Posted on 12/22/2015 4:43:59 AM PST by SkyPilot
Imperial College London has found that two networks of genes determine whether people are intelligent or not so bright.
Genes which make people intelligent have been discovered and scientists believe they could be manipulated to boost brain power.
Researchers have believed for some time that intellect is inherited with studies suggesting that up to 75 per cent of IQ is genetic, and the rest down to environmental factors such as schooling and friendship groups.
But until now, nobody has been able to pin-point exactly which genes are responsible for better memory, attention, processing speed or reasoning skills. Now Imperial College London has found that two networks of genes determine whether people are intelligent or not-so-bright.
They liken the gene network to a football team. When all the players are in the right positions, the brain appears to function optimally, leading to clarity of thought and what we think of as quickness or cleverness.
However when the genes are mutated or in the wrong order, it can lead to dullness of thinking, or even serious cognitive impairments.
Scientists believe that there must be a 'master switch' regulating the networks and if they could find it, they could 'switch on' intelligence for everyone.
"We know that genetics plays a major role in intelligence but until now haven’t known which genes are relevant," said Dr Michael Johnson, lead author of the study from the Department of Medicine at Imperial College.
"This research highlights some of genes involved in human intelligence, and how they interact with each other."
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
| Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar · | ||
Thanks SkyPilot, extra to APoD.
Old joke from the WWII boot camp days:
Sgt. hands mop to recruit and says "Start mopping."
Recruit says, "But Sarge, I'm a college graduate!"
Sgt. says, "Oh, then let me show you how."
manipulating” or “switching on” things
I think they are referring to what I call trying to make chicken salad out of chicken s**t. Just won’t work.
As for your last paragraph, I think it has more to do with Genesis 12:3.
Worms.
Can.
Big ass!
Given the cul-de-sac most funded scientists have allowed themselves to be restricted, I’d be inclined to ask “how would YOU know what intelligence is?” :\
“I wonder if IQ tests perhaps measure problem solving of a particular sort and that perhaps the variations in results are really because people of different races solve problems in different ways.”
If those different ways are “well” and “poorly,” then you have a point.
Some races just have more dumb-asses and fewer geniuses than others.
***** “75 per cent of IQ is genetic” *****
Son Nuclear Power-plant Operator
Daughter Linguistic Anthropologist, Historian, Author
Daughter Theoretical Mathematician, Statistical Mathematician
Me = salesman
So the Wife must have cheated on me a few times... gonna be an interesting conversation ;^)
Paradox: "My modest 135 IQ, while nothing to sneer at overall, makes me a freakin Einstein among “my fellow hispanicsâ€..."
libertylover: "I wonder if IQ tests perhaps measure problem solving of a particular sort and that perhaps the variations in results are really because people of different races solve problems in different ways."
First of all, nobody should expose their own IQ's in public, any more than you'd expose your private parts -- it's indecent.
Keep it properly clothed, then if you truly do have some IQ, people will quickly surmise that from your words and actions.
Second, in today's world, "average IQ" is a function of previous social structures.
In ancient lands ruled for millenniums by a small, capable aristocracy, where the vast majority of humans were mere beasts of burden -- valued far more for their brawn than brain -- among them you will find a few geniuses, but much lower average IQs.
Amongst other groups whose very survival depended on their mental agility, where stupidity was effectively a death sentence, there you will find the average IQs much higher.
And, of course, from all those lands most Americans are self-selected immigrants, selected for their ambition, courage and, yes, intelligence to improve their lives in a new land of opportunity.
So Americans generally score higher than their fellow countrymen who stayed home in their native lands.
Finally it's been noted that in the past 100+ years average IQs slowly increased, even amongst, or especially amongst, those groups which score lowest.
And that is a HUGE problem for Democrats, because any people eventually reach the point where they begin to grasp that Democrat political-economic diagnoses are false and their nostrums quack, intended only to maintain their class dependence on Democrat Big Government.
Such people begin to seek more uplifting ideas less committed to Democrat politics.
It's why Democrats constantly bombard us with not just high quality new immigrants, but more to their purposes, the worst of the worst, future Democrat voters.
Without them, Democrats as a national party would slowly fade away.
It also explains why liberals have taken control of the educational system, to keep hidden the paucity of their ideas and the tyrannical, deceitful methods by which they are advanced.
When did I do that?
No, of course you didn't but, ahem, one of our posters here did, just as I quoted in #51 above.
Even then, it was only in service of a higher point, namely, that groups with lower average IQs still include some who are very bright indeed.
You might call that a paradox.
I'm only saying it's a function of thousands of years of social structures which either reward or punish brain over brawn.
In short: when jocks rule, you get more jocks and when nerds rule, you'll get more nerds.
Nothing mystical or supernatural about it.
They why did you include me by name in your comment like that?
Even then, it was only in service of a higher point, namely, that groups with lower average IQs still include some who are very bright indeed.
No one is disputing that. That is why I posted a graph of the IQ Bell Curve - which points that out exactly.
I'm only saying it's a function of thousands of years of social structures which either reward or punish brain over brawn. In short: when jocks rule, you get more jocks and when nerds rule, you'll get more nerds.
People with higher intelligence are "nerds?" What is the scientific definition of a "nerd"? You throw out sweeping statements such as that, but you demand everyone else police themselves. Yours is a very strange post.
Because in my post #51 I quoted from your own post #8, hoping to make a point about average IQs amongst various human sub-groups, i.e., Jews & Hispanics.
SkyPilot: "People with higher intelligence are 'nerds?'
What is the scientific definition of a 'nerd'? "
Why-ever do you wish to debate the definition of "nerd"?
I simply used it as an informal term for "smart people", as opposed to more physically endowed "jocks".
What's to debate?
So I'll repeat one point I'm trying to make, in hopes you will accept it without taking further offense:
So what, exactly, is your problem with this?
I’m pretty sure I got some good genes when it comes to intelligence.
But what I need is a rich gene. Because I’m constantly questioning, “if I’m so smart, how come I ain’t rich?”
Thanks for a thoughtful response. I still wonder though, since if you compare say, blacks to whites, blacks have or tend to have different noses, different lips, different hair, etc. so it seems possible, perhaps probable, that their brains work a little differently too.
I haven’t read “The Bell Curve” and I wonder if they tried to vary the testing methods in order to overcome what could be an unintended bias.
Jews have had a particularly bad time of it historically, and probably the more stupid ones have failed to survive, while the smart ones did. Africa had major towns and cities, but the people who were captured and sold as slaves were often taken from the forest and undeveloped areas. It is likely that the more enterprising even in those days might have gravitated to the cities or escaped into the forest. Thus those brought to the Americas may have not been the most intelligent. Survival in slavery was not usually a product of intelligence, but of physical strength and obedience to orders. Culturally, of course, Jews, Orientals and other Asians place a strong emphasis on education and diligent study. Also, it was not easy for these populations to flourish in this country decades ago.
My younger son was severely dyslexic, but had a really fine people sense. Although he ended up being a high school dropout, he married a college graduate, has two fine children and manages his own business. I always told him not to worry about the reading and writing because he could always hire a secretary. He knew how to charm people and engender cooperation. He tells me his 8 year old has twice his social intelligence, gets very high grades and has no dyslexia, and is very cute. I look forward to seeing how he turns out.
I also think our education system does dyslexics a severe disservice. My brother was also severely dyslexic. Both did not begin to be able to read until the 5th grade. Perhaps it would make more sense to have such children learn more from dealing with other subjects than reading and writing (except in small doses), until they showed the readiness to learn reading and writing. They enjoyed making things and drawing among other activities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.