🧵 Behavioural "science"

Anonymous at Thu, 10 Oct 2024 20:48:19 UTC No. 16419777

The fields of behavioural science and genetics are a meme. It's garbage. I redid the MENSA-Norway IQ test after a few years (I think it's supposed to test spatial IQ) and the first 15-20 or so questions were easy, basically just subtracting and adding and the same 3 patterns. If I tried then I could probably get a higher score (not like the answers aren't on YouTube). I don't think MENSA is the same as doing a real WAIS test but it still seems like it something somebody could easily practice for (again, it's basically just a few patterns) and depends on
1. How serious or committed someone is to the test
2. Prior experience with this form of logic (which is culturally biased and defeats the whole point of the exam if it it meant to be hereditary and the score can be massively changed by this).
3. Any major illness or pain
Someone I know took the test and scored probably well below 100 and is still functioning and capable (not saying who it was because I don't want to be datamined)

Literally the first thing that comes up when you search heritability in Google
>Heritability does not indicate what proportion of a trait is determined by genes and what proportion is determined by environment. So, a heritability of 0.7 does not mean that a trait is 70% caused by genetic factors; it means that 70% of the variability in the trait in a population is due to genetic differences among people.

Also "scientists" haven't solved the missing heritability problem after how many years or found specific SNPs that contribute or are linked to anything or have made any actual advancements in years. It's just a bunch of people warring on internet forums and posting contradicting studies. The only important thing after centuries has been germ theory and basic Mendelian inheritance. The studies on race and IQ and heritability are a meme too by using normal distribution.