Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re: a quick search (Score 1) 228

by JMJimmy (#48182473) Attached to: No More Lee-Enfield: Canada's Rangers To Get a Tech Upgrade

It was a 1 hour guided tour group through a National Park, it was unusual for the moose to be that close to the "human" area of the park. As such, no food or anything else that would attract it was on hand. It was just 20 feet off the path eating as we passed. I stayed behind in a tree and was whistling to it which caught it's interest. It got within 10 feet and then I set off to rejoin the group... when I looked back it was trotting after me, the faster I ran the faster it got.

No pamphlet - he just said if that ever happens again, to go back to where I was - ie: hug a tree and they won't be able to distinguish you from it. Or turn around an swear/yell at it until it goes away ;)

Comment: Re: a quick search (Score 3, Informative) 228

by JMJimmy (#48181369) Attached to: No More Lee-Enfield: Canada's Rangers To Get a Tech Upgrade

Moose have terrible eye sight, if you're up wind of them they get curious as to what you are and can run you down unintentionally. I learned this the hard way in Gross Mourne when one chased me down a trail - would have run me over had it not been for the park ranger who scared it away (took 2 tries, after the first try it came back and started running at us again). It was not-rutting season and it was a female.

Comment: Re:Scarier still.... (Score 3, Interesting) 357

by JMJimmy (#48159721) Attached to: Scanning Embryos For Super-Intelligent Kids Is On the Horizon

Gene detection means squat when it comes to intelligence or the positive impact it can have. Intelligence, even in a given area, means nothing without the ability to make use of it in a meaningful way.

My family would likely be ones that have the intelligence gene (there's no way to say that without it sounding like bragging/ego, it's really not meant that way). I believe that based on a number of factors, including the level of participation of extended family members in their respective fields, psycho-educational testing where scores are in the 90th+ percentiles, etc. What that intelligence gene wouldn't show is the impact it can have. Combined with the intelligence in my family comes issues with depression, ADHD, bipolar disorder, failure to recognize/interpret social indicators (partly related to ADHD), isolationist tendencies, etc. Those might be local to our genetics, however, the "absent minded professor", "genius idiot", "troubled genius", etc. stereotype exists for a reason.

For every major success in my family there's a major failure to launch, meaning they have a really hard time getting careers/life going despite what testing suggests. In my family I am one of the latter group. My Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale tests (professionally administered) showed exceptional PRI scores like 98th percentile matrix reasoning & 97th percentile visual working memory and some truly horrible WMI/PSI scores as low as the 9th percentile. For me this has resulted in problems in school, friction in social arenas, bankruptcy, and currently: driving a forklift for a living. I have diagnosed & fixed a code efficiency problem in code that had been under constant optimizations for over 3 years, in a language I've never used, without seeing more than an outline of the original code, in less than an hour. Unfortunately that ability means nothing when working memory doesn't allow me to keep method names/etc in my head. It's akin to having the latest greatest processor with a tiny amount of RAM - the OS takes up most of the RAM and everything that's left is dedicated to the problem at hand - every time something else needs that space something important gets pushed out. Sometimes that's remembering to sleep/eat, others it's any concept of time, and mostly it's the "unimportant" details like method names/attributes/outputs (information that I can look up any time and isn't essential to the abstract core of a thing).

Point is, just because you can identify a gene and manipulate it to get better scores on testing doesn't mean it's going to result in something "better".

Comment: Re:In lost the will to live ... (Score 1) 795

by JMJimmy (#47972761) Attached to: How Our Botched Understanding of "Science" Ruins Everything

Poor grammar on my part, my apologies. "It" in the previous comment was not meant to refer to statistics itself but rather anything that uses statistics to prove something. At some point, whatever that subject is, must be proven scientifically but until we're able to do so statistics acts as a 'best guess' but is not actual proof. Example: a psychological study of a group cannot prove anything about any given individual.

Comment: Re:In lost the will to live ... (Score 1) 795

by JMJimmy (#47969397) Attached to: How Our Botched Understanding of "Science" Ruins Everything

Absolutely true. And even though science can disprove the 6k Earth it doesn't mean everything else in religious texts is false. While I don't proscribe to a religion I also don't proscribe to invalidating religion - even if certain elements are suspect that doesn't degrade some lessons to be learned from the texts - faith or not.

What this country needs is a good five dollar plasma weapon.

Working...