals
 = IQ of 100
5% decrease in vitals
 = IQ of 104
10% decrease in vitals
 = IQ of 108
15% decrease in vitals
 = IQ of 112
20% decrease in vitals
 = IQ of 116
25% decrease in vitals
 = IQ of 120
30% decrease in vitals
 = IQ of 124
35% decrease in vitals
 = IQ of 128

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Make7 (Reply #159)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:32 PM

169. I don't think it does, I didn't say that it did, and I didn't read that it did in the excerpt....

...but it didn't strike me as anything other than serious research. It isn't a satirical, nonsensical line of query.

I don't think that the exact content of the picture was the point (Obama, black people, ghosts, spiders, etc.). I think the point of the picture was to display an emotionally unsettling, complex and confusing juxtaposition of images to understand the subject's tolerance for exposure to such elements. Not their exact opinion about spiders or Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Make7 (Reply #45)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:36 PM

161. There's such a high correlation between pulse rate/blood pressure...

Last edited Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:14 PM - Edit history (1)

...and the ability to draw breath. And those test subjects that had that ability were demonstrably far superior
in their responses to the test than those that did not.

Isn't that a standard element of any I.Q. testing methodology? (Some of the "Fox Viewers" being tested, it would seem, had previously been scared to death. But apparently, they were still included in the test group.)

But, like WOW ....Cool text box.

Just playing around to see if I can copy the formatting. So typing and pasting.....a favorite quote:

“The love of liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves.” William Hazlitt


Thanks, didn't know it was possible to get that fancy on D.U.!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mojowork_n (Reply #161)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:06 PM

178. No.

There's such a high correlation between pulse rate/blood pressure...and the ability to draw breath. And those test subjects that had that ability were demonstrably far superior in their responses to the test than those that did not.

Isn't that a standard element of any I.Q. testing methodology?


Um.....no. Take it from someone who's done quite a lot of IQ testing, as well as neuropsychological testing....oh, and measuring BP, etc isn't typical of typical neuropsych testing either. It is occasionally used one measure in neuropsych & medical studies that measure brain brain functioning (e.g., fMRI, SPECT & PET scans), sometimes using IQ as one measure in the study's protocol, more often using neuropsych measures as the test measures. There have been a tiny number of specialized studies measuring IQ as correlated with BP.....e.g., a nephrology study looking at children with chronic kidney disease & it's correlation with hypertension, one of the measures in the study.

But your assumption is wrong -- those aren't "standing elements of any I.Q. testing methodology."

ETA: I failed to address your basic premise -- no such relationship has been established between BP and IQ. There is a relationship between maternal BP and fetus' IQ, but no relationship has been established in the general population between BP and IQ.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tpsbmam (Reply #178)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:48 PM

187. I was kidding. Sorry. (Suggesting they must have included people without a pulse in ther numbers.)

But thanks for clarifying how tests are actually given.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mojowork_n (Reply #187)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:33 PM

194. Wayyyyyyyyyyy too tired to spot the clear humor!! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:52 PM

47. Of course it's bullshit

 

Doesn't detract from the fact that it's fun to laugh about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:14 PM

60. I agree

I cannot find a link to a valid study on this either.

Yet, we know that Fox viewers aren't playing with a full deck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Duppers (Reply #60)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 11:27 PM

96. Playing with a full deck? Heck they havent even figured out out how to take the cellophane off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cstanleytech (Reply #96)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:34 AM

116. LOL. :D

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:01 PM

81. Meet my neighbor before you make up your mind. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:21 AM

99. Obviously you haven't spent much time talking to Fox Viewers. No one needed a

clinical study. I'm surprised they scored so high.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:33 AM

102. Smartypants

Of course it is. Or is it? (in my best imitation of Stephen Colbert.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:15 AM

129. No such report on Intelligence-Institute.com is found.

or any of the other self-described intelligence wannabes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NoodleyAppendage (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:40 PM

185. I call bullshit even more.....

This is pure BS -- there are no data to vet. murielv. is right -- it was $199 well spent in that it fooled a whole lot of people. Someone is getting hearty laughs out of all of the repostings around the web.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:45 PM

12. Hmmmm... Now, why does it show a popup for the Onion when I follow the link...? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Whovian (Reply #13)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:06 PM

19. Oh, I don't doubt that it's not true...

It's just that it seemed odd to have that specific popup show up. That, and the fact that it came from PRWEB and not directly from the Intelligence Institute ( http://www.intelligence-institute.com/index.html ), which seems geared more to Business Intelligence, rather than can these people tie their own shoelaces without professional help.

Either way, it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buns_of_Fire (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:25 PM

31. Oh no, it's definitely made up

It would be impossible to get an average IQ that low for a group as large as 'Fox News viewers'. That website is from 2009; it looks incredibly unprofessional, and might be a scam, part of the spoof, or just something an individual put up to publicise themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buns_of_Fire (Reply #19)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:37 AM

121. So what is 'business intelligence'?

It sounds like market research to determine what people watch what programming and what patterns of behavior one can expect.

It would seem that FoX viewers are gullible and like the communications fed to them very simple. That may leave guidance for [product placement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbrower2a (Reply #121)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:50 PM

174. In my limited exposure to the term...

(when I worked for a fairly large corporation), it meant scoping out the competition -- by analysis, by hook and/or by crook, by spying on them, by talking to their vendors or former employees, by all of the above, whatever -- to see what they were up to. If they were developing a new product, a new design, or enhancing one of their existing products, it'd be nice for your company to know that as early as possible so you could choose to develop your own competing product, or get (or maintain) a competitive advantage in some other way.

It can also be interpreted as you stated. Either way, it usually fell under Marketing's umbrella.

That said, I didn't really hang around the site long enough to get a full interpretation of what they were about. I just looked around for some reference to the article in question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buns_of_Fire (Reply #12)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:50 PM

15. And from Forbes

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 05:53 PM

16. What I'm taking away from my first read

Fox news viewers are the kind of people who bark at vacuum cleaners

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:35 AM

103. OMG that's funny!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:37 PM

147. Interesting

Of course the point here is that if this report appeared on a wingnut site and said that liberals have IQ's 20 percent below Fox News viewers, it would be accepted as coming straight from the Burning Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:01 PM

18. I suspect this is a satirical piece,

but these days it's kind of hard to tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:09 PM

21. 80 is higher...

...than the IQ of the average Faux pundit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:14 PM

22. They needed a study for this? We all know Fox News viewers are stupid...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:15 PM

23. President Obama standing next to a "ghostly" image of a child holding a tarantula.

That must give them nightmares.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:16 PM

24. Well duh.

I posted this on my Facebook, and got a few responses, one of which was, and I quote, "man u r goin 2 hell. its cuz of u stupid liberal that the (n-word) got the office again. i hope ur happy wen the country goes 2 hell". Needless to say, that person is now off of my friends list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rehpotsirhc (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:22 PM

27. Welcome to DU and I hope you enjoy the site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rehpotsirhc (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:23 PM

28. That response kind of proves the point of this study.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rehpotsirhc (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:41 PM

40. The country has already gone *2* hell thanks to stupid fox news viewers. I hope they are happy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rehpotsirhc (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:02 PM

82. And his medication! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rehpotsirhc (Reply #24)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:26 PM

138. welcome to DU!

we r glad u r hear!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:17 PM

25. I work with many PhD chemists who watch Fox News exclusively...

They are undeniably brilliant in their fields, so this is very puzzling to me. I live in a very red area and I am a moonbat weirdo in my environment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hun Joro (Reply #25)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:24 PM

30. I've met plenty of people with advanced degrees

that were idiots once they stepped out of their area of expertise. Except for MBAs. Most of them are idiots within their area of expertise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:59 PM

51. Eeek!... lolololol

and so true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:12 PM

59. Too true....

Chemists seem to be the worst. (I am one) It is scary how many of them have breathed way too many solvents.....for real!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MAD Dave (Reply #59)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:03 AM

118. I'd like to think that isn't the case with me

I'm good at everything else except for chemistry

I'm a chemist for the federal government. I like to think of myself as being more of an overpaid technician. Most of my work is very routine and monotonous, but I like it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:21 PM

62. LMAO!

Nice one!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #30)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:18 PM

85. They keep us techs as far away from the MBA types as possible

My boss got in trouble for playing bullshit bingo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TrogL (Reply #85)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:50 PM

94. That's great!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #30)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:19 PM

142. "Except for MBAs. Most of them are idiots within their area of expertise."

In the past year I've worked with three people with MBAs (one of whom got fired a couple of months ago) and a single potted plant probably has more common sense than all three of 'em put together.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rob H. (Reply #142)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:39 PM

150. As my 82-year-old mother is fond of saying.

In future millennia, when studies are done of the long gone American culture, the finding will be that we were a relatively progressive society done in by something called an MBA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rob H. (Reply #142)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:46 PM

151. To be honest, some of them are okay,

but they were probably fairly bright before they went to college. What raises a red flag is the ones who have to remind you they have an MBA every time they have a conversation with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr.Bill (Reply #30)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:15 PM

155. Want to destroy the Chinese economy?

Carpet bomb them with MBAs and HR "professionals." That should bring them to their knees in short order.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #155)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:23 PM

156. In one of Art Buchwald's columns

a long time ago he said the US government should pay the way for any Chinese citizen who wants to go to Harvard law or business school, as long as they agree to go back to China after graduating and practice there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hun Joro (Reply #25)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:13 PM

69. A few misguided (or bigoted) PhD's wouldn't be enough to raise the IQ average

of the FOX News population. I know some highly educated people who despite their intelligence go to fundamentalist christian churches every Sunday and believe it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:25 PM

32. Wasn't there another study much earlier that showed Fox "News" viewers knew less

about current events?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sakabatou (Reply #32)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:45 PM

42. yes, like blaming Acorn for fraudulent voting in 2012.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #42)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:17 AM

114. And here's the study for those wanting to know about it (HuffPo)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sakabatou (Reply #114)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:01 PM

175. But that is not the study described in the OP.

The Huffington Post article you linked to is describing an entirely different study (even though that is the link found in the press release about the "IQ study") - here is the release from the college about the poll conducted regarding how informed consumers of different media are:

  http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2012/confirmed/final.pdf

No mention of IQ at all. No mention of anyone named P. Nichols.

There is no link to the study in the OP because it doesn't exist - there is no such study with those conclusions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Make7 (Reply #175)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:11 PM

180. I know, I was referring to my own post



Oh well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sakabatou (Reply #180)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:31 PM

183. I know, I wanted to clarify for people browsing the reply titles.

I thought my edit made that more clear. (Perhaps not.)

One of the biggest red flags about the "study" in the OP is the fact that the "press release" links to an article about an entirely different study with a different purpose, methodology, and conclusion. That article happens to be the one you linked to at HuffPo.

It's funny that the text for the link to HuffPo in the "press release" in the OP is: More info to this study can be seen here.

Um, no. More info about the "study" cannot be seen at that link. There is no more information anywhere - the "study" in the OP doesn't exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Make7 (Reply #183)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:39 PM

184. Stupid autistic me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sakabatou (Reply #184)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:07 PM

189. I don't know how you're responsible for the lack of clarity in my writing.

But if you want to take credit for it, I'm willing to bestow that honor upon you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Make7 (Reply #189)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:09 PM

190. *shrugs*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sakabatou (Reply #32)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:53 PM

141. Now THAT I believe. Believed in WMD, Saddam responsible for 9/11 etc. They don't know current

events they are willfully misled and believe what is told to them.

Sad really that intelligent people can be so dumb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:36 PM

35. Interesting the article is on Yahoo. The 80 IQ set has taken over Yahoo blogs. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #35)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:46 PM

43. It's from 'PRWEB' - for $199 they will get anything you say on Yahoo News

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #43)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:30 PM

63. +1

PRWEB - I almost certainly a bogus article folks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:36 PM

36. Let's Be Clear:

 

watching FAUX News did not cause test subjects lower IQ test scores.

these folks had a lower IQ wayyyyy before they began watching FAUX.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:38 PM

37. I don't think this is real. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flabbergasted (Reply #37)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:03 PM

55. OYOH, I would think that people who don't beleive it is not real would be fox news viewers. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Flabbergasted (Reply #37)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:56 PM

78. I don't think it is real either.

There is a reason why 100 is the average IQ; it's because the majority of people hover near that number. There are not enough 80-IQ people (which is just 10 points from mentally retarded, if I may use an old term) to make up the large numbers of FOX viewers.

This would have been a lot more believable if the difference had been perhaps 5 points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #78)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:27 AM

100. How many viewers does Fox have? At most 2,000,000 and I think it's way less than

that. Out of over 3 hundred million people, that is a tiny %.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #100)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:00 AM

123. The US population is 314 million

If you subtract the 20 percent that are children, that would be about 250 million aged 15 and over.

People with an IQ of 80 make up one percent of the population, but to just average to 80, we can include all those between say, 70 and 90 IQ. This is about 22 percent, or a bit over 50 million.

So you are right; the numbers are there - easily.

I still don't believe this though, even though it makes sense that people with a lower IQ would gravitate toward FOX. I just think there are a lot of people with normal intelligence that are just whacked out when it comes to politics.

I think if someone did a good, legitimate study of this, there would be an average IQ difference, but it would be small, like 5 percent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chemisse (Reply #123)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:58 PM

188. Thanks for doing the math, I am terrible at math. I don't think it's true either,.for one

thing, a lot of people with a low IQ are wonderful people and would be instinctively turned off all the vitriol on Fox.

And the same is true of people with high IQs in reverse, some are just hateful, nasty people.

Uninformed I believe to be true. How if you use Fox as your main 'news' source could you be informed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:40 PM

39. This was done by a conservative non profit group... the findings do not surprise me

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:44 PM

41. only twenty?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:49 PM

44. It's fun to believe that the other side is stupid, but an IQ of 80 is a stretch.

Seriously, 80 is only 10 points above mild mental retardation. If you believe the other side is THAT dumb, you're only fooling yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:51 PM

46. Only 20? I would have guessed more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:52 PM

48. So... Does this mean stupid people watch Fox "News", or does Fox "News" make you stupider?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:59 PM

52. OK Billo

Now who's the "pinhead."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:00 PM

53. Well, I guess Psychology Today is also into satire.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201003/why-liberals-are-more-intelligent-conservatives

Here's a snippet:

Because all members of a hunter-gatherer tribe are genetic kin or at the very least friends and allies for life, sharing resources among them does not qualify as an expression of liberalism as defined above. Given its absence in the contemporary hunter-gatherer tribes, which are often used as modern-day analogs of our ancestral life, it may be reasonable to infer that sharing of resources with total strangers that one has never met or is not likely ever to meet – that is, liberalism – was not part of our ancestral life. Liberalism may therefore be evolutionarily novel, and the Hypothesis would predict that more intelligent individuals are more likely than less intelligent individuals to espouse liberalism as a value.

Analyses of large representative samples, from both the United States and the United Kingdom, confirm this prediction. In both countries, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to be liberals than less intelligent children. For example, among the American sample, those who identify themselves as “very liberal” in early adulthood have a mean childhood IQ of 106.4, whereas those who identify themselves as “very conservative” in early adulthood have a mean childhood IQ of 94.8.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LancetChick (Reply #53)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:18 PM

61. Calling that 'satire' may be generous

That write is infamous:

http://jezebel.com/5786394/the-illustrious-career-of-a-crap-psychologist
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/17/satoshi-kanazawa-black-women-less-attractive_n_863327.html
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/09/10/satoshi-kanazawa-is-back/

Notice there's no reference for where his 'data' come from.

Having said that, a variation of a large group of 5 points from the mean is possible; of 20 just isn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:01 PM

54. heh heh heh ... like dogs barking at vacuum cleaners

"Less intelligent animals rely on instinct when confronted by something which they do not understand. This is an ancient survival reaction all animals, including humans, exhibit. It's a very simple phenomenon, really; think about a dog being afraid of a vacuum cleaner. He doesn't know what a vacuum is or if it may harm him, so he becomes agitated and barks at it."



(Damn, I wish I was sophisticated enough and enlightened enough not to find that ball-ticklingly funny.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:09 PM

57. 80 used to be the cutoff

For intellectual disability. It has been lowered in recent decades.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:11 PM

58. It's a fake story, people.

If you don't believe me, do a little research. Try to find P. Nichols & the Intelligence Institute wif da Google.

This was apparently a fraudulent story distributed by PRWeb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #58)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:38 PM

66. shhhh

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to certainot (Reply #66)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:18 PM

144. I have a confession to make.

I sent the article to My Favorite Wingnut, fully knowing it was false.

I did it in retaliation for all the bullshit Fox crap he sends me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #144)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:05 PM

206. the perfect gift for republicans! thanks for the suggestion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:34 PM

65. My poor ex husband.. It's still incredible to

me how otherwise seemingly intelligent people can get sucked in to the point of regurgitating fox "news" points and swearing "it's the truth". Not knowing their Brainwashing is Complete right up to guaranteeing 20 Points Lower to their IQ.

It would totally be deal breaker for me now.

EDIT: Oh dear, I got busted again.. thinking something was true.. not reading about the satire part or going to the link. oh well, it was fun to write anyway.. everything holds true except the "20 Points in IQ" DIP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:02 PM

68. Palin on science

"And sometimes these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good, things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not."

- former Gov. Sarah Palin (R-Alaska), 2008

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:48 PM

70. One,

of the ladies my wife golfs with said her husband is fully informed….he watches Fox News. Ya, right LOL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 08:53 PM

71. A real chicken / egg connundrum

Does fox attract those slow on the uptake, or does watching Fox produce this result? One could only figure this out by making high IQ folks watch Fox and retest to see if IQ dropped, or perhaps making Fox viewers watch only PBS and see if scores improve.

Of course such experimentation on humans might well violate the Geneva Conventions....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to quaker bill (Reply #71)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:45 PM

165. Confirmation -- or insult?

Intelligent, learned people would surely hate FoX Propaganda Channel -- if I am any indicator. Even when it isn't political (as on a crime story) it quickly makes me angry. Riling people is not news; it is manipulation. Smart people recognize and loathe crude attempts to manipulate them. People who abhor FoX News shut it out.

Level of intelligence? Sesame Street is less troublesome. But it heavily uses humor, some of it working on different esthetic levels. It has to be tolerable at the level of a parent who might try to use it to influence a child's learning even if its primary focus is children. FoX is deadly serious even if it doesn't merit belief. Heck, North Korean 'news' is offered as deadly-serious material even if it is ludicrous if contrasted to official news from the People's Republic of China on anything outside China. I trust Russian and Chinese news about the US more than I trust FoX news.

Someone who can see what FoX tries to do can avoid damage. Now contrast PBS' News Hour. It competes with the superficial news coverage on the three main networks, but it can go in depth on a subject as ABC, CBS, or NBC Nightly News (or for that matter, CNN Headline News) can't. It can cover three stories in one hour-long program with nearly twenty minutes each without filler. After ads, the 30-minute newscasts reduce to about twenty minutes and five to eight stories and obviously little on each.

But...FoX News is 24/7 and has good resources, right? Of course. But much of it is analysis directed at pushing a political agenda. Are America's hard-working and worthy super-rich in need of even higher profits and executive compensation... or much more, irrespective of the human cost to people who really don't matter? Is Barack Obama simply evil or is he the agent of destruction of America? That is not what I think of as useful analysis. I prefer "what are the economic consequences of proposed changes of tax laws?", "does this offered agreement make sense?", or "What will the Russians do if Assad uses chemical weapons?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pbrower2a (Reply #165)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:34 PM

177. I did not come up with the results

I just proposed a controlled experiment to test them. Most testing I have read indicates that Fox viewers know less about the world than people who watch no news at all. Is it that Fox misinforms, or is it that their average viewer has an 80 IQ. (it is really hard to correctly inform anyone so challenged)

(Of course an average of 80 suggests that there are at least some 60s and 70s in the mix.) Having volunteered with the mentally challenged, this result seems less than credible. 80s are fairly dim folks, but when you get down to the 60s and 70s, special testing is required for accuracy as they are well outside of one standard deviation from the norm. Folks at that level must be trained at length just to correctly count back change, if they can grasp the concept at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:11 PM

72. Don't really trust general intelligence measurements myself

However, the fact that Faux Noise viewers have already been shown to be far less informed than viewers of other channels has already been established.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:18 PM

73. From last year: "“IE Users Have Lower IQs” Study Is a Hoax: Here Are Some of the Red Flags"

A widely circulated research study claiming to show that Internet Explorer users have lower IQs has been outed as a hoax.

An outlet calling itself the “AptiQuant Psychometric Consulting Company” threw up a phony website a month ago, copied staff photos from a French site, and issued a press release to reporters. Major newspapers, web sites and television stations from England to the US ran the story.
...
But that’s not what the study claimed to show. If anything, most outlets toned it down. Only some, like The Daily Mail, relayed the full implications:



As Cambridge statistician David Spiegelhalter told the BBC, “these figures are implausibly low – and an insult to IE users.” To their credit, someone at The Daily Mail realized this was batty, and they quickly pulled the story from their site.

http://www.wired.com/business/2011/08/internet-explorer-users-have-lower-iqs-study-is-a-hoax-here-are-some-of-the-red-flags/


This is similar, except in this case they haven't even bothered setting up fake websites. Just a claim from an untraceable 'institute', and an untraceable researcher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:30 PM

75. The Intelligence Institute is also selling...

a bridge in the area of Brooklyn and land west of Miami beach both very cheap to all that believe them!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 09:41 PM

76. I mentioned this study on a blog

and was told that mostly Democrats watch Fox.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:14 PM

84. Not surprising at all considering Mensans (world wide) lean far left.

In fact their Congress of the Intelligent special interest group leans so far left on social issues you would think it was comprised of DUers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:20 PM

86. See Stupid, Find Repuglicans!!!!

 

See Stupid, Find Repuglicans!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Disconnect (Reply #86)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:45 PM

91. Welcome to DU, Disconnect.

Just a tip, you don't have to repeat your subject in the message box....in fact, you don't have to put anything in the message box if you don't want to. Just put your comment in the subject line and end it with n/t (no text) or eom (end of message). That tells everyone that there is nothing more to see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:35 PM

88. I am P. Nichols and the study is real

I'm glad that everyone is reading our study. I want to say that it is real and all data we reported was collected accurately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #88)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:37 PM

89. Thanks for the study and welcome to du!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #89)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:34 AM

110. New details about study


The group that funded our research did not want to be associated with the findings. Because they are a Republican PAC, they want to maintain their anonymity. They represent moderate Republicans and the interest of the party. They understand they cannot negotiate with the Fox News demo and they will never win another general election until they remove this ugliness from their base. They do not want the Republican party to continue to represent hate, ignorance, homophobia, and xenophobia.

The results of the study were collected and reported using a standard practices. The Intelligence Institute is a pseudonym created to take the "heat" from the right.

PRWeb has flagged the release because they need more proof. Our representatives have spoken with PRWeb's Executive team and are going to present the information proving this study's findings were in fact collected and reported properly. PRWeb recently had a problem with a fraudulent release about a Google acquisition and are being careful not to publish "fake" news.

We have created an impromptu tumblr account to keep the media and public up to date concerning this study.

@pnicholstii
theintelligenceinstitute.tumblr.com

Sincerely,

P. Nichols
Twitter @pnicholstii theintelligenceinstitute.tumblr.com

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #110)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:19 AM

120. So good seeing your comments. Thanks, so much, welcome to D.U. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #110)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:58 PM

153. Well, OK, wait and see. But those results are pretty staggering.

First of all, the average IQ in the U.S. is a little below 100:

98

http://www.sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm

But for the average of that viewing population to be 80.... how many had to come from the very lowest end of the range?

I'd be very interested to see how you selected your test subjects.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #88)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:51 PM

95. Hey thanks for taking one for the team P. Nichols!

I don't think I could've lasted that long in a room full of Fox News watchers.

And welcome to DU, glad you're here!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #88)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:42 PM

164. I doubt it.

Where is the Intelligence Institute?

If it's real there must be a real website, not just a virtually empty tumblr account.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #88)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:35 PM

170. Really? Where can one see your methodology and actual results?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #88)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:19 PM

193. Are you doing traditional intelligence tests

like the SB or the WAIS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:41 PM

90. Well according to testing...

Binet Scale
70–79 is Borderline Deficiency Mild disability (modern term)
80–89 is Dull Dull Normal (modern term)



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #90)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:37 AM

104. Dull Dull Normal

Yep, that fits all the republicans I know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 10:48 PM

93. What? It took this long to find this out?

Nothing to see here. Old news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:10 AM

98. How dumb are they?

Welllllllllll, if you took the brain of a bee and put it in a bagger, he'd fly backwards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:29 AM

101. Well, file this one under "Duh"

I always wondered if low intelligence people gravitated to Bullshit Mountain or if Bullshit Mountain rained so much stupid on their heads, that they got dumb.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:39 AM

105. An IQ of 80? Nah. That's way too high. This is satire for sure. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:54 AM

106. Did the author, P. Nichols, mean Institute for Intelligence Studies?


Mercyhurst University

When businesses, institutions, nonprofit organizations, or governmental agencies need to reduce uncertainty, one place they can turn to is the Institute for Intelligence Studies at Mercyhurst. Many already have.

The Institute for Intelligence Studies at Mercyhurst University has a research and analysis arm, the Center for Intelligence Research Analysis and Training (CIRAT). This center has provided research and analysis products to clients since 1995. Over the years, it has done research and analysis for agencies such as Department of Defense, the European Union Parliament, Central Intelligence Agency, Procter & Gamble, Coca Cola, Erie Regional Chamber of Commerce, Eriez Magnetics, and many more.

More: http://www.iismu.org/research-analysis

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proReality (Reply #106)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:31 AM

109. We directed link to Huffpo because it showed veracity

The group that funded our research did not want to be associated with the findings. Because they are a Republican PAC, they want to maintain their anonymity. They represent moderate Republicans and the interest of the party. They understand they cannot negotiate with the Fox News demo and they will never win another general election until they remove this ugliness from their base. They do not want the Republican party to continue to represent hate, ignorance, homophobia, and xenophobia.

The results of the study were collected and reported using a standard practices. The Intelligence Institute is a pseudonym created to take the "heat" from the right.

PRWeb has flagged the release because they need more proof. Our representatives have spoken with PRWeb's Executive team and are going to present the information proving this study's findings were in fact collected and reported properly. PRWeb recently had a problem with a fraudulent release about a Google acquisition and are being careful not to publish "fake" news.

We have created an impromptu tumblr account to keep the media and public up to date concerning this study.

@pnicholstii
theintelligenceinstitute.tumblr.com

Sincerely,

P. Nichols

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #109)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:04 AM

119. You don't know the difference between IQ and 'badly informed'

which is, on its own, all the proof we need to see that you know nothing about this area at all, and couldn't administer IQ tests. Hell, it shows you didn't bother to check Wikipedia for some basic information before you started. Whether or not you're the person who put this on PRWEB, or just a random hoaxer (could be another DUer, could be a new visitor), we can't tell, yet. But the HuffPo article just talks about Fox News viewers being badly informed, which is not the same as unintelligent - intelligence tests are not general knowledge quizzes.

Your claim that you invented a bogus "Intelligence Institute" is unbelievable. If you were a real researcher, that on its own would have meant they can just say "see? He makes things up". Creating a Tumblr account using the name means nothing (though it does make you look pretty amateur).

If you think this helps the left, then you're wrong. It just associates some lies with being anti-Fox. At worst, this will be used to say "look at the lying left wingers - they make stuff up to say we're stupid. They can't be trusted. They hate normal people." Of course, it's quite possible that you want that to happen, because you want this hoax to make liberals look bad, whether or not you originated it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proReality (Reply #106)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:34 AM

111. No, I believe he's refering to the made-up one in Birmingham, AL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:00 AM

107. This is troll bait

It's a little too over the top. 7 points maybe, 80 I don't think so. Also "Less intelligent animals rely on instinct when confronted by something they don't undersand". It goes on to make an analogy of a dog and a vacuum cleaner. I'm no defender of Faux News viewers, but this just rings of troll-baiting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tab (Reply #107)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:26 PM

197. It's only 20 points! But yeah, it's baloney.

Maybe conservatives are trying to prove that previous, serious reports of Fox viewers' poorly informed worldview are also nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:30 AM

108. I don't believe this was an actual study... Not even a little.

By the way, the "conservative non-profit group"'s shows it's for real by having such recent articles as the following.

Recent Posts

Study: Fox ‘News’ viewers have an IQ that’s 20 points lower than the U.S. National average
Morning coffee
What we learned from Boehner this morning: the GOP will take everyone hostage for The Wealthy
House Speaker John Boehner will hold a news conference at 11 a.m. ET.
This is where most of us part ways with the Republican Party
Morning coffee: TGIF
To all the seniors who voted Republican to protect Medicare: YOU’VE BEEN HAD!
Midmorning break: warm bath
Virginia Foxx as a metaphor for the GOP’s attitude towards diversity
Chicago
Darden Restaurants takes a stock hit, announces it won’t reduce workers’ hours
“It’s official: Republicans hate the UN more than they like helping people in wheelchairs.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:39 AM

112. This just in to FOX NEWS!!!

Muslim Obama master plan to destroy American is discovered! He's going to kill all out chldren with tarantulas! FOX NEWS ALERT! WHOOP WHOOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:41 AM

113. In other news, water is wet and a bear does indeed, shit in the woods

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:05 AM

115. lol, good article

"The self-identified conservatives' vitals increased over 35% when shown complex or shocking images. The image that caused the most stress was a poorly edited picture of President Obama standing next to a "ghostly" image of a child holding a tarantula."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:40 AM

122. I want to thank you for this link.

If we each take a little time and post this at the work place and forward it to someone else we will slowly win America back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 08:21 AM

124. They could probably knock it down to 18 if they quit watching.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:02 AM

127. No surprise there

I could have told them that without a study

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:07 AM

128. this is known as the "Kilmeade Effect"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:41 AM

130. "While not all conservatives are stupid people, most stupid people are conservative"

don't know the source of that quote, but it's an oldie and a goodie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mountain grammy (Reply #130)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:49 AM

199. Mark Twain, I think. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:12 AM

131. It seems obvious that smart people would avoid Fox "News".

The clips that I see from it on The Daily Show and elsewhere insult my intelligence. Now we find out why their viewers don't worry about that.

This dovetails with those earlier studies showing that Fox "News" viewers believe all sorts of outlandish falsehoods, much more than the consumers of any other news source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:58 AM

132. So they gave everyone watching fox an IQ test, how did they do that?

All newspapers, I have been told, are written at an 8th grade level so that is a none starter.
What about MSNBC and CNN are they made at a junior high level too

Is yahoo is a reliable source? We do know that fox misinforms and misrepresents things. Real statistics show fox viewers are less knowledgeable than DU readers that is easily proved but IQs I have my doubts. Most viewers are not aware that fox is selling crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 10:58 AM

133. n/t

The ability of otherwise intelligent, educated people to suspend their critical thinking skills when it comes to their belief system is a source of never ending amazement to me. I've walked into Doctors, Vets, etc. offices where proselytizing, religious music payed loudly and proudly in the waiting room. I sure would go there myself but that's friggin' scary.

That combined with confirmation bias and the tendency for primates to distrust or even hate groups outside their own troupe, (along with other factors), seem as good an explanation as any as to why some of our countrymen act the way they do.

Against their own interests even

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:00 AM

134. I feel for the RepuliSuckers who let Fox (R) pollute their brainpans

...and so dramatically lower their IQ.

If they ever wake up realize how the Republicans, Inc. have suckered them, there will be Holy Hell to pay...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:57 AM

137. In other news, water wet.

Funny, most of us who have ever had any sort of political "conversation" with a Fox News viewer could have told them that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 12:35 PM

140. That High?

I'm impressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 01:22 PM

143. rofl..

Something we already knew.No study needed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 02:56 PM

148. Hoax for sure

There is no such Inteiigence Institute. It's a fake press release and somebody at Yahoo News got fooled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:54 PM

152. Well it certainly didnt take a genus to figure that out!!

Huh? Oh genius.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 03:59 PM

154. It should be a crime to terrorize

Stupid people. I swear we will have a crisis of Nation Psychosis, if this is allowed to continue.

Billo, is their intellectual icon, cuz he is so, middle of the road, fair and balanced.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Next, to HITLER.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)


Response to gslusher (Reply #157)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:32 PM

158. No it is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #158)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:35 PM

160. yes, it is fake. there are other studies that confirm this

but this particular one is fake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to La Lioness Priyanka (Reply #160)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:39 PM

162. Wow ok I was wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to gslusher (Reply #157)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 04:40 PM

163. Do you agree people who watch foxnews are idiots.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hrmjustin (Reply #163)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:00 PM

167. Obviously a fake story

There's no way that such a large group of people can have that low of an IQ. Intelligence is far more complicated than who is gullible enough to believe what FOX News says. That would put them at around the bottom 10% of the population.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gslusher (Reply #157)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:46 PM

173. I'm not sure why that reply was hidden.

The "study" is obviously not real, therefore the comment seems entirely accurate.

I wonder if the jurors left comments to let us know what the reasoning was for the hide...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:11 PM

168. Fake. But appreciated.

Just go to web site of "The Intelligence Institute" and you'll see they have nothing to do with conducting such studies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 05:43 PM

171. Hoax, imo, and successfully set up to make us look stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 06:05 PM

176. And we used to say the same about CB radios! Listen, OK, but start talking and

your IQ drops 20 points!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:08 PM

179. It sure sounds like a fake study-- probably created to discredit real studies

that show that Fox news viewers were seriously uninformed (Farleigh Dickinson University study) which Fox news tried to dispute http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/05/24/fairleigh-dickinson-foxs-response-to-our-survey/186686

Or the work of Satoshi Kanazawa that propose and use data to support the idea that conservatives are less intelligent than liberals:

http://csr.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=150:is-atheism-linked-to-intelligence&catid=25:research-news&Itemid=59

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 07:24 PM

181. I hereby copyright the "Dogs barking at vacuums" meme.



C 2012, DirkGently

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DirkGently (Reply #181)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 09:48 PM

192. Too Late, Dirk

I am quoted using the metaphor in our press release. We'll share the credit with you because our cause is to help the U.S. and it's people.

The results of our study are real and we are presenting them to the necessary news wires tomorrow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #192)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:19 PM

195. Perhaps the meme will outlive this hoax study?

You should give DU the inside scoop on what you're really up to, P.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-giltz/exclusive-pr-guru-behind_b_2268959.html

'Cause it ain't scientific study, is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnicholstii (Reply #192)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:41 AM

200. "we are presenting them to the necessary news wires tomorrow." LOL! You Go Gurl!

Sorry, but this doesn't pass the smell test on so many levels.

If you are from a Conservative group, you would only want news agencies to print this so you can then discredit them for reporting garbage.

Conservatives don't believe in real "research" and only use it to make money and they would certainly NEVER pay for it and then allow it to be used to cast them in a bad light. THEY ONLY SUPPORT RESEARCH THAT PROVIDES THE DESIRED RESULTS. That would be in the contract.

And we all know that Conservatards could never have an "Intelligence Institute"!!!! LMAO!

I do have to say that it is a pretty hilarious story and is anecdotally, though not scientifically at this point, supported by everyone's experences with Conservatives.

Include this in your cover letter for a job at The Onion!

<img src=>

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Sun Dec 9, 2012, 11:26 PM

196. A study based on Meta discussion threads...

 

would most likely return similar (or lower), results.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 12:39 AM

198. Sorry, but no. This story is a hoax. I'd bet money on it.

Someone at Yahoo News got punked with a fake story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 01:48 AM

201. personally, i don't believe this. iq 80 is more than 1 standard deviation from the norm, borderline

 

mentally retarded. i know plenty of fox viewers, and none are near-retarded. most are actually quite intelligent.

if the 'average' for fox viewers is borderline retarded, that means somewhere around 50% *are* retarded. did they do their research in a group home or something?

political differences aren't about 'intelligence,' however defined. i call 'research' like this propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Original post)

Mon Dec 10, 2012, 02:57 AM

203. fighting the urge to read the comments on a yahoo story that says this.

i swear yahoo is purposefully inflammatory sometimes. they know their demo and keep them clicking the links. their "polls" are almost exclusively ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Whovian (Original post)

Tue Dec 11, 2012, 12:01 AM

208. Debunked - here's a Salon article explaining how and why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread