Talk:Intelligence testing

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Cut from end of article:

"why different races or cultural groups have significantly different scores" This is attempting to be an encyclopedia, and when discussing science the word 'significantly' should not be used lightly. user:stevendavy

Many have ascribed such differences to the cultural bias of the tests [1].

I take it cultural bias in intelligence test is a myth [2]. Sorry for being misinformed. BillyBoy 08:42, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

You are not misinformed (the claims are well-known). I would just rather we provided a balanced and well-organized treatment. I have spent a lot of time helping to develop Wikipedia's race and intelligence article series, with a stress on objectivity, impartiality, and balance.
I would attribute this claim to Adrian Dove and also explain a bit more about why anyone would want to ascribe the difference in scores to vocabulary or to knowledge of inner-city life. --Ed Poor 08:46, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
  • In the fall of 1994, the publication of Hermstein and Murray's book The Bell Curve sparked a new round of debate about the meaning of intelligence test scores and the nature of intelligence. The debate was characterized by strong assertions as well as by strong feelings. Unfortunately, those assertions often revealed serious misunderstandings of what has (and has not) been demonstrated by scientific research in this field. Although a great deal is now known, the issues remain complex and in many cases still unresolved. Another unfortunate aspect of the debate was that many participants made little effort to distinguish scientific issues from. political ones, Research findings were often assessed not so much on their merits or their scientific standing as on their supposed political implications. (Stalking the Wild Taboo)
Thanks for the answer. You mentioned Wikipedia's race and intelligence article series, with a stress on objectivity, impartiality, and balance. Isn't the object of Conservapedia to avoid that kind of wikipedian liberal bias?
BillyBoy 08:58, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

The irony of you tarring everyone with one brush ...

That particular article series is well-done. I had a lot to do with it. "Impartiality" is not liberal bias. Pretending to be impartial while cherry-picking sources that support your own POV is the problem. --Ed Poor 09:07, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Wikipedia's bias

I've tidied up the Wikipedia articles several times, but I saw today that the old liberal bias has crept back again. Jensen and also The Bell Curve are vilified, and Gould's POV is exalted. Gould puts words into others' mouths, and Wikipedia lets him get away with it. (I guess evolutionists like Gould can do no wrong, and conservatives can do no right, eh?) --Ed Poor Talk 13:33, 20 July 2007 (EDT)

At some time I tried to fix Wikipedia article providing references to the relevant works of the real scientific research but all got removed so that cannot even find in edit history. If there is any single article in Wikipedia that provides clearly false, misleading and biased information, backed up only by the supporting team watching the edits, then this one article it is. H22 (talk) 16:04, 16 October 2016 (EDT)