0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
he [should] have restricted his sample to twins who had been SEPARATED AT BIRTH
If you can predict human performance based on inheritance, ...
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.
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".
Unwarranted Assumptions pollute the history of medicine to this day and have caused more death and human misery than the damned atom bomb.
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?
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.) ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGIN
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.] ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGINBut what a dead man thought of England over 100 years ago is hardly relevantSo, 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.