Controversial study suggests human intelligence peaked several thousand years ago and we've been on

So this is the excuse why there is no intelligent life on earth. I suppose their right, I actually read the article and feel there are more than two Genes effected. Replacing these geans with Levi's was the big turning point.

Also, I like to think about how organised religion, pretty much ruling the world, and the dark ages etc.
How much history has literally been suppressed for religious reasons and for contradicting peoples beliefs?

Obviously this is all highly highly speculative before anyone jumps on me

Originally posted by antonia

Originally posted by SprocketUK
Diet. Hfcs, grains, trans fats....those probably have a big role in making people stupid.
I read in one of the paleo diet sites that paleolithic skulls have larger brain pans than neolithic ones.
If true, it could be a more reasonable explanation.

Brain size is not correlated to increased intelligence. If that was the case then a sperm whale should be smarter than your average human, but it isn't.

quite an example to prove your point.
just proves the theory been discussed.

Compare:

Modern architecture

www.hdwallpapers.in...

Ancient architecture

www.google.com...://www.culturefocus.com/egypt/pictures/pyramids-32small.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.culturefocus.com/egypt_pyrami ds.htm&h=260&w=518&sz=47&tbnid=JKDU597XxBDrgM:&tbnh=60&tbnw=120&zoom=1&usg=__Zja5gSGgOHtOe4pBhSra7wTRzbI=&docid=Z1wi0vA0SA_8tM&sa=X&ei=_JWiUJuYO-mMiAL Wn4G4AQ&ved=0CFAQ9QEwBQ&dur=460

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


That could really explain a lot, we live in the age of ignorance while darkness is advocated and encouraged.

Originally posted by Urantia1111
I have little doubt this is true. Once you remove natural selection from the process, as we have done with civilization, its no longer the strongest or smartest that reproduces most successfully. Its whoever has the most sex. Often intelligent people are so preoccupied with carreer that they never get around to having kids. Idiots will have as many as possible.

Watch 'Idiocracy' to see where we're headed and why...

I think tha'ts basically what this guy is arguing in the OP. Since we've removed the culling that kills off the dumb people that means we've pushed evolution aside and obstructed it. So now what?

Honestly, to preserve our humanity we had to do this. We're NOT heartless. We won't sit and let nature kill off dumb people because we're too social as a species to let that happen.

I am not sure it really matters, though. I've made a couple previous posts to this already in this thread. Our technology and knowledge may make this whole argument obsolete. With the ability to engineer our own genome and to augment our brain with computer technology, nanomachines and other things to enhance intelligence or capability, it won't matter so much that natural evolution is slowed. It may be that this guy is right and yet wrong too. It may be that we had to go through this period of loss to get to a period of surplus. And what follows after that is science fiction right now.

Consider this... Birds have wings to fly. We have airplanes. Fish have gills and fins to swim. We have submarines and oxygen tanks and ships. Spiders have legs and webs to climb walls and hang from branches. We've got ropes and hydraulics and pulleys. Bats have eyes that can see in pitch darkness. We have radar and sonar. Cheetah have strong legs and sharp bodies to attain 70mph running speeds. We have motor cars and jet cars that can go upwards of 760mph. The list goes on and on of the things evolution can do that we've done with technology. But let me ask a question. Humans have big brains to allow them to be intelligent. How is that different from birds having wings? We also have computer software AI and model-simulations that can duplicate some of these intelligence feats. How long before our technology can duplicate all of it? And why should we be able to duplicate the feats of flight and swimming underwater and climbing on walls and detecting objects at night and moving at fast speeds and NOT be able to duplicate the feat of intelligence? It's logical...

What's going on is this:
1) We give our fate to natural evolution
-or-
2) We give our fate to controlled evolution

Or a ratio of the two together. It doesn't have to be either/or.

Evolution apparently doesn't understand the human heart. Because it wants to kill everybody that doesn't measure up to its standards. While we're not immune to killing our own kin, we can exercise a more discriminating judgment. Perhaps that's why we're pushing aside natural evolution.

Now... I'm not sure I actually believe all that I just typed. In truth, I don't. There're too many assumptions. The OP is linking to a professor who is making a HYPOTHESIS. It's not proof.

So this is a lot of wind. There's NO way I'd throw away the past 10,000 years. That's CRAZY. Humanity has made a lot of progress, as I see it. We're better than we've ever been. We're living longer. We know how to live in a complex and expansive society. We've gained immense knowledge. NO WAY would I throw this away. And I want more proof. Not just a hypothesis.

It is all just an opinion.
Our minds are just working in different ways then they were thousands of years ago.
Skilled in one area as opposed to another does not mean intelligience is declining,it has been reassigned to less practical functions.

A few munths ago I culdn't even spel blogur and now I are one. We're not bright, we're not inciteful, we're not progressive, we just have internet, you know, the thing that gives you the prerogative to be an ass hole.

reply to post by deepankarm


Well, ignorance and stupidity are two different things. Intelligence is linked more to the structure of the brain rather than sheer size, but this isn't really taught in schools so I wouldn't expect more people to readily know it.

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


I don't have time t read this right now but this would explain so much. Thank you.

As a graduate student I've come to not count on any single study for anything. The problem is that you design a study, conduct it, and then must interpret the results in an analytical way. Your analysis may not interpret the outcome correctly. But far more likely the interpretation will be correct and either the design or carrying out of the study will be flawed in some way (making a valid interpretation incorrect). It's important to realize that the vast majority of studies are flawed in some way. Often, it is plainly stated that they are flawed due to uncontrollable factors. You can only do what you can do and whatever the results of the study you own it.

In most cases it takes a lot hashing out among a lot of minds over a lot of years to come to any consensus.

The next big advance for humanity will be the melding of the mind with the computer. The interface will be at the electrical impulse level of the brain. Genetic manipulation of our species will also be important. That's supposing our screwed up societies make it out of the first half of this century.

reply to post by alfa1


i agree. who's smarter.

the guy you can drop in the middle of the serengeti with nothing and survive like he was in his backyard or the guy you drop in the middle of a national park with nothing and dies in three days because there was no star bucks around.

Well, at least someone is trying to figure out why stupidity and ignorance are running rampant.

It's honestly embarrassing to witness.

You have to remember that statistically, half the people are below average.

It also seems to me that stupid people have a higher birthrate than people with higher IQs.

So, I think that there will come a time in the near future that there will be a major event that will thin the herd. The faster you can process information the better chance you will have to survive.

Just my opinion.

Originally posted by SymbolicLogic
reply to post by AGWskeptic

 

I think you should spend some time reading architecture books.

Or, read some books that deal with microchip fabrication.

Or, read some books that deal with military theory.

Or, read some books that deal with biology.

Or, read some books that deal with AI programming.

Or, read some books that deal with audio engineering.

Or, heck, just read some books.

It's ok, I expected responses like yours.

Your own ego refuses to believe anything that doesn't point to your generation being the apex of civilization.


I hate to break it to you, but it's not.


For Darwinism to work you need adversity, not a guy impatiently waiting for his 90 second hot pocket to be finished.

The only adapting and overcoming you have known is programming your Tivo so it gets all your favorite shows.

There are several billion people standing on the shoulders of giants -


I have accepted my mediocrity


"We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology."
Carl Sagan

Originally posted by Wongbeedman
Also, I like to think about how organised religion, pretty much ruling the world, and the dark ages etc.
How much history has literally been suppressed for religious reasons and for contradicting peoples beliefs?

Obviously this is all highly highly speculative before anyone jumps on me

I agree with you completely. Religion has held back our civilizations advancement for many years. Heck we could be a class 1 civilization by now but instead we have a very simple basic understanding of science and physics.

The article could be true that we did reach our peak intelligence but I do think we have been conditioned into being lazy and dumb for the last couple decades by our Government(s). I also think that it took a dive when both parents had to start working in order to provide for their families. Lack of discipline can lead to a decline in a will to learn and encourage laziness, as it has. Too many parents want to be their kids friends instead of disciplining their kids and all it does is set the kid up for failure later in life.

We have past records of intelligent persons, Shakespeare, Jefferson, Plato, but we don't have all the records, because stupid people usually don't do the great things these men did, and they don't get recorded, unless a great man wrote about them. The idiots just wash away in history.
I'm sure there were scads of idiots alive at the same time as these great men, we just didn't have Ye Olde Failblog to show us.

I doubt I'll get dropped off in the Serengeti. I'm pretty sure though that my ability to feed myself now depends as much on my ability to operate a computer as it does my knowing not to plant 150 day corn in North Dakota or my proficiency at making arrow heads.

I think part of the "dumb" factor is that modern society allows it. Even a person with below average IQ is capable of performing some pretty complex operations. Sure, they'll not be making any great strides in theoretical physics, but they can be very productive members of society performing necessary work. The problem is that they can get along just fine by being an ignorant lazy welfare case or career fast food employee thanks to a social net that removes the need for any kind of competitive behavior whatsoever.

So too, we shouldn't discount the manipulative power of society on people. Large swaths of the population simply don't regard education and knowledge as cool. It's cooler to roll with some 20s and have a loud stereo than it is to read something. Likewise, it is cooler to consume and be seen to consume than it is to devote oneself to the pursuit of knowledge (and just to be sure, the only people who ever make any great theoretical or practical impacts are those who devote their very being to their field, and that just isn't cool).

reply to post by Erectus


You assume that we live in some utopia where people automatically get jobs.

I know plenty of intelligent, qualified, people who can't even get a job at Starbucks.

Besides, a GPA doesn't even measure intellect. So what planet are you living on and how do I get there?