tenngun said:
If [you're] smarter then 1/2 the people that means that 1/2 the people are smarter then you.
Actually, not necessarily. If I were
only smarter than half the people that would be true. I could also be smarter than the other half. Here's an example Tenn -- now work with me on this, I can help you all.
Answer this: I have three US coins in my hand and they total $0.25; one of them is not a nickel; what three coins am I holding?
tenngun said:
If 1/2 the people that eat grits are among the 1/2 the people that are smarter then you that would mean that 1/4 of the people that eat grits are smarter then you and 1/4 as smart as you.
For argument's sake let's say you are correct though; that half the people are smarter than me. And that 1/2 the people who eat grits are also among that above-average line. A pretty absurd supposition but let's run with it. Then you are wrong, again. By your own definition half the grits-eaters are smarter than me -- that's the group
you put them in. So,
just a quarter of grits eaters can't be smarter than me (unless perhaps they soon had a second helping?). Kindly, I'm not even gonna ask how you concluded one quarter were AS smart when, again, they were ALL in the group that was supposed to be smarter. But let's move on...
tenngun said:
That means you have a 50-50 chance of getting smarter if you eat grits. Play the odds man you have nothing to loose
Finally, besides you relying on those false mathematical derivations above you are making incorrect empirical conclusions regardless. I can't fathom where the 50% chance of getting smarter from eating grits comes from as:
a) you yourself calculated one quarter of grits eaters are smarter than me and the rest are only as smart or not as smart
b) we never established how many grits-eaters there are in the population sample -- you falsely and quite accidently may have presumed that half the people are. Why!? It
could be only 1/10th of 1%, then what? What're my odds!? Even if grits made southerners smart it could be a ROUNDING ERROR in this calculation and sample population. And
c) Where is the assumption that eating grits has anything to do with making one smart anyway? That came outta thin air. You may have counted how many grits-eaters fall into what category of smartness, OK, but never counted their actual numbers, didn't quantify their materiality in the sample, and never established any cause and effect of eating grits with improved or above average smartness. And, if anything, well, knowing you love grits as much as you do, along with a coupla other notable fellas here, well, you know...
This kinda proves the
opposite: that grits-eating people are below average intelligence and the high correlation, the almost statistical certainty, implies eating grits is in fact a, though maybe not the, root cause of that.
This is
your mind. This is your mind on grits.
Tenn --
JUST SAY NO!