No wonder he got elected twice!
2007-06-02 00:07:55 · 17 answers · asked by flushles 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Dwight Eisenhower in 1957
2007-06-02 00:21:21 · update #1
Sorry, I won't fall for this one.
.
It was Dwight Eisenhower in 1957.
,
He quickly realized his error and laughed.
.
If half are below average then that means half are above average.
.
Thats why they call it average.
.
Seeing as how you fell for it, this makes you dumber then Bush.
.
BTW,,Bush was selected by the Supreme Court in 2001 and after reading about all the trouble they had in Ohio, I'm thinking he snuck one past us in 2004 as well.
/
2007-06-02 00:17:50 · answer #1 · answered by MechBob 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Below Average Intelligence
2016-11-10 07:28:12 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do we have a fabricated study or statistic here? I think so.
I doubt you have sources to back this up, but if President Bush was told something like this, he probably felt right at home ...
Speaking of below average intelligence, how could half of Americans have below average intelligence when the average would be the intelligence quotient of each American added together and divided by the number of Americans? Therefore, unless I am one of the half far below average, which I doubt, a great number of those measured had no intelligence quotient at all.
If you are talking about world intelligence, then you are inferring that Americans belong to a sub-human species. I would watch making that type of assertion. I know of one individual that tried making that claim about a group of people; he was proven wrong.
2007-06-02 02:27:52 · answer #3 · answered by James S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was reading about this story and thought that mathematically speaking it is possible that more than half of the population to be below the average. Most people think about average as a median, but that s not so. The median is the middle number in a set of numbers, so half of the numbers are greater and half of the other numbers of the set are less than the median. Regarding the mean, it depends on the shape of the distribution. If the intelligence (let s say IQ) distribution is right skewed (i.e. most of the values are small, and a few are very large), then more than 50% of the data will be below the average. In this scenario, it is mathematically correct to say that, more than half of people have below average intelligence.
2015-05-16 11:29:04 · answer #4 · answered by Arthur H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was going to disagree with you when you stated that half the Americans have below average intelligence then I realized that you must be counting all the illegals and although they come from South America and you could call them Americans they are not citizens of the U.S.A. Another thing to think about is could the half with below average intelligence all be liberals ?
2007-06-02 00:57:11 · answer #5 · answered by hdean45 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sources?
2007-06-02 00:10:45 · answer #6 · answered by A Person 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I don't know why Bush would be alarmed to know that half the population is below average. He counted on it.
2007-06-02 00:46:03 · answer #7 · answered by Debra D 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
yeah, he is one of those Americans with below average intelligence as well that would also be the reason he expressed astonishment
2007-06-02 00:13:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
You realize that it seems mathematically impossible for a majority to be below average.
2007-06-02 00:45:28 · answer #9 · answered by .... . .-.. .-.. --- 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ignoring his reaction, statisticly, shouldn't half of us be below and half above? That 's what average means---oh, wait a minute--I missed your point. If your point is that Bush didn't know what average means, than that's pathetic.
2007-06-02 00:18:34 · answer #10 · answered by David M 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋