The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?  (Read 35576 times)

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #25 on: 26/08/2015 05:16:52 »
You fight with the strength of many men, Sir knight....


 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 156 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #26 on: 26/08/2015 09:07:32 »
If there were no genetic component in academic or athletic achievement, we would see the "whole population" distribution of extreme genetic anomalies reflected at all levels of every profession. But we don't.

We know from "experiment" and accident that genetic damage by irradiation in utero can depress IQ, and we even have numerical values for the critical stage of development and the dose/damage ratio.

The only remarkable aspect of this study seems to be its statistical sensitivity, apparently sufficient to distinguish between fraternal and identical twins, and thus discriminating between nature and nurture in otherwise "normal" kids.
« Last Edit: 26/08/2015 09:12:20 by alancalverd »
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #27 on: 26/08/2015 18:25:21 »
Some people believe that a person's divine spark of humanity is determined to some extent by their genetic makeup. Those are the people T.S. Elliot was describing in his poem, "The Hollow Men" (1.)

Some people do not.

Francis Galton showed that genetics could play a role in a person's stature and other physical traits.

To extend that idea to a person's GCSE scores - which is to say their character - is what we in the Army Medical Corps used to call an, "Unwarranted Assumption".

This is the Physiology & Medicine forum. Unwarranted Assumptions pollute the history of medicine to this day and have caused more death and human misery than the damned atom bomb.


(1.)  http://allpoetry.com/The-Hollow-Men
« Last Edit: 26/08/2015 18:27:15 by Pecos_Bill »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8678
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #28 on: 26/08/2015 19:27:55 »

Francis Galton showed that genetics could play a role in a person's stature and other physical traits.

To extend that idea to a person's GCSE scores - which is to say their character - is what we in the Army Medical Corps used to call an, "Unwarranted Assumption".

This is the Physiology & Medicine forum. Unwarranted Assumptions pollute the history of medicine to this day and have caused more death and human misery than the damned atom bomb.

But, once again, you are straw manning.
It's not an assumption; it's an observation based on a lot of data.

So, how do you explain the data?
Why are the two groups different?
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #29 on: 26/08/2015 20:05:03 »
This is exactly what Elliot was talking about in that poem.

Your obsession with this inconsequential point -- in the face of the larger question of what constitutes humanity -- is in direct consequence of your "hollowness". You are a child of modern culture and so you think that this thing matters in even the slightest way to describing anything human.

Sit there in the midst of this wasteland you inhabit and keep telling yourself that you have some valuable insight into the nature of humanity because fraternal twins score differently than identical ones.

Much good may it do you.

And now I will cease from this tedious and useless effort to explain reality to any of Britain's  hollow men.

Who am I to blow against the wind?
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8678
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #30 on: 26/08/2015 21:45:28 »
I have never said that the effect matters; just that it exists.
So, that's yet another straw man.

And this "And now I will cease from this tedious and useless effort to explain reality to any of Britain's  hollow men."
is a slur against the whole nation.
Would you like to apologise for it?
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8678
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #31 on: 26/08/2015 21:49:24 »
Incidentally, did you not notice that not all of these people who you mentioned
"..., Dr. Joseph Goebbels, ...."
are Brits- even though you assert that they would have believed the effect of genetics on  exam scores was important.
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #32 on: 26/08/2015 23:33:24 »
T. S. Elliot was awarded the Nobel Prize in literature for his poetry in 1948. (1.)

Perhaps you think (if, indeed, you have ever read the poem) that he wasn't talking about Britain, but really the Watutsi instead. I will apologize after Elliot does.

They DO still include the humanities in a British University - the better to avoid  turning barbarian technicians loose on the streets as "scientists" , don't they?




(1.) http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1948/
« Last Edit: 27/08/2015 00:09:46 by Pecos_Bill »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 156 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #33 on: 27/08/2015 00:47:47 »

To extend that idea to a person's GCSE scores - which is to say their character - is what we in the Army Medical Corps used to call an, "Unwarranted Assumption".

Wrong. GCSE scores are a measure of academic achievement to date (they used to be simply one-time written exam scores, which are a far "cleaner" measure, but now include coursework and teacher assessments, so are less valid measures of individual academic capability, but sometimes you just have to use dirty data, which is why twin studies are essential) and have nothing to do with "character".

Quote
Unwarranted Assumptions pollute the history of medicine to this day and have caused more death and human misery than the damned atom bomb.

Agreed, but irrelevant here. AFAIK nobody has made any assumptions, but has simply pointed out that nature and nurture can be disentangled.

It is a reasonable and testable hypothesis that genetics and academic ability may be correlated, but since the variates are hugely complicated in the case of genetics, poorly specified in the case of academic ability, and both shrouded in the noise of nurture and circumstance, the best you can do is to show a historic statistical correlation for a very small and special set of people, which is what has been done here. Generalising from a special set, or particularising from a statistical inference, would be not merely unwarranted but potentially disastrous, but the potential misuse of a finding does not invalidate the finding itself. 

To go back a few posts
Quote
If you can predict human performance based on inheritance, why can't you predict the winner in a soccer match by just consulting their family tree?

(a) the paper under discussion says nothing about prediction, but (b) people who know about such things do spend a lot of effort to establish the pedigree of a horse, cow or dog if they hope to make serious money out of it. 
« Last Edit: 27/08/2015 01:11:42 by alancalverd »
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #34 on: 27/08/2015 01:41:25 »
In the Britain of 2025 if this publish-or-perish twaddle is remembered at all it will be in some obscure bits in some archive -- cited by nobody.

However in that 2025 Britain what will have become of Elliot's  "hollow men" ?

Will the wild card outliers who don't show up in this "scientific" study have eaten up all their lunch?

If that happens, will the yeomen of England complain that it is all just a cruel trick of nature because the fraternal twins scored differently?

You better believe it, GI.
« Last Edit: 27/08/2015 02:28:09 by Pecos_Bill »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 156 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #35 on: 27/08/2015 12:00:05 »
Not a great fan of Eliot - I have nothing against Americans (I live with the cream of the crop)  and The Journey of the Magi is at least a good poem, but I dislike his politics and religion. As an apparent fan, however, you might be interested in the first Eliot quotation cited by Google:

We shall not cease from exploration. And the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time.
Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go.


So what do we have here? We know that for the most part, racehorses breed racehorses rather than carthorses, collies and crows are better problem-solvers than bulldogs and chickens, and bright parents have bright kids, so we are indeed back where we started. The unique contribution of this study is to separate nature from nurture in the specific case of academic exam results, and to show that nature does indeed have a measurable role.

We also know, from general observation, that genetics is a lottery, which is why we have public examinations and vocational tests rather than assume that the daughter of an astronaut will be a suitable astronaut.

You made an earlier point about a hereditary monarchy. Quite a different matter. The two words that strike terror in the heart of British republicans are "President Blair" - rather as mention of "George W" makes Americans hang their heads in shame (and also proves that an intelligent and statesmanlike father can indeed produce a clutch of corrupt idiots - there are lots of losers in the genetics game). What we do over here is to ensure that the figurehead of state is (a) chosen by nonpolitical means (b) financially independent of banks, oil companies and others who might prosper from a war or unethical banking practices (c) educated and trained from birth at public expense to do the job properly and (d) served some time in uniform. The system seems to have worked pretty well since Cromwell's time and is widely adopted throughout Europe: given the choice, inhabitants of the Low Countries, Scandinavia and post-restoration Spain all voted for a constitutional monarchy rather than rule by Quisling, Franco, et al.

Have the Americans "gone too far"? Well I could point out that the murder rate in Canada, with an absentee monarch as head of state, is a lot lower than in the USA, but that would be punching below the belt, and completely irrelevant to the present argument.
« Last Edit: 27/08/2015 12:04:09 by alancalverd »
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #36 on: 27/08/2015 17:41:56 »
That's all very well, but the question remains.

Was this paper written to retain tenure in the "scientific" field of genetic psychology (that's what it calls itself ) or to help build Jerusalem in England's green and pleasant land?

I suddenly have a mental image of Governor Lepetomane...

 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 156 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #37 on: 28/08/2015 08:17:47 »
We of the chosen have already built Jerusalem in Europe, England, the USA, and most recently, Jerusalem for the second time. So to turn to your alternate hypothesis: after serving a dozen years on research ethics committees and a lifetime in laboratories and hospitals, I have grave doubts about the purpose and quality of most "academic research". Practically every paper in my own field (radiation protection and medical imaging) simply restates that photons travel in straight lines until they are absorbed by atoms, and "qualitative research" on the "lived experience" of car thieves, lefthanded lesbians, or whatever today's oppressed minority happens to be, is just a matter of transcribing a tape recording and nonjudgementally extracting a common theme from four interviews.

Whilst the present object of discussion does contain some decidedly vague statements of possible fraud (how can you "correct" exam results for "intelligence" if (a) you haven't independently measured intelligence and (b) the GCSE, at least in STEM subjects,  is supposed to test the candidate's ability to use information - isn't that the definition of intelligence?) it does at least outline the only way to distinguish nature from nurture, by comparing identical and fraternal twins. But

http://www.twinsuk.co.uk/twinstips/18/144/multiple-birth-statistics,-facts-&-trivia/having-twins-or-triplets---interesting-&-fun-facts/ 

worries me! Apparently Nigerian mothers produce far more twins than average, and Chinese mothers, far fewer. Now British society includes significant numbers of first and second generation Nigerians and Chinese, probably with quite different cultural norms, so the statistics may have all sorts of hidden nurture bias that is tightly correlated with nature effects. But the occurence of twins may itself be affected by maternal diet, which is more likely to regress to a norm in a heterogeneous urban society....

Allowing for all those faults and unknowns, I think the finding still stands: identical twins score closer than fraternal twins, so there is some genetic component in GCSE scores. But there is no indication as to what it is, or what it does. 

In short, I think the paper is brilliant, informative, and useless.   
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #38 on: 28/08/2015 16:52:17 »
It wasn't useless.

It put bread on the authors' table.

If this is Jerusalem you couldn't tell it from BBC 3

In Alfred Bester's "The Stars my Destination" we read of a cargo cult of savages in the asteroid belt. They are the descendants of space pioneers who now call themselves the "Scientific People".

I can imagine stuff like this paper among their most sacred texts.


 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8678
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #39 on: 29/08/2015 12:39:55 »
T. S. Elliot was awarded the Nobel Prize in literature for his poetry in 1948. (1.)

Perhaps you think (if, indeed, you have ever read the poem) that he wasn't talking about Britain, but really the Watutsi instead. I will apologize after Elliot does.

They DO still include the humanities in a British University - the better to avoid  turning barbarian technicians loose on the streets as "scientists" , don't they?




(1.) http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1948/
Yet another straw man.
It was you that mentioned Goebells and you that said the traits he exhibited are typically British.
Nobody except you had, at that point, mentioned Elliot.
 
And you might want to grow out of insulting Britain ant its institutions;
this sort of thing
"They DO still include the humanities in a British University - the better to avoid  turning barbarian technicians loose on the streets as "scientists" , don't they?"
 doesn't make you look clever.

Also, you said you had read the paper which clearly states its objective.
"The purpose of the present study was to investigate the extent to which the remarkably high heritabilities for educational achievement in the UK persist to the end of compulsory education. "
And yet you ask "Was this paper written to retain tenure in the "scientific" field of genetic psychology (that's what it calls itself ) or to help build Jerusalem in England's green and pleasant land?"
Well, why ask such a silly question when someone has already told you the answer.

So, may I invite you to stop insulting people, stop citing irrelevant Nobel prizes, and answer the question.
Why are the identical twins' scores more similar than those of fraternal twins?
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #40 on: 29/08/2015 17:14:06 »
As to the fraternal twins red herring, in any analysis one is free to throw out non-germane outliers. As much as you may claim that is a weakness , I have done so in my own good right. Let the readers decide as is <<their>> own good right.

As to your assertion that my quote of T.S. Elliot constitutes a personal slur to you and Merrie Olde England --- would you like me to write you a note to the Chaplain?

This is a forum - an idea derived from the forum in Athens. People come here and debate issues and the other people observe and come to their own conclusions. That is what both you and  I have done. Did you really imagine that I have continued this thread to effect <<your>> opinion?

You are welcome to report me to the British thought police if you think my ideas constitute disorderly conduct or sedition.
« Last Edit: 29/08/2015 17:22:24 by Pecos_Bill »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8678
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #41 on: 29/08/2015 19:37:22 »
The stats show that the effect is not an outlier. An dth e difference between the two sorts of twins is the essence of the study so it's just plain silly to suggest throwing it out.
this is yet another strawman
"As to your assertion that my quote of T.S. Elliot constitutes a personal slur to you and Merrie Olde England --"
Nobody said that.

This is indeed a forum (though I think you will find the word is Latin, rather than Greek).
And the forum was a place to discuss things, not to preach.
So, you not only have to put forward your point of view, you have to defend it.
in particular, you must answer criticisms of your point of view.

I have given you plenty of opportunities to address the criticism that your point of view simply doesn't explain the facts.
you have not done so.
I presume that is because you can't.
you are unable to meaningfully explain away the actual data  without accepting that it is really due to a genetic component to exam scores.
You can't face the truth so you keep posting nonsense about poets, and pointless straw men.
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #42 on: 29/08/2015 21:04:24 »
I think that is, perhaps, the 14th time you have repeated that. Maybe you could try rhyming it next time.

The rest of the world and I will try to soldier on despite our inability to perceive the value of this very, very British example of "science".

For example  this "scientific" article was self published in "PLOS ONE" [1.] which advertises itself as, "PLOS ONE takes the hard work out of publishing. There's no stress waiting to find out if your article meets subjective acceptance criteria." Yep, that's some powerful scientific stuff they do there in Britain, alright, Bub.

My apology for any disrespect. We benighted colonials often find it difficult to maintain a straight face -to say nothing of a properly reverent demeanor - when confronted with supercilious British wisdom.

[1.] http://www.plosone.org/static/publish
« Last Edit: 29/08/2015 22:47:59 by Pecos_Bill »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 156 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #43 on: 30/08/2015 00:10:01 »
You will be pleased to know that BBC3 is under threat of closure. Auntie has slowly realised that the sort of crap that appeals to people who make TV programs, doesn't always appeal to the people who watch them - at least not to the extent of justifying innumerable repeats. Thankfully, BBC4 is not yet under the cosh.

By all means poke fun at British institutions. We are quite used to it , just as we have come to acceopt the American habit of turning up late (1917, 1942...) and claiming all the credit. But what is your real problem? Regardless of where or how this paper was published, it argues that if there is a hereditable element to exam performance, it can be distinguished from environmental factors by studying twins. Surely that makes sense? The only question is whether the statistical analysis in this instance was sufficient to demonstrate a real effect. If you think their statistics was weak, wouldn't it be a good idea to point out the flaws? 

 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #44 on: 30/08/2015 09:36:13 »
Since you yourself opened the matter and at the risk of inciting petulant shrieks of outrage, I will point out that given the obvious mental defects of Asquith, Lloyd-George and Clemenceau, it is quite understandable that the United States declined to drink the kool-aid until Germany went to sinking our ships.

It is unfortunate that Britain refused to consider a decent and sensible negotiated peace. Nor was it auspicious that-- after American boys had shed their blood at the 2nd Marne -- Britain told President Wilson to take the 14 points and blow them out his nose. That reverberated in 1939 as the Sikes-Picot treaty reverberates today. I mention this only to mitigate and explain American "bad manners" when exposed to some hoity-toity British smarty pants. Present company excepted.

_______

As to the case in point. These twins were all raised in the <<same>> households. I don't see how anyone can truthfully say that this even begins to distinguish between the effects of inheritance and environment. I pointed that out repeatedly at the beginning of this thread, but the point was drowned out by the constant clamor about "fraternal twins".

It is clear to me that this study is worthless because it did not study separated-at-birth twins -- but then I am American and lack the congenital British devotion to matters of inheritance.

As a matter of fact the question of nature versus nurture was treated at length in the novel "Pudd'nhead Wilson" by Mark Twain in 1894. Until you do a study on separated twins exclusively, Mr. Samuel Clemons is as valid an authority on this question as any Brit who ever lived.

Finally, BBC 3 has some good stuff mixed in with the schlock. Stacey Dooley does some interesting stuff and watching Bad Education is one of my guilty pleasures.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8678
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #45 on: 30/08/2015 11:44:45 »
I think that is, perhaps, the 14th time you have repeated that. Maybe you could try rhyming it next time.

The rest of the world and I will try to soldier on despite our inability to perceive the value of this very, very British example of "science".

For example  this "scientific" article was self published in "PLOS ONE" [1.] which advertises itself as, "PLOS ONE takes the hard work out of publishing. There's no stress waiting to find out if your article meets subjective acceptance criteria." Yep, that's some powerful scientific stuff they do there in Britain, alright, Bub.

My apology for any disrespect. We benighted colonials often find it difficult to maintain a straight face -to say nothing of a properly reverent demeanor - when confronted with supercilious British wisdom.

[1.] http://www.plosone.org/static/publish
Rather than counting how many times you have failed to address a point, why not answer it?

Re Plos one; your comments are on a web page that has a similar publishing strategy.
Did you think you had made a point?
Stop trying to attack the messenger and address the actual point.
Re
"It is unfortunate that Britain refused to consider a decent and sensible negotiated peace."
Make up your mind.
Do you really think that Britain should have negotiated a peace deal with the government that included the man you cited as a villain in your opening post?

Re. "Until you do a study on separated twins exclusively"
Is it that you are unable, or unwilling to understand that you don't need to separate the rwins for this sort of study and in fact it would make it a less sensitive test if you did?

"Mr. Samuel Clemons is" a typing error- which leads me to wonder how much thought you are really putting into this.
Perhaps if you got the spelling right you might have found stuff like this
"Mark Twain can easily be labeled as a great Anglophile.  His love for English culture and country began with his first trip in 1872 and continued for the rest of his life.  Twain approved of British culture because he found the stereotypes associated with the English appealing.  This was partly because of how they contrasted with American culture, and also because he enjoyed the company and the ways of the English upper-class, who took him under their wing.  He also fell in love with the English countryside, writing in one of his short stories that, “England is the most beautiful of all countries.” As a man who loved history and tradition, in England he found a country rich in both.  Upon returning from his first visit, he continually praised the English and their ways in public. He even wrote the article “British Benevolence” for the Tribune, advocating for Americans to develop an establishment akin to the London Humane Society. Between the beautiful countryside, impressing establishments and traditions, and his embracement by the upper-class, Twain felt he belonged in England."
from
http://users.dickinson.edu/~wronski/dickenstwain/twain.html

But what a dead man thought of England over 100 years ago is hardly relevant

So, let's try again.
As you say
"As to the case in point. These twins were all raised in the <<same>> households. I don't see how anyone can truthfully say that this even begins to distinguish between the effects of inheritance and environment."

OK, I'm sure that we agree that their environment will be very similar.
And that would explain part of the reason why twins typically get similar exam scores.

Have you understood that bit?

OK now identical twins are also "all raised in the <<same>> households.".
And that should explain why identical twins also typically get similar exam scores.

Does that also make sense to you?

OK, now we move on to the actual point of the research.

The differences in exam scores between pairs of identical twins is significantly smaller than the difference in exam scores between pairs of non identical twins.

Now, as you already pointed out- it can't be due to environment because twins (identical or not) are raised in very similar environments.

So the difference must be due to something else.
In particular, it must be due to the only difference between the two sorts of twins.
One set are genetically identical and the other set are not genetically identical.

That difference, whether you like it or not, is genetics.

Now someone has explained the basis of the research, do you understand why twins separated at birth wouldn't have helped in this study?
It's because they were not separated that we can use their nigh identical upbringing as a means to cancel out most of the environmental factors and look at just the genetics.

It's actually a very clever piece of research.
And it's a pity that you have repeatedly shown that you either didn't read it, or you didn't understand it before you tried to rubbish it.



 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #46 on: 30/08/2015 18:44:45 »
In the real world - outside of Britain - people see that by not using twins who have been separated at birth these authors produced a bed-time story for smug white British gentlemen. This "scientific" paper got more coverage in the Daily Mail than any academic notice. That was no accident, Bub


We read books like "The Guns of August" by Barbara Tuchman about how Britain so obviously bit the big one in 1914. We read books like "Mr. American" by George MacDonald Fraser in which Fraser- in the last few pages - discusses why staying out of the war would have led to a limited conflict with a negotiated settlement. We see how just a tiny iota of British common sense could have avoided such hideous knock on catastrophes and we ask ourselves, "Why couldn't the Brits have seen the whole picture?"

I cannot explain your failure to concede that my opinion may have some validity, but I can certainly see from it how it was that Britain eviscerated itself in 1914.

We see that same phenomenon enacted  today as Britain bemoans a shortage of skilled labor on the one hand while talking about sending troops to Calais on the other.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8678
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #47 on: 30/08/2015 20:16:13 »
Well, if you still think that "by not using twins who have been separated at birth these authors produced a bed-time story " you have still not understood the research.

And, of course, the science has nothing to do with "being British" so, in banging on about that you simply look foolish.
 

Offline Pecos_Bill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #48 on: 30/08/2015 21:44:32 »
Caveat Lector:  Never discuss an issue of science which concerns something that has wide coverage in the Daily Mail with a certain type of Englishman.

Here is a story on today's Daily Mail online  front page, "A flooded office, plummeting temperatures and documents mysteriously moving: Terrified workers fear that ghost of an old lady is haunting them after 'face' appears at the window".

What should you do if you accidentally encounter a Daily Mail reader in conversation? In the old days people once used a topical mixture of sulfur and petroleum jelly for relief. Nowadays one might use a Lindane shampoo. One can also get good prevention by using outer clothing impregnated with Pyrethins.
« Last Edit: 30/08/2015 21:57:28 by Pecos_Bill »
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4729
  • Thanked: 156 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #49 on: 30/08/2015 21:47:36 »
Why does the finding that identical twins are more alike than fraternal twins appeal specifically to smug white British gentlemen? I would have thought it to be a common assumption among all people and fairly widely tested, at least anecdotally, by educators around the world. And given the anomalous incidence of twins in Nigeria, I would have thought the phenomenon would have been observed more often there than here.

Plomin, Piaget, et numerous al, had I thought pretty well put the subject to bed for ever during the last 100 years, so the finding isn't particularly surprising, but the study is remarkable in using public examination results to achieve more statistical power, with fewer ethical or procedural pitfalls, than any antecedent "laboratory" tests were able to do.   

If there is any matter of consequence from this study,  http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051117/iq-scores-different-for-twins suggests a downside:the IQ of twins (at least in Aberdeen) was significantly lower than that of singleton births in the same family.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Do your genes affect your GCSE grades?
« Reply #49 on: 30/08/2015 21:47:36 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length