Quote from: TDoS on Jun 10, 2026, 06:08 PMNonsense. That is just your ego speaking. You are on the high side of average, but you aren't the only one with functioning neurons at a level beyond that of Joe Average. And then some. I'll include even K-Dog in here on general principles based on nothing more than my personal experience dealing with EE's.

I never claimed to be the only one with functional synapses.  Nor is the precise percentage of stupid  people important.  Relative to me, it's a lot higher than 90%.😁  Relative to you, it might be 70%. lol. The salient point is my experience has been that stupid people are randomly distributed between drug users and non-users.  I encounter them in equal frequency regardless of their choice.  Here, we are all smart, most of us are drug users of one sort or another.  AFAIK, you are the only one who abstains from both drugs and alcohol.  This tells us nothing about stupid people, since none are represented here.

RE

Quote from: RE on Jun 10, 2026, 07:28 PM

Quote from: TDoS on Jun 10, 2026, 06:08 PMNonsense. That is just your ego speaking. You are on the high side of average, but you aren't the only one with functioning neurons at a level beyond that of Joe Average. And then some. I'll include even K-Dog in here on general principles based on nothing more than my personal experience dealing with EE's.

I never claimed to be the only one with functional synapses.

True, you do something more interesting. If you think it, you being above average intelligence, you consider your statements on the topic to be as informed as someone who has done it. I can see it working in some specialties. But certainly not others. Example...."As a child I learned to shoot a gun at camp....now I will explain sniper tactics to survivalists at peakoil.com". You were quite specific in the hows and whys of using a firearm against non-paper targets. At specific long ranges. Someone with real life experience at such things might find such an assumption of imbued real world performance from some practice as a child as....an interesting perspective.

It isn't always about functioning synapses. It is about projecting a small, perhaps barely related experience, to mastery. Very intelligent people do this all the time and can get away with it. Until they run into a person who has earned their mastery the real way. By doing it.

Shooting is a perishable skill. I know that from experience. But as I mentioned earlier (perhaps erased, but it was during the Charlie Kirk posting and someone's comment on the precision necessary to make such an easy shot and I mentioned my return to long range shooting) the experience is still experience. If the mind is still there, even if the skills have faded, the experience sticks. Sometimes, so does the skill itself.

Same with claimed surgical skills. Motorcycle skills from riding around NYC and hanging out with folks pretending to be Hardly Ableson bad asses, or Ricky Racers perhaps?

You have provided many examples of your deductive reasoning, obviously.

Quote from: RENor is the precise percentage of stupid  people important.  Relative to me, it's a lot higher than 90%.😁

You act like you are alone at that level. You aren't. 90th percentile on the last normal distribution I checked only  equates to maybe an IQ of 120. You sure you don't want to change that percentile? 😂I would have guessed that you would give yourself more credit....like what my sister and I have at least. She stayed in the holler, married a good guy, and never used it in the least. Her older brother did...better.

Quote from: RERelative to you, it might be 70%. lol.

lol indeed, let me know how far off AI is.

On a standard intelligence (IQ) distribution, the 90th percentile corresponds to an IQ score of approximately 120. This means an individual with this score performs better than 90% of the general population.

Quote from: REThe salient point is my experience has been that stupid people are randomly distributed between drug users and non-users.

Could be. I can't refute your experience with using drugs or the kind of people you were using with.

Quote from: REI encounter them in equal frequency regardless of their choice.

I encounter them at low frequency if at all. I attribute this discrepancy to the difference between the kind of people we associate with.

Quote from: REHere, we are all smart, most of us are drug users of one sort or another.  AFAIK, you are the only one who abstains from both drugs and alcohol.  This tells us nothing about stupid people, since none are represented here.
RE

Indeed. I will agree that as we both, aside from this site, have hung out with different folks and different classes of people over our lives. And have developed different ideas on drug users. You, as someone familiar with such folks and are around them far more than I am, see them evenly distributed between smart and stupid. I, as a non-user....don't see users much....but I also don't see stupid folks very often. Or users. So my perspective is different. Correlations matter in statistics.

A selection bias problem perhaps. I would recommend improving the clientele you hang with, and seeing if the ratio changes to a ratio more similar to mine. I understand that you are limited in this regard however.

Another theory is that users naturally mix with other users. You mix with users, and see users as evenly distributed between smart or less smart. I was always a bummer at parties in high school or college because I didn't drink. Or smoke. Or do drugs or whatever. I rode motorcycles. Went to the range. And then discovered later in life that the folks I was learning from, then teaching, and then doing state of the art research for, were not users, and were generally all quite smart. As long as we can agree that the award of Piled higher and Deeper is some indicator of above average intelligence above the norm anyway.

No, I'm not 90th percentile, but I do credit people who are 90th percentile as being reasonably smart.  Actual percentile?  99.97, 3 sd. Statistically, ~3 in 10,000 people are smarter than me.  I've met a few in my life, not many.  I make no claim of mastery of any topic, but I know a lot about many topics, make connections others don't and I can generally find solutions to problems other people find intractable.

On this particular topic, besides being  smart, I have a pretty thorough experience also. both my own and acquaintance with others.  So I think I can justifiably say I present a well informed opinion.

RE

I think I am a mere centurion.  One in a hundred.  The dirt on the bottom of a shoe.

Quote from: K-Dog on Today at 10:51 AMI think I am a mere centurion.  One in a hundred.  The dirt on the bottom of a shoe.

Plenty smart enough,  and you have the added and VERY important quality of having CFS(Common Fucking Sense), which many very smart people lack.  1:100 puts your IQ at 135, which I would guess to be about right.  I come in at ~155 on Wechsler (most common), although I have tested higher on MABII.  I don't buy scores over 160 on any test, there aren't enough people who score that high to properly norm the test.

RE

Quote from: RE on Jun 11, 2026, 07:02 PMI make no claim of mastery of any topic, but I know a lot about many topics, make connections others don't and I can generally find solutions to problems other people find intractable.

I don't doubt this statement. I really liked your explanation of genes previously. Perhaps the only difference between us comes down to a peculiar characteristic.....an ability perhaps, as opposed to raw intelligence.

I make a claim of being a polymath only within a small set of topics, make connections others can't and I can generally find solutions to problems that other people find intractable. I then deliver a result. Results, as it turns out, can be quite lucrative. A small difference really, but on such small things can a life turn.

Quote from: REOn this particular topic, besides being  smart, I have a pretty thorough experience also both my own and acquaintance with others.  So I think I can justifiably say I present a well informed opinion.
RE

We are all older here, and have pretty thorough experience, on our own, and via acquitance with others. I would consider your opinion generally more informed than not (dependning on topic), yes. Particularly if the obvious biases are removed, but that can be done relatively easily, and they aren't as hard coded into your doom views as most.

I can present  well informed opinion. In my world it is mostly referred to as analysis. Sometimes I choose to make them more than well informed. Those are designed to be irrefutable. Such is science.

Quote from: K-Dog on Today at 10:51 AMI think I am a mere centurion.  One in a hundred.  The dirt on the bottom of a shoe.

Did you think this before or after consuming mind altering hallucinogens?

I didn't have any trouble producing results back in the day.  I just didn't like the job.  I didn't like academia much either, I was just good at it.  Mainly, I didn't like the society, from the time I was old enough to have 2 sets of friends, the boys I played futbol on Ipanema Beach with from the favela and the boys I went to school with from the FSoA Embassy diplomatic corps.  I was already a socialist by the time I returned from Rio at 10.  I positively hated Nixon and Vietnam.  I've been disgusted by the politics, consumerism and the plastic world of Big Yellow Taxi my whole life.  So I dropped out of it and did what I liked.  I coached a lot of good gymmies along the way.  It was fun.


RE