Re: No Genius Left Behind

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> "R. Steve Walz" wrote:
> >
> > Herman Rubin wrote:
> > >
> > > I do not think that all expense here is needed or justified.
> > > However, we need it down to a much lower level than 160.  If
> > > we want competent teachers, physicians, etc., for the next
> > > generation, we will need to get it well below the genius
> > > level, as we need those who can do similar things year after
> > > year.
> >
> > Absolutely, most teachers are only 110-130 IQ. The IQ 160 genius is
> > only 1 in 200 or 300 people.
> 
> The IQ-160's are the folks who are going to make the Nobel Prize
> winning breakthroughs that seriously improve society: Cure cancer,
> make fusion power work, stop the OzoneHole and GlobalWarming,
> save species extinction, reclaim toxic waste, improve crop yields,
> to name a few.
----------------
Some do. Most don't. I didn't, though I am writing a book. 
My IQ was tested at 165.

 
> That's why it is so important that No_Geniuses are overlooked in
> the *Insane_Quest* spending Billion$$$ to see that every IQ-75
> Retarded Gork LOOZer makes some minimum score on the latest
> standardized test, between gruntz and twitchez...(NCLB).
----------------------------------
Do you have ANY IDEA actually how FEW IQ-75 people there are, or how
many of them are simply retarded, and seldom genetically?? These are
NOT the people in question in political debates about educational
spending!! But of course you're such an idiot that you can't make 
sense of such facts.
Steve