Fun question: what's the average IQ of a sceptic?

8 Responses to Fun question: what's the average IQ of a sceptic?

1. TinyCO2 says:

   25 September 2015 at 09:57

   IQ comes in more than one form. While the qualifications of both sides (those who blog and comment, not the casual side takers) are high, I think the sceptic side has less conventional intelligence. This probably means lower overall qualifications but a wider range of skills. I think we understand people better and consider more issues at the same time. Proponents seem very narrow focused to me. They try to frame everything as black and white, while we’re all about shades of grey. The difference between an engineer and a scientist.
   The proponent activists are a strange mixture of high and low intelligence but obsessive in nature. There doesn’t seem to be a sceptic equivalent.
   As far as I can see the casual supporters of AGW tend to be uninterested in the science and react purely as an emotional response. Whereas casual sceptics are more pragmatic.
2. wyoskeptic says:

   25 September 2015 at 15:05

   I think of the old saying “Jack of all trades, Master of none.”
   Most alarmists are masters of one trade: Climate Alarmism. Or another way of putting it is the old saying “When your only tool is a hammer, you tend to view all problems as if they were a nail.”
   Diversity of thought, thinking outside the proscribed dogma, asking “What if this is so” or “What if this is not so?”, making mistakes, learning from the mistakes, moving on to different problems, being open to different solutions, being open to discovering what one thinks is a problem, is not and discovering that what is “the perfect solution” to the problem, is not a good solution at all, all of these leads to progress.
   It is the opposite of what the alarmists are doing that has advanced man to the point where he is at present. Coming up with a theory, testing it, finding it wrong, admitting it is so and moving on to something else, that is what gets things done. It is not repeating the same mantra over and over again, expecting it to magically transform the situation into something better. Or something worse.
   Wishful thinking never once built a single solitary thing. Getting your hands dirty and smashing a few thumbs, now that is a different story.
3. Scottish-Sceptic says:

   25 September 2015 at 15:07

   I agree that there’s no single measure of intelligence. Indeed, I rather suspect that anyone who is super intelligent in one area of their life is super stupid in another.
   However, it has also struck me that those who push global warming are on the whole quite stupid. You have people who are supposedly “experts” in their field, having spend much of their life doing the work – and they make stupid almost imbecile mistakes like Mann did on the Hockey Stick – and worse, they don’t even seem to recognise their own mistakes when they are pointed out to them in great detail.
   Anyone can make a mistake, but it takes a real dim witted idiot to deny they’ve made a mistake when it’s pointed out to them.
4. mpcraig says:

   25 September 2015 at 20:49

   I suspect my IQ is quite high but then again, I have friends equally intelligent that fully subscribe to climate alarmism.
   The one difference I have found is that they are really very, very resistant to being the least bit wrong. Any concession I force them to make (usually couched in terms of uncertainty) tends to make them very uncomfortable. It’s all very odd since this doesn’t usually happen for other controversial topics.
   Also, for what it is worth, I have noticed that those who might have a lesser IQ generally do not concern themselves with AGW. And the main point for them is usually they have no interest in people trying to tell them what is going to happen in 20, 50 or 100 years. Not an unreasonable position in the least.
5. Guirme says:

   26 September 2015 at 16:55

   Sadly there are intelligent people who are in the green nutter group. I think tbat the problem is that intelligence does not imply common sense. Somtimes however intelligence can be accompanied with intellectual arrogance of the I know more than you and I know I’m right variety. There is little point in trying to argue with someone who despite their intelligence has a closed and arrogant mind.
6. Scottish Sceptic says:

   27 September 2015 at 07:43

   A while back I began noticing that almost all sceptic metaphors were mechanically or engineering or perhaps science based. I don’t think I’ve ever heard an alarmist use anything similar.
   Indeed, I suspect “if the only tool you have …” would be translated by climate extremists as “if the consensus is to use a hammer, then that it the right tool”.
7. Scottish Sceptic says:

   27 September 2015 at 07:49

   As a rough rule of thumb, I always assume around half of what I write is complete utter garbage. But I console myself by knowing that is almost certainly higher than most climate extremists.
   However, it also means that statistically, even when I think I’m wrong, even if I’m speaking to one of the worst of the zealot climate believers … they could still be right and me wrong.
8. markstoval says:

   27 September 2015 at 10:44

   It is not the IQ that matters. It is honesty and following of the scientific method. We have had very smart men and women propose the most beautiful theories that were later slain by experiment and facts.
   It is using the methods of science honestly that has moved our civilization forward and brought us the wonderful fruits of these modern times. But so very many modern people now refuse to think logically or to use the real method of science. They fudge the facts to fit the theory.
   The stupid followers don’t bother me near as much as the smart, dishonest leaders of the scam.

Comments are closed.