so yeah, the american government shutdown...

[Pext]

oh and this. for lulz.

oh my... did you read the comments? everybody blaming each other for being dumb. "nu u "

[edit 1] interesting objection (although i don't know if teen pregnancies are more common in the us) - from the comments:

A study in St. Louis and validated abroad showed lower IQ's of people born to mothers under 16, 10 point lower on avg at age 4 for those born to under 14. Countless studies find ten times as many mental and physical handicaps in such births under age 16. It is a fact that is ignored as well as the fact that an adult uterus does not develop before other growth ceases.. Our teen mothers may be behind our problem. We must look at this with compassion but with reality. Teachers must not be asked to solve this problem alone.

[edit 2] this seems to hold: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence ... _pregnancy --- see the paragraph "Birth and abortion rates, 1996"

55.6/1000 women aged 15-19 give birth to a child in the US as compared to
7.7/1000 in sweden

[losCHUNK]

This is where I think Darwin falls apart, the stupid spread like wildfire

[GONNAFISTYA]

^^Total load of shit about 16 year old mothers^^

My mother got had me when she was 16 and I'm well above average in IQ. While this fact will truly upset angry morons such as Suckrak, xer0s, Etul and DTS it nonetheless is the truth.

It seems everyone forgot that less than 300 years ago 16 was the average age a woman got married and had her first kid. If that BS linked to above was actually true, it'd mean that humanity had been getting steadily dumber until the invention of antibiotics.

[losCHUNK]

Oh didn't read enough to see it;s drawing a connection, just read the 2nd edit. Aye my mum had me when she was 18

[Κracus]

^^Total load of shit about 16 year old mothers^^

My mother got had me when she was 16 and I'm well above average in IQ. While this fact will truly upset angry morons such as Suckrak, xer0s, Etul and DTS it nonetheless is the truth.

It seems everyone forgot that less than 300 years ago 16 was the average age a woman got married and had her first kid. If that BS linked to above was actually true, it'd mean that humanity had been getting steadily dumber until the invention of antibiotics.

I ain't angry. My mother had me when she was 16 too, I'm sure my IQ is comparable to yours.

[GONNAFISTYA]

Not sure, though.

[seremtan]

oh and this. for lulz.

apparently Americans are so dumb, that when one writes an article in the New York Post about how dumb they are, even *they* are too dumb to know the difference between England and the United Kingdom

[Tsakali]

Uhm that article sounds like uninformed bullshit..., if anything, the younger u have kids the less likely ti have any complications or long term issues. As far as nature is concerned the younger the better. That goes for mother and child

[losCHUNK]

oh and this. for lulz.

apparently Americans are so dumb, that when one writes an article in the New York Post about how dumb they are, even *they* are too dumb to know the difference between England and the United Kingdom

I think the report is at fault for that, I think it's Canadian, but stats for the UK only include England and N.Ireland

And when those stats are looked at individually for Literacy, Ireland must be causing a drag on England because they come in behind America at 16/17th. When partnered with the mungrels to become the UK they come in 3 places ahead in 13th.

Combined 2 articles to figure this out if you wanna see

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/n ... 49.article

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -test.html

Daily Mail one is pretty comical. It's a rehashed article of the one Memph posted bashing the yanks, but completely ignores the figures of the 'UK' who didn't fare much better. So it seems.

[seremtan]

to be fair, there are a lot of dumb people in Britain

in fact, even the clever people are dumb

[GONNAFISTYA]

Uhm that article sounds like uninformed bullshit..., if anything, the younger u have kids the less likely ti have any complications or long term issues. As far as nature is concerned the younger the better. That goes for mother and child

The older a woman gets the more likely for major problems regarding having kids, for both mother and child.

And again...for some reason everyone has forgotten we were having kids much younger before we more than doubled our lifespans with medicine. People weren't having kids at 30 - 50 years old back in the 1600 - 1700s because people weren't living to 30 - 50 years to begin with. It really wasn't that long ago and yes, teen pregnancy is only a recent phenomenon.

[losCHUNK]

Don't think teenagers existed until the 1900s ?, or the term wasn't coined.

[Eraser]

^^Total load of shit about 16 year old mothers^^

My mother got had me when she was 16 and I'm well above average in IQ. While this fact will truly upset angry morons such as Suckrak, xer0s, Etul and DTS it nonetheless is the truth.

Oh yeah, the "this happened to me so it's true for everyone" fallacy.

It seems everyone forgot that less than 300 years ago 16 was the average age a woman got married and had her first kid.

Which doesn't automatically mean that back then everyone had a higher IQ or better health. Also, the article speaks of pregnancies before 16 yrs. I'm no expert on the field, but I wouldn't dismiss the info so easily. It could very well be that before the age of 16, the female reproductive organs aren't fully matured yet which brings additional risks.

[Pext]

to clearify a few things:

i did not link to any article. i just quoted a comment on the article made by some random guy.

i merely found the structure of the argument to be appealing. this was not a line of reasoning i was expecting.

but having thought about it a bit more i have to agree with GKY: it's BS.

First, the mere numbers don't seem to justify it. A birthrate of ~55/1000 teen mothers is not large enough a factor to really matter.

Second, teen pregnancy might also be connected with the social class or level of education (lower education earlier motherhood). But the social class is also connected to the IQ. And so is the education level for obvious reasons. So there might be two factors at work here: Parents with better education are able to pass more knowledge to their children. Around 50% to 70% of a persons IQ is genetically inherited from the parents.

Third, teen mothers might be more occupied and have a harder struggle in their life. Thus, less time to take care of their children and accordingly less time to pass on knowledge.

[GONNAFISTYA]

^^Total load of shit about 16 year old mothers^^

My mother got had me when she was 16 and I'm well above average in IQ. While this fact will truly upset angry morons such as Suckrak, xer0s, Etul and DTS it nonetheless is the truth.

Oh yeah, the "this happened to me so it's true for everyone" fallacy.

That's not the only argument I have and it's not something I would take as proof of anything. I'm simply pointing out that "trends in statistics" aren't exactly what people think they are and are open to interpretation.

It seems everyone forgot that less than 300 years ago 16 was the average age a woman got married and had her first kid.

Which doesn't automatically mean that back then everyone had a higher IQ or better health. Also, the article speaks of pregnancies before 16 yrs. I'm no expert on the field, but I wouldn't dismiss the info so easily. It could very well be that before the age of 16, the female reproductive organs aren't fully matured yet which brings additional risks.

You're completely missing my point: If having babies at that age of 16 and lower affects IQ of the baby, then that means that - througout our history of having babies between the ages of 11 and 16...when they bleed - we've been damaging our own IQ potentials and would have been dumbing down all this time, getting stupider with every generation. The evidence is quite the contrary.

[GONNAFISTYA]

but having thought about it a bit more i have to agree with GKY: it's BS.

*smooch*

[Eraser]

You're completely missing my point: If having babies at that age of 16 and lower affects IQ of the baby, then that means that - througout our history of having babies between the ages of 11 and 16...when they bleed - we've been damaging our own IQ potentials and would have been dumbing down all this time, getting stupider with every generation. The evidence is quite the contrary.

lol, evidence that's certainly not present around these parts

[GONNAFISTYA]

lol yeah Texas and Conservatism in general fuck up the averages...

[losCHUNK]

Prepare for jimmification

[obsidian]

Extensively planned and orchestrated by secretly changing the rules before the shutdown.

[seremtan]

murcah

[losCHUNK]

Who the fuck gave the retard the keys ?

[Eraser]

lol, what a puppet show

[losCHUNK]

I think it's open again ?

[YourGrandpa]

Great!!! The government is going to reopen with the authority to continue its reckless spending. Fuck a balanced budget or reduced spending. Lets raise the debt limit. Fucking insane!

This guy is on point.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151899681508984