As If The Cowards Of Hamas Have Not...
News2 mins ago
Scottish Brains Larger
Is it not wonderful to see that researchers have proven and published the fact that Scottish brains are larger than the rest?
Is this not, however, something we all knew already?
How else could we have produced Logie-Baird, Watt, Alexander Graham Bell, Macintosh,and so many many more?
I can go to bed happy tonight now that the scientific community has stated the obvious ......!!!!
Is this not, however, something we all knew already?
How else could we have produced Logie-Baird, Watt, Alexander Graham Bell, Macintosh,and so many many more?
I can go to bed happy tonight now that the scientific community has stated the obvious ......!!!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rich47. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Rich, two or three World Cups ago, the chief football correspondent of The Times published an article explaining why Brazil's team was better than England's. His central point was 'population'. I don't recall the exact figures, but it was something like England 55 million; Brazil - 330 million. His case, therefore, was that for every single world-class football-player England was likely to muster, Brazil could probably count on six.
I sent the paper a letter for publication pointing out that Scotland's population was a mere five million and so, for every decent player Scotland might produce, England was possibly in a position to produce a whole TEAM!
In it, I asked why - given that England and Scotland have played 110 football matches against each other - the results are as follows... England won 45 (41%), Scotland won 41 (37%) and 24 (22%) have been drawn. Another way of putting this is that England won 45 and DIDN'T win 65. Surely a pathetic statistic in the circumstances.
I sent the paper a letter for publication pointing out that Scotland's population was a mere five million and so, for every decent player Scotland might produce, England was possibly in a position to produce a whole TEAM!
In it, I asked why - given that England and Scotland have played 110 football matches against each other - the results are as follows... England won 45 (41%), Scotland won 41 (37%) and 24 (22%) have been drawn. Another way of putting this is that England won 45 and DIDN'T win 65. Surely a pathetic statistic in the circumstances.
In Kurt Vonnegut's novel Galapagos, big-brained humans blow up the world with nuclear weapons. The only survivors are cruise-ship passengers shipwrecked on one of the Galapagos Islands of Darwin fame.
Survival of the fittest plays out on the island, with those able to catch fish better suited to eat, live, mate, and pass on their genetic information.
Smart people--the kind who can build weapons that destroy the world--are at a disadvantage on the island because all they know how to do is argue. They all soon die. The dumb people, over the course of millions of years, evolve into dumber, penguin-like creatures skilled at catching fish.
Vonnegut clearly doesn't have much respect for those with big brains. By "big brain" of course, he means the so-called smart person--creative liberty from a great author who knows deep down that HUMAN BRAIN SIZE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTELLIGENCE.
Assuming you could measure smartness (which we can't), and assuming you could measure brain size by measuring the outside of the head (which we can't), you'd still be wrong to assume that people with bigger heads are smarter. There have been geniuses with tiny brains and idiots with huge ones.
Women have smaller brains than men, on average. Smaller people, particular midgets, often have smaller brains. Unless you are prepared to defend the stance that women and short people are dumber, you'd be wise to drop the "BIG BRAIN = BIG SMARTS" argument.
Survival of the fittest plays out on the island, with those able to catch fish better suited to eat, live, mate, and pass on their genetic information.
Smart people--the kind who can build weapons that destroy the world--are at a disadvantage on the island because all they know how to do is argue. They all soon die. The dumb people, over the course of millions of years, evolve into dumber, penguin-like creatures skilled at catching fish.
Vonnegut clearly doesn't have much respect for those with big brains. By "big brain" of course, he means the so-called smart person--creative liberty from a great author who knows deep down that HUMAN BRAIN SIZE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTELLIGENCE.
Assuming you could measure smartness (which we can't), and assuming you could measure brain size by measuring the outside of the head (which we can't), you'd still be wrong to assume that people with bigger heads are smarter. There have been geniuses with tiny brains and idiots with huge ones.
Women have smaller brains than men, on average. Smaller people, particular midgets, often have smaller brains. Unless you are prepared to defend the stance that women and short people are dumber, you'd be wise to drop the "BIG BRAIN = BIG SMARTS" argument.
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV5 mins ago
News13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles28 mins ago
ChatterBank38 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles43 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.