| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ak47gen
n00b
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 36
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:40 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ohio, I grew up with little proper training and I have some ghetto friends that their language tend to rub off on me. As a side note I am 50% Irish 25% italian and 25% other random stuff (polish, gyipsey?....) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ak47gen
n00b
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ppurka
Advocate
Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 2782
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
He's just an older version of Dr. House.
_________________
emerge --quiet redefined | E17 vids: I, II |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1271
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
I am 48.
_________________
Obama killed bin Laden like Nixon was the first man on the Moon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1271
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ppurka wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
He's just an older version of Dr. House. |
I don't know how old House is, but he looks at least a decade older than I. 
_________________
Obama killed bin Laden like Nixon was the first man on the Moon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ak47gen
n00b
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
I am 48. |
I bet you are wondering how I know this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1271
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ak47gen wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
I am 48. |
I bet you are wondering how I know this? |
I've mentioned my age in here numerous times.
_________________
Obama killed bin Laden like Nixon was the first man on the Moon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ak47gen
n00b
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
I am 48. |
I bet you are wondering how I know this? |
I've mentioned my age in here numerous times. |
Oh well that makes my educated guess not seem as cool....
I guessed that because the attitude in your posts seem to be a person that was the end of the baby boomer area. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1271
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ak47gen wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
I am 48. |
I bet you are wondering how I know this? |
I've mentioned my age in here numerous times. |
Oh well that makes my educated guess not seem as cool....
I guessed that because the attitude in your posts seem to be a person that was the end of the baby boomer area. |
Very perceptive. Depending on what definition you use, I am either the last of the baby boomers or the first of generation X. Overall, I think I fall more into generation X. Note that my posts in here do not necessarily reflect my real beliefs and attitudes accurately.
_________________
Obama killed bin Laden like Nixon was the first man on the Moon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ak47gen
n00b
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 36
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | ak47gen wrote: | | Also BK how old are you? You seem to be the type of guy who is 48. |
I am 48. |
I bet you are wondering how I know this? |
I've mentioned my age in here numerous times. |
Oh well that makes my educated guess not seem as cool....
I guessed that because the attitude in your posts seem to be a person that was the end of the baby boomer area. |
Very perceptive. Depending on what definition you use, I am either the last of the baby boomers or the first of generation X. Overall, I think I fall more into generation X. Note that my posts in here do not necessarily reflect my real beliefs and attitudes accurately. |
I always wondered statistically what the IQ of people compared to mid generation vs at the end of a generation? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1271
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ak47gen wrote: | | I always wondered statistically what the IQ of people compared to mid generation vs at the end of a generation? |
I doubt there is any relationship, since "generation" is defined very arbitrarily and ambiguously.
Biologically, a generation is the average reproductive period of a species. For humans, that has traditionally been "about 20 years" but is now more like 26 in industrialized Western societies. That only has meaning with respect to a particular family (e.g., the Robert J. Smith family) or for a particular group of similar-aged peers (e.g., the class of 1981). Even there, it quickly loses meaning, because couples will have children at different ages, and over periods of time. So even at the second generation, you are at something like 26 years +/- 8 years. By the time you're looking at great-grandchildren, that has propagated to a range of 64 years -- a point where the social significance of their lineage would be all but entirely eclipsed by the experience of social context.
Sociologically, a generation is a group of people who shared certain influential experiences (e.g., those who went through World War I and raised a family during the Great Depression; those who went through World War II; those who were raised in the post-war idealism of the 1950s and acted out as sophomoric ass-hats in the late '60s and early '70s), or those to whom some identifiable sociological phenomenon applies (e.g., the baby boom). In my opinion, things like World Wars are significant enough to define "generations". But two generations removed, we are trying to apply labels to something that doesn't exist. In my opinion, there has been no "generation" per se after the Baby Boom.
Before the World Wars, people talked in terms of decades, or in terms of "eras" that were typically generational in length (i.e. about 20 years) and named for what was going on. I think this is a more useful thinking framework than the person-centric "generation". People are not only influenced by events during their adolescence. We had, for example, the "Federal Era" (1790-1830; consolidation and birth of a nation), the "Jacksonian Era" (1830-1840; aggressive growth); the "Antebellum Era" (1850-1860, industrialization, socio-political conflict); the "Civil War Era", the "Gilded Age" (1870-1890), the "Gay '90s" (1890s; was actually an economic depression, but an American upper class had emerged and they were partying it up), the "Edwardian", "Great War" or "Ragtime" era (1900-1919); the "Roaring '20s" (post-war exuberance and liberalism); the "Depression Era" (1930s); the "World War II" or "Hollywood" era (1940s); etc., etc.; "The Sixties" or "Vietnam Era"; and so on. These events influenced not only those who were growing up during that time, but people across many age groups.
Those for whom such an event becomes a defining influence on their thinking and behavior -- those are the people of a "generation". Sociologists, and even moreso, the general public, want an easy way to put the labels on people, and want to say, "born between date A and date B", but it just doesn't work that way.
Anyway, it would be extremely difficult to show that IQ is related to the timing of child development relative to sociologically definitive events (for example, that someone who grew up during height of the Cold War would have a higher or lower IQ than somebody who grew up toward its end). Other factors are undoubtedly far more salient.
Or maybe you were talking about birth order. I know nothing about that, but I'd guess that those earlier in the order tend to test higher, because they are challenged more and get more attention during childhood development.
_________________
Obama killed bin Laden like Nixon was the first man on the Moon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 15989
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2012 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Earth wrote: | | Native speakers have heard "would've" spoken since birth, while not necessarily realizing that it is a contraction of "would have". |
I was going to make a comment about learning that part in school, but never mind :D
| BoneKracker wrote: | | You missed your calling as a forensic etymologist. |
Thank you for your insight.
_________________
Safety is my gaol.
US Constitution | Amendments |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
