Well... coloration of brain in proximity to the body size. This has often been wondered as a possibility why dinosaurs have died out. Speaking of these types of creatures recently they found a real baby dragon recently... Brand new creatures to research and learn from small little thing. Now... why would it take so long for these creatures to come out? I'm not lying and this isn't fake, Look it up!!!
@simplycomplicated333: Ferociously ... deep, where great whites feast on flesh in chaotic murk, thrusting and thrashing limbs flail, frantically grasping ... air bubbles, as burgundine [aka burgundy] turbulence envelopes masters and prey, a new order unfurls from chaos, satiating blood lust for another day, 'til the morrow.
@souldude81: Say -- so do I...getting packed, 'cause these people are WHACK-A-DOODLES! See: Operation Blackjack. Most NWO stalwarts are neither high, super-high nor mega-high IQ Test score holders. Most of them, according to one mega-high IQ MD & Ph.D. score holder's online "names & scores" compilation, form a bell-curve BELOW that of the standard Benet apex. What that means is that by far the brightest and the best are EXCLUDED from NWO's Control Pyramid: unruly FEMA gulag fodder!!
@anomaly19851: Your "litmus test for lifetime success measurement" rates deeply flawed & foolishly obviates eg, "dispositional genetics"; these: non-conformists | anarchists | hermits | unimpressed and/or those whom eschew avarice: fore-or-aft bourgeois predilections, urgencies, values, environment et cetera. Chris Langan appears a) intelligent, b) none-too-familiar with accrued scholarship legacies, c) conflicted as to his "marginalized worldly bid status": Fungibility Rejection
I am unable to provide a link for proof but you could simply type in 'the mega society', enter the top link, click on issue #55 then proceed to the 'Letter to the Noetic Society'.
@1pineshooter1: LMAO!! You clearly graduated, if you did, from the lower % of your class!! For starters, my own casual punctuation in my posts is ok online, but would fail in corp; but, clearly, my writing demonstrates that I know the rules! Whereas, being that you don't have a clue as to nor grasp advanced/sophisticated punctuation, re simple, compound and/or complex sentence structure & sharp syntax, u proceed, too dumb to know u're dumb, spamming superbright CarCritic: WTF bro
"If I.Q. has any value whatever, that value depends on, and is dominated by, the real-world problems with whose solutions I.Q. allegedly correlates. To value I.Q. over its reason for existence would indicate a strange and loopy mentality." -- Just guess who wrote that. I'm not shitting anybody; Mr. Langan actually wrote that.
@LongandGeneric Well, then some people might argue: why does he comfirms that he is a genius in this video? Well, he also says that if he was to meet someone that is allegedly smarter then him then he would determine smarts by scrutinizing their work and not give them an IQ test. Thus he consider himself a genius beacuse he beleives his work can merit that title. I am glad you posted this, I think Chris is a very misunderstood man, but at the same time that is not so strange.
CL, juggle, among fallacies, logic-leaps. Post hoc ergo propter hoc: coincidental correlation sans causation: mal conclusion/s, solely upon events’ order vs. apt factors ass., correlation may or might rule out concatenation|linkage. EX: A occurs; then B::A 'cuz B? Rooster’s AM 'cuz sunrise? My maxim adherence: “Required, covariation data, alone, does not affirm causality”. In|De-ductive reasoning can beguile eg, “Texas Sharpshooter” doom; Euler’s|Venn diagrams; Failure Logic; Mierscheid’s law?
Okay -- I notice that studdly (sic) should read studly, except that, owing to the retro cartoon series' Duddly|Dudley DoRight impression...lol. Come'n, 'poor bastard 's been kicked around, akin to that '70's "live like a refugee ...." song's lyrics. 'Would 've likely ended-up another duc d' Orleans, w/ a massive Louis XIV chip, no? His cephalic index "off-the-page" reference -- though a 7 7/8 hat size here -- adds laughs ... but, I do like 'em; it's hard resisting jibes
@metamemetics: Glad to see another anti-Malthusian proponent orate. Ted Steele's embrace of Jean-Baptiste de la Marck checks denigration: "the ultimate Darwinian put-down" FKA "a lamark 'ism". That slur is no longer brandished among the informed. Nonetheless, the New Order crew -- a massive geo-political consortium -- ass-wipes eg, NASA, the Rockefeller & Ford foundations, along w/ IIEs et al agencies foist "Climate Change" & "Sustainability", re REX-84 & Agenda 21, as per a FEMA run futurology
@CarCriticAssessor: Brianiac, the more I'm reading your comments my head hurts!!! I go slow and reread each more than I intend but then it all makes sense, and that's scary. It's like you put my head in a vice!! You're crazy fast punctuation takes effort when you zing home!!!! I hope that I'll never end up writing like you do, because your brianiac condition takes too much energy. But I get your points. I hear you!!! You just love smacking people around:
A-OKAY: All tolled & despite his "every man 'ism, raised in adversity, low-brow, Plastic -- Dyed Hair 'wannbe studdly' -- Messiah routine...a la Eddie & the Cruisers"; despite trite rhetoric & orchestration...discounting, too, his "scripting & presentation shortcomings"...he's funny, in a mocumentary manner, as he "aligns himself with the prevailing powers-to-be" [or at least those he perceives might well respond to & bring him on-board the NWO gravy-train (FEMA)]: I like him; he's smart: lol
EVALUATION: Mr. Chris Langan posits an array of convolution. As a verified 175 out of a possible 175 IQ-Test holder [Universal IQ-Test for Military Pilots], I find that his phraseology eg, "present time" -- redundant; since, "presently" or "currently" (adverb) suffices: terse selectivity -- bespeaks a "core fraudulence" ie, at best he rates as an ill-conceived hustler of cliché Malthusian "scarcity" ill-logic; and, at worst, his obesity paired to dyed hair, apes despotic incisiveness: DORK
Ugh. Just watched the video again. This guy's philosophies come from utter inexperience in doing anything practical. It seems to me the man's never met a CEO and he's just playing the pathos card with such statements, which doesn't really work when you watch the rest of the video. He makes assumptions but wants you to believe he's an unassuming man. He's narcissistic but wants you to believe he cares about you. Nooope.
the best course of action is education on this subject not blunt hindrance. And you dont have the right to murder via home invasion, you have the ability to do so but ability and right can become blurred. i will give you the aids point tho god.
@thayoman707 Ability and free rights are quite clear on a number of things. In any given moment, anyone with the ability (most all humans) could run into a city with explosives, kill hundreds or thousands or millions of people. Gladly this is not the ability of most of our minds and thus our emotions, although physically it is possible. But, if our troublesome subjects were to live the explosions they caused, there would be severe consequences. But why?
@thayoman707 Because this action killed. And what we know of life, the happiest and healthiest of persons are clearly on the opposite end of dead bodies. Death brings pain in many ways, to many people. We have a moral obligation to avoid the worst suffering, and death (aside from very select, specific situations) and push towards the greatest happiness and human thriving for the greatest number of people. Logic is the key!
@Zachisgod92 Unfortunately greedy people suffer the most (it seems like that), so their happiness requires suffering of most of the people. Logic doesn't need morality to produce valid arguments, decisions (no matter how disastrous they may prove to be), that is, which was proven many times...
@thayoman707 That isn't entirely what he was saying. Basically, for absolute human progress we must all come to an understanding in certain morals. Morals that are well thought out and truly hold a position on a line ranging from "the greatest happiness" and "worst suffering", the goal is to achieve the highest percent of people on "the greatest happiness" end of the chart. Our morals must not come from faith in a god, or in a religion.
@thayoman707 It is up to our generation to establish radical change, for the good of future mankind. Chris Langan's reasoning is objectively flawless, what he says only slightly dips into a greater good, or I like to think of as a series of networks conceived by these universally accepted morality notions.
@thayoman707 If everyone is trained from early childhood and on, that all mankind are to be equal in freedoms again stemming from the core "what is wrong and evil/and what is right and good". And to control who can have children is a wonderful concept if you truly think about it. I'm not discriminating, nor am I prejudice against those with illnesses and diseases. But if we can avoid these things for future generations, wouldn't that be the best course of action for all?
@thayoman707 Controlling who has children would also be an enormous change for children who come from abused homes, children whos parents have left them and so forth. In order to have a child you must first go through an inspection of sorts, so that the best interests of the children are met. Do you see why this would be a good thing for us all?
@thayoman707 And that brings me to the final point, lmao sorry making you read all of that :), but freedom should not be a right for certain things that harm others. You do not have the free right to walk into someones home and kill them, this is unacceptable behavior , you should also not have the right to conceive a child living in the poverty, or if you have AIDs. And those are just two examples.
Anyone doubting his authenticity, have a quick look via google at his cognitive theoretical model of the universe. I would recommend ruminating several days over it and it would behoove you to have a strong background in matrix algebra as well. For someone without a formal education he is one eloquent mo fo and also very insightful albeit trop esoteric for the mainstream.
Which makes me think about Art! Not creating the genetically perfect species, but about the individuals that have had some of the highest IQ's/processing power have used it to create art! From paintings, to sculptures, to symphonies, to the theory of Gravity. But none have ever even contemplated making a perfect human. They weren't about themselves but about things that people could appreciate and use for inspiration. Almost like a way to connect, and show others something beautiful/living for!
If we create the perfect humans from an intellectual standpoint will we really advance in our way of living. We also have natural emotions that help create unique feelings that can also create new ideas, feelings, relationships, etc. that might answer something one of us couldn't even comprehend. I've always been a big proponent of two minds are better than one, not saying they have a better answer but might see something in a different light than the normal intellectual would.
I didn't watch the video but the commentary was enough of a brief synopsis and all I needed to hear. I'm not saying what he is saying is right or wrong but my beef is with the whole perfecting something. We should all know, religious or not, that nothing is certain and if not for people questioning others we wouldn't find the correct answers. Which is my main problem with the whole correcting our gene's theory. Like I said I didn't listen to it all but am responding to what others have said.
Although he is very intelligent, I think its a waste for him to just work at a bar. He could be solving physics or biology problems in a lab somewhere, advancing society. He even said as a more intelligent being, he has more responsibility to solve problems other humans cannot solve. I wonder if he is as smart as Edward Witten.
This creep is the reason why smaart ppl shouldnt always succeed..I agree something should not be happpening but to take it away&use conntrol takes the cake
Let's assume that we're all genetically perfect, and similar, through breeding. We've perfected a way of living that can continue essentially indefinitely without running out of resources, nor giving any individual less than the next. There is no conflict because we all share the same idea of right and wrong under one standard ethical code.
All that's left is understanding reality. And this understanding will satisfy us so that our now "boring" mortal lives are irrelevant?
@AtheistKharm Maybe you should try watching the videos again, because in case you missed it, he created the CTMU. The cognitive theoretical model of the universe.
Look up Platto's form and every time someone tells him how do you know something is real they come to mathematics to prove it, but life isn't a big math problems sometimes fact is a perspective, look up Nietzsche, he tells you the real deal of what is someones "fact" it's a big game of fact or fiction, in the end I might view it wrong he might view it right, he says his math conclusion is right but math conclusion is a perspective therefore, perspectives are opinion, my question is
Conclusion: Being smart sucks, I want to be a huge douche with a fat share in the stock holding, whose with me, let's grab the big cheese, people, come on.
To everyone asking why Chris doesn't bother with becoming a doctor, or physicist, or mathematician... even though he could probably excel easily on those levels. Easy, he can be what HE wants to be, not what others EXPECT him to be.
For such a smart guy who says he doesn't want to be a bouncer and is doing it because he get's to stand and think, he should be able to put an ounce of his intelligence in to another trade, create a business, or create an organization that could support him. Nope, I think his early life screwed him up from reaching his potential. I'm not following this guy.
@TravelingBlogBum He doesn't want to make money... Creating a business or "learning a trade" would eat up and waste the time he wants to spend thinking and solving the problems he's actually interested in. And since these problems are so above anyone else, it's not like there are any job openings for it. It's essentially, what he believes, is the mentality we have to take as a race if we're to survive. At least that's what I understood.
@danhantheman That they're simplistic and stupid? Gee, are you saying that a much smarter person looks at a stupid person and says they're bright and insightful? Don't worship, my friend.
Although, in retrospect it may be us the viewers who are mistaking his mere opinions with expertise simply because we're prone to believe that he is extraordinarily smart.
It seems to me that he's confusing his intelligence with expertise and subsequently answering questions he's not informed well enough to answer intelligently.
But how can you say if someone is or isn't smarter than you are? People are 'smart' in differing ways. Architects are a different form of intelligence than philosophers, but neither is more intelligent than the other. And when he refers to the hypothetical PERSON who is challenging his intellect, he assumes that person would be male. That is an unintelligent assumption.
@OutsideTheBox28 The years have led me to believe that intelligence is best measured in terms of personal satisfaction. In this regard, IQ has little relevance. However, when speaking of architects vs philosophers, you'll note that most of the "smartest" men in history were indeed philosophers as opposed to architects. Certain fields tend to draw certain intellects.
@Ieatutube But I would say Architects are JUST as smart as philosophers (and they haven't all been men). That was my point. I don't think you can say one person is smarter than the other because there are different kinds of intelligence. Besides, philosophy is a more readily discussed profession than architecture, which might be why throughout history we have heard more about 'smart' philosophers than 'smart' architects.
@OutsideTheBox28 You're making a wild generalization to say that one profession is "just" as smart as another. Wouldn't you expect a "typical" genius in the U.S. Army to be different from a "typical" genius in the fields literature or philosophy? Each occupation appeals to different types of people and so probably lack equality in aggregate intelligence. Most great achievers have been men (for better or worse). It's no wonder men are unduly cast as "smarter".
@Ieatutube But one could also say you are making a generalization in saying that one field of intelligence is 'more than' another. What I am saying is that there are different kinds of intelligence and they are likely not comparable. I would never say that a person who excels in one field is smarter than one who excels in another. And yes, MOST (but not ALL) recognized 'geniuses' have been male. But that has more to do with culture and oppression than anything.
@OutsideTheBox28 Generalizations are absolutely necessary for describing the world in a comprehensible frame. It is only when a generalization becomes too much of a blanket it looses relevance. Admittedly, I've been exchanging comments with you without knowing the context of your original posting. To disagree: Sure there are multiple intelligences but only one type (that associated with standard IQ) is highly correlated with Western notions of high achievement in professional/academic fields.
@Ieatutube But I would agree! Only one type that is recognized in our culture. WESTERN notions. The space we have constructed here in the West calls for corresponding attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs. That doesn't make it real. J. Krishnamurti and Eckhart Tolle and other spiritual leaders are brilliant, but they all did poorly in academics. That doesn't make them stupid, that makes the world they live in blind. That is why I would like the world to be restructured - Zeitgeist Moving Forward.
@Ieatutube It is just nice to use inclusive language because for one, there have been recognized female achievers (they are not all male, so you can't use that word as if it were set in stone that only men can achieve). Second, women are coming from a history where they have been told they can't achieve because of their gender and that sets in motion "the stereotype threat." The language you used is in the same realm. There are really interesting psych experiments out there on this.
@OutsideTheBox28 But how can you say if someone is or isn't smarter than you are?
People aren't one dimensional in terms of intelligence. People have different levels of intelligence for the innumerable number of subjects that exist. Most people have a high level of intelligence in at least one area. "True geniuses" though have a high level of intelligence in multiple subjects of particular importance.
To measure and compare is a matter of "averaging" the results of the tested subject areas.
@OutsideTheBox28 But one should keep in mind that emotional volatility ( how well one is able to control their emotions on different subjects) can cause variability in the different "intelligences."
@OutsideTheBox28 You said " But how can you say if someone is or isn't smarter than you are? People are 'smart' in differing ways." I suggested, Basically, that the "averaging" of an individuals "intelligence" on differentsubjects of particular importance to derive a single IQ score can be used to show different overall intelligence between people b/c people aren't one dimensional in terms of intelligence. We use our different "intelligence" in different subjects each day to achieve our goals.
@OutsideTheBox28 and when you compare overall "intelligence" in conjunction w/i emotional volatility, you can determine whether one individual is more "intelligent" than the other.
@mena88 I guess I'm still unclear about what you mean by emotional volatility...why does someone who is more emotionally volatile less intelligent? There are a great many very smart people I know who have very high IQ scores, but they are also very emotional and moody. So I'm not sure I get the connection you are making. Perhaps you can direct me to a research paper or a book on the subject. Thanks!
@OutsideTheBox28 It's nice to see you keep up with gender studies instead of falling strictly into the idiotic feminist "the inherently evil male oppresses females" camp. I have seen the research you are referring to and find it profoundly sad that gender expectations of parents and teachers as well as historical notions discourage females from even attempting high levels achievement in academic/professional fields.
umm, but how would you determine who was healthy or fit enough to reproduce when the bio-psycho-social world effects genes too? Genes are not an island. If they were, flies that look like wasps would never have developed. And if everyone is the same - like everyone has the same super-genes - does that not fly in the face of the evolutionary theory that calls for diversity within species so as to overcome environmental pressures?
@OutsideTheBox28 If anything, I would say it might be just as important to restructure the ENVIRONMENT that the genes exist in (Zeitgeist Moving Forward) - see how many of the abnormalities and diseases in the human species dissipate when the environment facilitates ideal physical and cognitive development.
There is an interesting fact about intelligence. People tend to understand those whose intelligence approximates theirs or is lower easily, but have difficulty in understanding those whose intelligence is significantly higher than theirs. One should keep this in mind before jumping to erroneous conclusions about a person whom they probably have never met nor thoroughly examined his concepts.
@Wordlaw12 It's the God of Spinoza, more or less. An attempt to define the absurdity of the nature of Nature. In fact... for many philosophers it is the only explanation. Einstein used the term. The very concept of a god or God, when used by such thinkers, is about the concept of absolute knowledge or something containing it.
I read Malcolm Gladwells 'Outliers' which argues the great Chris Langan would have made it further in life if he showed more emotional intelligence and was able to convince, influence and negotiate with greater skill.
I now understand what Gladwell mean't ..... Langan is intimidating, detached, unnerving and creepy. I don't think there is anything smart about that. He is a loner living in a herd-oriented world .
big words doesn't make an intelligent being. There are many flaws in his logic and theories that it just shows that an IQ isn't everything. Smart? no, Psychopath? Yes.
Eugenics? Wow, I guess it has been long enough since the Third Reich for this backwards idea to come back. He's a fascist, clear and simple. IQ isn't a qualification for being a dictator. I've read his CTMU, and he either makes very fundamental misunderstandings about set theory and logic, and hides it by using lots of really big words, or he has an inability to communicate well with others. Either way, this guy shows that a high IQ score doesn't automatically qualify someone to do everything.
I.Q. is completely overrated. I play chess pretty well (almost 2000 USCF), and people always say, "Wow, you must be so smart." It's completely untrue. Success in chess is not related to intelligence at all. I see wackos playing chess all the time who can't even hold a simple job but are amazing at chess. Same goes for I.Q. Just 'cause you have a high I.Q. doesn't mean you are a good person or intelligent. It means you can ace a test. And btw, my I.Q. is 140. And it don't mean SHIT! real talk
@Fupper16 Let me see if I uderstood it correctly. Are you actually implying that holding at least simple job is a sign of intelligence? I know some good chess players that don't look smart to me (some had problems with math, which by common prejudice implies they aren't intelligent), but I could be wrong, some may just don't like (or know how) to show it...Btw, do you have a job? :-)
@mujotomi Put simply, there are many different kinds of intelligence, so it is difficult to accurately ascertain if someone is 'intelligent' by an grounds. However, basic intelligence encompasses the bare minimum of living, for example: social skills, writing ability, abstract thinking, spatial visualization, and the like. However, there are autistic savants who can do the former two, but cannot tie their shoes. So yes, it is a difficult subject. And no, I do not have a job:)
@Fupper16 I agree with all that you say (even about IQ tests) but intelligence does exist . So does differences between people . And there are people that are way way above the average .
I'd like to say "if he's really this smart, why isn't he teaching global politics at MIT" or something, but in a way it makes sense that he might be doing something like bouncing. Maybe he's one of these people who has a super-high functioning intellect, but is lower-functioning in the social skills department, or in the ability or motivation to obtain a more prestigious position in life.
@iceman8067 Maybe he doesn't like the picture of corrupted society, so maybe everything which add to this picture (prestigious position in life requests this addition) repels him. Society isn't even close to ideal, so in order to move it closer to it, you need to be "lower-functioning in the social skills department" (kind of apparent paradox: to be "social" in the highest degree you have to be "anti-social").
Mate, your productions end where your brain meets your skull. If raw intelligence matters, don't waste yours by sitting around proposing ways to improve society, and actually contribute.
This is is very smart guy, and deep down I agree with a lot of what he says, but at the same time, he seems to be an elitist. Having a high IQ gives you the ability to think up ideas more easily, and to rationalize your ideas (very effectively in his case), but I really don't know how easily the pragmatism of these ideas can be measured. I really don't see how someone with a lower IQ is incapable of coming up with a pragmatic idea, even if they can't back it like him.
For all this guy's brains he knows squat about one way/reason humans evolved and that IS due to mutation which to many of us would be considered 'bad genes' by our standards.
Prescribing 'eugentics' or whatever the hell he decided to call it, can essentially stunt our evolution and even, wait for it--wait for it-- CAUSE the dying off of our species.
Why? Because variation is the key. Variation in a species is needed as an affront to future viruses etc. It's settled--smart people-not so smart.
This fella is opinionated sure...He may be intelligent, but his wisdom is limited to his own morals and values...you only know as much as there is to know he doesn't have answers anybody else hasn't already discussed and I believe his thinking is along the lines of a famous dictator known for controlling the population...need I say more?
Langan likens people agreeing about something to 2+2=4. Well that's very true, and if we are to liken the concept of everyone's happiness to 4, well then 2+2 isn't the only way of getting there. We also have 1+3, 5-1 etc. In other words, one person's way (ie Langan's) isn't the only way we need do things.
As to skepticism about his intelligence, he got a perfect on the SAT and scored extremely high on IQ tests, so that's sufficient evidence that he is indeed extremely intelligent.
@ClamCrunchy There is little doubt of how fast he can learn things, how he can comprehend on a level higher than average. But what does he know? Knowledge and intelligence go hand and hand but they are not the same thing. He has an impressive potential for learning but what has he contributed?
I think someone's measure intelligence lies in their accomplishments, actions, experiences and influence. Until this man says or does or says anything of note, his IQ means nothing.
Anti-disgenics should have been done a long time ago. Our planet is doomed. Our resources are finite and with massive, ecumenical quandaries such as global warming and overpopulation looming over our heads, it seems our problems are just too great.
Not too great to solve theoretically. Evolution has conditioned us to deal with nearly anything that we must. But too great in scope considering the fact that morons are the vast majority of first world democratic societies.
also " the dumb person think he is as smart as the smart person" when later on he says "we are all equal" what the unholy fuck is he talking about... he is just talking fucking nonsense.
This guy is a delusional fraud. He gets a high score in the IQ test and now he wants to order society so the control rests with those who score high in IQ testing ? Sounds like a fascist presupposition to me. You can't fucking measure intelligence into one single digit, you have to be an insurmountable idiot to believe that possible. In fact in a Darwinian evolutionary sense survival and ability to survive is interchangeable with intelligence. Not a fucking IQ test.
@utube2344 Have you even watched the interview ? he states numerous times that he believes IQ is the foundation for determining human intelligence.ITS WHAT THE WHOLE FUCKING VIDEO IS ABOUT A MAN WITH A HIGH IQ. Holy shit can people be more stupid. Your sexual last for chris langan is obvious think before you post.
@nikeabdallah Actually it is. Seeing as evolution is the process by which nature determines which traits are more useful than others and intelligence is a by product of evolution. Evolution is always in command of intelligence. Ability to survive and adapt to an environment are the only kinds of intelligence that evolution favours. Whether or not you come up with the general theory of relativity has no direct bearing on your ability to survive. Put Einstein in the desert see how long he lasts.
@nikeabdallah Evolution only prioritises application of theories into an advantage for the proponent. Having superior scientific knowledge may lead to a heightened sense of intelligence or advantageous awareness, in an evolutionary sense, but this only becomes relevant in the application of that knowledge. Also the exclusion of that knowledge from others, which almost all scientific knowledge is inclusive and used for the good of all. Humans can't measure intelligence only evolution can and has
@nikeabdallah Evolution didn't cause life on this earth that is the theory of abiogenesis. Evolution is the theory of how life diversifies once it already exists. I don't wish to argue with someone who, presumably, thinks 'godidit'. That is the most illogical answer of them all.
@Pomaori Well god did do it and if you don't think that you are either an atheist or just confused. I honestly do not wish to argue further on this topic and I will not reply anymore.
The fallacy in his argument: if his production is greater than mine, he is smarter than me. Ergo, bill gates, Larry Page, Mark Zukerberg, Charles Darwin, Barack Obama are smarter than him
He makes the same mistake that many smart people make. What is a friend? Another I. When you are really good at some small area of life, it is very hard to avoid re-writing the definition of intelligence in terms of whatever it is you are good at. One of the hardest skills to learn is selective humility. Ironically, this is relatively easy if you are in the center of the bell curve.
I was born near the top end of the bell curve and this is something I struggle with every day.
I feel that each person is smarter than the other one. What do I mean by that, I mean that maybe you may be smarter math that I may be. I may be smarter than you in something else. I just feel that if we all have the ability to stay in control and not try to beat one an other to the top then we will reach the top together.
Does anyone else notice the contradiction while he explains his philosophy of how the future society ought (should be)? "those with greater intelligence (ability) should be separated from those with less intelligence, only by accepting greater RESPONSIBILITY. I am skeptical of his genius, although he does appear to be quite smart, he is still a bouncer. If he wants to make a difference, he should work on getting his "productions" or philosophies publicized and gain some actual accreditation.
He is suppose to be the smartest person in the word, making him the dumbest person in the word as well. His name alone the side of names like einstein or darwin is an atrocity to history. All the people on this list choose to do something with their gift, they became somebody and did extraordinary things for human kind. He took his gift and choose to be a loser, a bum, a bouncer....?? However, I can show my children how a mind can be wasted away without a purpose or goals. So thank you Chris..
He answered the questions his interviewer posed. Why would he bother going off on a tangent that the vast majority of viewers wouldn't understand? Also, remember that this is a very, very intelligent man whose world view has been tempered by a lifetime of dealing not only with "average" minds but cruel and drunken minds.
Well... coloration of brain in proximity to the body size. This has often been wondered as a possibility why dinosaurs have died out. Speaking of these types of creatures recently they found a real baby dragon recently... Brand new creatures to research and learn from small little thing. Now... why would it take so long for these creatures to come out? I'm not lying and this isn't fake, Look it up!!!
SweetCaraid 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@simplycomplicated333: Ferociously ... deep, where great whites feast on flesh in chaotic murk, thrusting and thrashing limbs flail, frantically grasping ... air bubbles, as burgundine [aka burgundy] turbulence envelopes masters and prey, a new order unfurls from chaos, satiating blood lust for another day, 'til the morrow.
CarCriticAssessor 1 week ago
@CarCriticAssessor I like your comments they're fun to read. I'm subscribing for more.
LongandGeneric 1 week ago
"I am Chris Langan and God put me on the earth to save humanity. Thank you." -Chris Langan
FreeMarketSwine 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@souldude81: Say -- so do I...getting packed, 'cause these people are WHACK-A-DOODLES! See: Operation Blackjack. Most NWO stalwarts are neither high, super-high nor mega-high IQ Test score holders. Most of them, according to one mega-high IQ MD & Ph.D. score holder's online "names & scores" compilation, form a bell-curve BELOW that of the standard Benet apex. What that means is that by far the brightest and the best are EXCLUDED from NWO's Control Pyramid: unruly FEMA gulag fodder!!
LogicCheck 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
CarCriticAssessor 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
CarCriticAssessor 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@anomaly19851: Your "litmus test for lifetime success measurement" rates deeply flawed & foolishly obviates eg, "dispositional genetics"; these: non-conformists | anarchists | hermits | unimpressed and/or those whom eschew avarice: fore-or-aft bourgeois predilections, urgencies, values, environment et cetera. Chris Langan appears a) intelligent, b) none-too-familiar with accrued scholarship legacies, c) conflicted as to his "marginalized worldly bid status": Fungibility Rejection
CarCriticAssessor 2 weeks ago
I am unable to provide a link for proof but you could simply type in 'the mega society', enter the top link, click on issue #55 then proceed to the 'Letter to the Noetic Society'.
LongandGeneric 3 weeks ago 2
@1pineshooter1: LMAO!! You clearly graduated, if you did, from the lower % of your class!! For starters, my own casual punctuation in my posts is ok online, but would fail in corp; but, clearly, my writing demonstrates that I know the rules! Whereas, being that you don't have a clue as to nor grasp advanced/sophisticated punctuation, re simple, compound and/or complex sentence structure & sharp syntax, u proceed, too dumb to know u're dumb, spamming superbright CarCritic: WTF bro
LogicCheck 2 weeks ago
"If I.Q. has any value whatever, that value depends on, and is dominated by, the real-world problems with whose solutions I.Q. allegedly correlates. To value I.Q. over its reason for existence would indicate a strange and loopy mentality." -- Just guess who wrote that. I'm not shitting anybody; Mr. Langan actually wrote that.
LongandGeneric 3 weeks ago
@LongandGeneric Well, then some people might argue: why does he comfirms that he is a genius in this video? Well, he also says that if he was to meet someone that is allegedly smarter then him then he would determine smarts by scrutinizing their work and not give them an IQ test. Thus he consider himself a genius beacuse he beleives his work can merit that title. I am glad you posted this, I think Chris is a very misunderstood man, but at the same time that is not so strange.
ThePaul1E 2 weeks ago
CL, juggle, among fallacies, logic-leaps. Post hoc ergo propter hoc: coincidental correlation sans causation: mal conclusion/s, solely upon events’ order vs. apt factors ass., correlation may or might rule out concatenation|linkage. EX: A occurs; then B::A 'cuz B? Rooster’s AM 'cuz sunrise? My maxim adherence: “Required, covariation data, alone, does not affirm causality”. In|De-ductive reasoning can beguile eg, “Texas Sharpshooter” doom; Euler’s|Venn diagrams; Failure Logic; Mierscheid’s law?
CarCriticAssessor 3 weeks ago in playlist Chris Langan
This has been flagged as spam show
Okay -- I notice that studdly (sic) should read studly, except that, owing to the retro cartoon series' Duddly|Dudley DoRight impression...lol. Come'n, 'poor bastard 's been kicked around, akin to that '70's "live like a refugee ...." song's lyrics. 'Would 've likely ended-up another duc d' Orleans, w/ a massive Louis XIV chip, no? His cephalic index "off-the-page" reference -- though a 7 7/8 hat size here -- adds laughs ... but, I do like 'em; it's hard resisting jibes
CarCriticAssessor 3 weeks ago
@metamemetics: Glad to see another anti-Malthusian proponent orate. Ted Steele's embrace of Jean-Baptiste de la Marck checks denigration: "the ultimate Darwinian put-down" FKA "a lamark 'ism". That slur is no longer brandished among the informed. Nonetheless, the New Order crew -- a massive geo-political consortium -- ass-wipes eg, NASA, the Rockefeller & Ford foundations, along w/ IIEs et al agencies foist "Climate Change" & "Sustainability", re REX-84 & Agenda 21, as per a FEMA run futurology
CarCriticAssessor 3 weeks ago in playlist Genius- how they think
@CarCriticAssessor: Brianiac, the more I'm reading your comments my head hurts!!! I go slow and reread each more than I intend but then it all makes sense, and that's scary. It's like you put my head in a vice!! You're crazy fast punctuation takes effort when you zing home!!!! I hope that I'll never end up writing like you do, because your brianiac condition takes too much energy. But I get your points. I hear you!!! You just love smacking people around:
*brianiac slow slap
LogicCheck 2 weeks ago
A-OKAY: All tolled & despite his "every man 'ism, raised in adversity, low-brow, Plastic -- Dyed Hair 'wannbe studdly' -- Messiah routine...a la Eddie & the Cruisers"; despite trite rhetoric & orchestration...discounting, too, his "scripting & presentation shortcomings"...he's funny, in a mocumentary manner, as he "aligns himself with the prevailing powers-to-be" [or at least those he perceives might well respond to & bring him on-board the NWO gravy-train (FEMA)]: I like him; he's smart: lol
CarCriticAssessor 3 weeks ago
EVALUATION: Mr. Chris Langan posits an array of convolution. As a verified 175 out of a possible 175 IQ-Test holder [Universal IQ-Test for Military Pilots], I find that his phraseology eg, "present time" -- redundant; since, "presently" or "currently" (adverb) suffices: terse selectivity -- bespeaks a "core fraudulence" ie, at best he rates as an ill-conceived hustler of cliché Malthusian "scarcity" ill-logic; and, at worst, his obesity paired to dyed hair, apes despotic incisiveness: DORK
CarCriticAssessor 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
CarCriticAssessor 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
CarCriticAssessor 3 weeks ago in playlist Genius- how they think
Ugh. Just watched the video again. This guy's philosophies come from utter inexperience in doing anything practical. It seems to me the man's never met a CEO and he's just playing the pathos card with such statements, which doesn't really work when you watch the rest of the video. He makes assumptions but wants you to believe he's an unassuming man. He's narcissistic but wants you to believe he cares about you. Nooope.
Liberum69 4 weeks ago
the best course of action is education on this subject not blunt hindrance. And you dont have the right to murder via home invasion, you have the ability to do so but ability and right can become blurred. i will give you the aids point tho god.
thayoman707 1 month ago
@thayoman707 Ability and free rights are quite clear on a number of things. In any given moment, anyone with the ability (most all humans) could run into a city with explosives, kill hundreds or thousands or millions of people. Gladly this is not the ability of most of our minds and thus our emotions, although physically it is possible. But, if our troublesome subjects were to live the explosions they caused, there would be severe consequences. But why?
Zachisgod92 3 weeks ago
@thayoman707 Because this action killed. And what we know of life, the happiest and healthiest of persons are clearly on the opposite end of dead bodies. Death brings pain in many ways, to many people. We have a moral obligation to avoid the worst suffering, and death (aside from very select, specific situations) and push towards the greatest happiness and human thriving for the greatest number of people. Logic is the key!
Zachisgod92 3 weeks ago
@Zachisgod92 Unfortunately greedy people suffer the most (it seems like that), so their happiness requires suffering of most of the people. Logic doesn't need morality to produce valid arguments, decisions (no matter how disastrous they may prove to be), that is, which was proven many times...
mujotomi 3 weeks ago
@thayoman707 are clearly the opposite of dead bodies**
Zachisgod92 3 weeks ago
Man, this is ridiculous. I don't deny that he's brilliant, but how is this video enlightening? How are these cliches getting us anywhere?
CaptainCrunchOwns 1 month ago
freedom is not a right? what a nut!
thayoman707 1 month ago
@thayoman707 That isn't entirely what he was saying. Basically, for absolute human progress we must all come to an understanding in certain morals. Morals that are well thought out and truly hold a position on a line ranging from "the greatest happiness" and "worst suffering", the goal is to achieve the highest percent of people on "the greatest happiness" end of the chart. Our morals must not come from faith in a god, or in a religion.
Zachisgod92 1 month ago
@thayoman707 It is up to our generation to establish radical change, for the good of future mankind. Chris Langan's reasoning is objectively flawless, what he says only slightly dips into a greater good, or I like to think of as a series of networks conceived by these universally accepted morality notions.
Zachisgod92 1 month ago
@thayoman707 If everyone is trained from early childhood and on, that all mankind are to be equal in freedoms again stemming from the core "what is wrong and evil/and what is right and good". And to control who can have children is a wonderful concept if you truly think about it. I'm not discriminating, nor am I prejudice against those with illnesses and diseases. But if we can avoid these things for future generations, wouldn't that be the best course of action for all?
Zachisgod92 1 month ago
@thayoman707 Controlling who has children would also be an enormous change for children who come from abused homes, children whos parents have left them and so forth. In order to have a child you must first go through an inspection of sorts, so that the best interests of the children are met. Do you see why this would be a good thing for us all?
Zachisgod92 1 month ago
@thayoman707 And that brings me to the final point, lmao sorry making you read all of that :), but freedom should not be a right for certain things that harm others. You do not have the free right to walk into someones home and kill them, this is unacceptable behavior , you should also not have the right to conceive a child living in the poverty, or if you have AIDs. And those are just two examples.
Zachisgod92 1 month ago
@Zachisgod92 sorry for* making* / living in poverty *
Zachisgod92 1 month ago
Anyone doubting his authenticity, have a quick look via google at his cognitive theoretical model of the universe. I would recommend ruminating several days over it and it would behoove you to have a strong background in matrix algebra as well. For someone without a formal education he is one eloquent mo fo and also very insightful albeit trop esoteric for the mainstream.
thecommonpatriot 1 month ago 2
Which makes me think about Art! Not creating the genetically perfect species, but about the individuals that have had some of the highest IQ's/processing power have used it to create art! From paintings, to sculptures, to symphonies, to the theory of Gravity. But none have ever even contemplated making a perfect human. They weren't about themselves but about things that people could appreciate and use for inspiration. Almost like a way to connect, and show others something beautiful/living for!
BigTuna24241 1 month ago
If we create the perfect humans from an intellectual standpoint will we really advance in our way of living. We also have natural emotions that help create unique feelings that can also create new ideas, feelings, relationships, etc. that might answer something one of us couldn't even comprehend. I've always been a big proponent of two minds are better than one, not saying they have a better answer but might see something in a different light than the normal intellectual would.
BigTuna24241 1 month ago
I didn't watch the video but the commentary was enough of a brief synopsis and all I needed to hear. I'm not saying what he is saying is right or wrong but my beef is with the whole perfecting something. We should all know, religious or not, that nothing is certain and if not for people questioning others we wouldn't find the correct answers. Which is my main problem with the whole correcting our gene's theory. Like I said I didn't listen to it all but am responding to what others have said.
BigTuna24241 1 month ago
ahh nuts to this less artsy more fartsy. -Homer j simpson
tripptacular 1 month ago
Although he is very intelligent, I think its a waste for him to just work at a bar. He could be solving physics or biology problems in a lab somewhere, advancing society. He even said as a more intelligent being, he has more responsibility to solve problems other humans cannot solve. I wonder if he is as smart as Edward Witten.
dietsnapple89 1 month ago
This creep is the reason why smaart ppl shouldnt always succeed..I agree something should not be happpening but to take it away&use conntrol takes the cake
YoungGsuperstar8 1 month ago
4:46 - Faith is dead. "People no longer believe in anything."
Someone tell this to bible humpers.
4:55 - "Yes, we can call the universe the mind of God. We are all little pieces of God"
Oh, there you go. You also believe in something.
DrQuijano 1 month ago
Let's assume that we're all genetically perfect, and similar, through breeding. We've perfected a way of living that can continue essentially indefinitely without running out of resources, nor giving any individual less than the next. There is no conflict because we all share the same idea of right and wrong under one standard ethical code.
All that's left is understanding reality. And this understanding will satisfy us so that our now "boring" mortal lives are irrelevant?
WatcherofTrends 1 month ago
Man, this guy is really full of himself. I have yet to hear him put forward any impressive ideas.
AtheistKharm 1 month ago
@AtheistKharm Maybe you should try watching the videos again, because in case you missed it, he created the CTMU. The cognitive theoretical model of the universe.
razor8900 1 month ago
Is this a joke?
IBcooful 1 month ago
How does he know he know what is right and what is wrong?
negvey 2 months ago
@negvey He doesn't. He just knows what is logical with given situations.
DjinnGuru 1 month ago
Look up Platto's form and every time someone tells him how do you know something is real they come to mathematics to prove it, but life isn't a big math problems sometimes fact is a perspective, look up Nietzsche, he tells you the real deal of what is someones "fact" it's a big game of fact or fiction, in the end I might view it wrong he might view it right, he says his math conclusion is right but math conclusion is a perspective therefore, perspectives are opinion, my question is
negvey 2 months ago
Conclusion: Being smart sucks, I want to be a huge douche with a fat share in the stock holding, whose with me, let's grab the big cheese, people, come on.
educassiano 2 months ago 7
@educassiano I'm down
thanythanyy 2 months ago
To everyone asking why Chris doesn't bother with becoming a doctor, or physicist, or mathematician... even though he could probably excel easily on those levels. Easy, he can be what HE wants to be, not what others EXPECT him to be.
JohnEliasOnSTEAM 2 months ago
if this guy was smart he would have been a scientist, wrote a book, start a business, etc. why be a bouncer? he fails
worldchampionboxer 2 months ago
@worldchampionboxer You are an awesome listener.
razor8900 1 month ago
For such a smart guy who says he doesn't want to be a bouncer and is doing it because he get's to stand and think, he should be able to put an ounce of his intelligence in to another trade, create a business, or create an organization that could support him. Nope, I think his early life screwed him up from reaching his potential. I'm not following this guy.
TravelingBlogBum 2 months ago
@TravelingBlogBum He doesn't want to make money... Creating a business or "learning a trade" would eat up and waste the time he wants to spend thinking and solving the problems he's actually interested in. And since these problems are so above anyone else, it's not like there are any job openings for it. It's essentially, what he believes, is the mentality we have to take as a race if we're to survive. At least that's what I understood.
razor8900 1 month ago
There's something surprisingly simplistic and stupid about this extremely intelligent person.
Liberum69 2 months ago
@Liberum69 it's what a more stupid person would think of a much smarter person. its okay ain't your fault
danhantheman 4 weeks ago
@danhantheman That they're simplistic and stupid? Gee, are you saying that a much smarter person looks at a stupid person and says they're bright and insightful? Don't worship, my friend.
Liberum69 4 weeks ago
Although, in retrospect it may be us the viewers who are mistaking his mere opinions with expertise simply because we're prone to believe that he is extraordinarily smart.
Ieatutube 3 months ago
It seems to me that he's confusing his intelligence with expertise and subsequently answering questions he's not informed well enough to answer intelligently.
Ieatutube 3 months ago
But how can you say if someone is or isn't smarter than you are? People are 'smart' in differing ways. Architects are a different form of intelligence than philosophers, but neither is more intelligent than the other. And when he refers to the hypothetical PERSON who is challenging his intellect, he assumes that person would be male. That is an unintelligent assumption.
OutsideTheBox28 3 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 The years have led me to believe that intelligence is best measured in terms of personal satisfaction. In this regard, IQ has little relevance. However, when speaking of architects vs philosophers, you'll note that most of the "smartest" men in history were indeed philosophers as opposed to architects. Certain fields tend to draw certain intellects.
Ieatutube 2 months ago
@Ieatutube But I would say Architects are JUST as smart as philosophers (and they haven't all been men). That was my point. I don't think you can say one person is smarter than the other because there are different kinds of intelligence. Besides, philosophy is a more readily discussed profession than architecture, which might be why throughout history we have heard more about 'smart' philosophers than 'smart' architects.
OutsideTheBox28 2 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 You're making a wild generalization to say that one profession is "just" as smart as another. Wouldn't you expect a "typical" genius in the U.S. Army to be different from a "typical" genius in the fields literature or philosophy? Each occupation appeals to different types of people and so probably lack equality in aggregate intelligence. Most great achievers have been men (for better or worse). It's no wonder men are unduly cast as "smarter".
Ieatutube 2 months ago
@Ieatutube But one could also say you are making a generalization in saying that one field of intelligence is 'more than' another. What I am saying is that there are different kinds of intelligence and they are likely not comparable. I would never say that a person who excels in one field is smarter than one who excels in another. And yes, MOST (but not ALL) recognized 'geniuses' have been male. But that has more to do with culture and oppression than anything.
OutsideTheBox28 2 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 Generalizations are absolutely necessary for describing the world in a comprehensible frame. It is only when a generalization becomes too much of a blanket it looses relevance. Admittedly, I've been exchanging comments with you without knowing the context of your original posting. To disagree: Sure there are multiple intelligences but only one type (that associated with standard IQ) is highly correlated with Western notions of high achievement in professional/academic fields.
Ieatutube 2 months ago
@Ieatutube But I would agree! Only one type that is recognized in our culture. WESTERN notions. The space we have constructed here in the West calls for corresponding attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs. That doesn't make it real. J. Krishnamurti and Eckhart Tolle and other spiritual leaders are brilliant, but they all did poorly in academics. That doesn't make them stupid, that makes the world they live in blind. That is why I would like the world to be restructured - Zeitgeist Moving Forward.
OutsideTheBox28 2 months ago
@Ieatutube It is just nice to use inclusive language because for one, there have been recognized female achievers (they are not all male, so you can't use that word as if it were set in stone that only men can achieve). Second, women are coming from a history where they have been told they can't achieve because of their gender and that sets in motion "the stereotype threat." The language you used is in the same realm. There are really interesting psych experiments out there on this.
OutsideTheBox28 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@OutsideTheBox28 But how can you say if someone is or isn't smarter than you are?
People aren't one dimensional in terms of intelligence. People have different levels of intelligence for the innumerable number of subjects that exist. Most people have a high level of intelligence in at least one area. "True geniuses" though have a high level of intelligence in multiple subjects of particular importance.
To measure and compare is a matter of "averaging" the results of the tested subject areas.
mena88 2 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 But one should keep in mind that emotional volatility ( how well one is able to control their emotions on different subjects) can cause variability in the different "intelligences."
mena88 2 months ago
@mena88 I'm not sure how that relates to what I said above. Can you explain?
OutsideTheBox28 2 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 You said " But how can you say if someone is or isn't smarter than you are? People are 'smart' in differing ways." I suggested, Basically, that the "averaging" of an individuals "intelligence" on differentsubjects of particular importance to derive a single IQ score can be used to show different overall intelligence between people b/c people aren't one dimensional in terms of intelligence. We use our different "intelligence" in different subjects each day to achieve our goals.
mena88 2 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 and when you compare overall "intelligence" in conjunction w/i emotional volatility, you can determine whether one individual is more "intelligent" than the other.
mena88 2 months ago
@mena88 I guess I'm still unclear about what you mean by emotional volatility...why does someone who is more emotionally volatile less intelligent? There are a great many very smart people I know who have very high IQ scores, but they are also very emotional and moody. So I'm not sure I get the connection you are making. Perhaps you can direct me to a research paper or a book on the subject. Thanks!
OutsideTheBox28 2 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 It's nice to see you keep up with gender studies instead of falling strictly into the idiotic feminist "the inherently evil male oppresses females" camp. I have seen the research you are referring to and find it profoundly sad that gender expectations of parents and teachers as well as historical notions discourage females from even attempting high levels achievement in academic/professional fields.
Ieatutube 2 months ago
@Ieatutube No one is inherently evil, we are all products of our culture.
OutsideTheBox28 2 months ago
umm, but how would you determine who was healthy or fit enough to reproduce when the bio-psycho-social world effects genes too? Genes are not an island. If they were, flies that look like wasps would never have developed. And if everyone is the same - like everyone has the same super-genes - does that not fly in the face of the evolutionary theory that calls for diversity within species so as to overcome environmental pressures?
OutsideTheBox28 3 months ago
@OutsideTheBox28 If anything, I would say it might be just as important to restructure the ENVIRONMENT that the genes exist in (Zeitgeist Moving Forward) - see how many of the abnormalities and diseases in the human species dissipate when the environment facilitates ideal physical and cognitive development.
OutsideTheBox28 3 months ago
He is a failed Kwisatz Haderach.
YouDingo88 3 months ago
There is an interesting fact about intelligence. People tend to understand those whose intelligence approximates theirs or is lower easily, but have difficulty in understanding those whose intelligence is significantly higher than theirs. One should keep this in mind before jumping to erroneous conclusions about a person whom they probably have never met nor thoroughly examined his concepts.
mena88 3 months ago 66
He can't be that smart if he believes in the god concept.
Wordlaw12 3 months ago
@Wordlaw12 It's the God of Spinoza, more or less. An attempt to define the absurdity of the nature of Nature. In fact... for many philosophers it is the only explanation. Einstein used the term. The very concept of a god or God, when used by such thinkers, is about the concept of absolute knowledge or something containing it.
EmpEli 1 week ago
if he was so smart, he'd know mustaches are only cool if they are ironic.
brianasher 3 months ago
if he was so smart, he'd know mustaches decrease his chance of procreating by 100x100000%.
brianasher 3 months ago
I read Malcolm Gladwells 'Outliers' which argues the great Chris Langan would have made it further in life if he showed more emotional intelligence and was able to convince, influence and negotiate with greater skill.
I now understand what Gladwell mean't ..... Langan is intimidating, detached, unnerving and creepy. I don't think there is anything smart about that. He is a loner living in a herd-oriented world .
adrianshaw1 3 months ago
if he was so smart he'd get rid of that dirty stache and deuchbag attitude
jose123001 3 months ago
if he was truly smart he would have gotten a desk job
VideoNewZ9 4 months ago in playlist More videos from logant44
This has been flagged as spam show
wow.. biggest idiot ever! please lock him up
SenfeuIe 4 months ago in playlist Weitere Videos von logant44
Comment removed
SenfeuIe 4 months ago in playlist Weitere Videos von logant44
This has been flagged as spam show
big words doesn't make an intelligent being. There are many flaws in his logic and theories that it just shows that an IQ isn't everything. Smart? no, Psychopath? Yes.
smacktalking 4 months ago
Comment removed
smacktalking 4 months ago
Eugenics? Wow, I guess it has been long enough since the Third Reich for this backwards idea to come back. He's a fascist, clear and simple. IQ isn't a qualification for being a dictator. I've read his CTMU, and he either makes very fundamental misunderstandings about set theory and logic, and hides it by using lots of really big words, or he has an inability to communicate well with others. Either way, this guy shows that a high IQ score doesn't automatically qualify someone to do everything.
cocacola443 4 months ago
I.Q. is completely overrated. I play chess pretty well (almost 2000 USCF), and people always say, "Wow, you must be so smart." It's completely untrue. Success in chess is not related to intelligence at all. I see wackos playing chess all the time who can't even hold a simple job but are amazing at chess. Same goes for I.Q. Just 'cause you have a high I.Q. doesn't mean you are a good person or intelligent. It means you can ace a test. And btw, my I.Q. is 140. And it don't mean SHIT! real talk
Fupper16 4 months ago
@Fupper16 Let me see if I uderstood it correctly. Are you actually implying that holding at least simple job is a sign of intelligence? I know some good chess players that don't look smart to me (some had problems with math, which by common prejudice implies they aren't intelligent), but I could be wrong, some may just don't like (or know how) to show it...Btw, do you have a job? :-)
mujotomi 4 months ago
@mujotomi Put simply, there are many different kinds of intelligence, so it is difficult to accurately ascertain if someone is 'intelligent' by an grounds. However, basic intelligence encompasses the bare minimum of living, for example: social skills, writing ability, abstract thinking, spatial visualization, and the like. However, there are autistic savants who can do the former two, but cannot tie their shoes. So yes, it is a difficult subject. And no, I do not have a job:)
Fupper16 4 months ago
@Fupper16 I agree with all that you say (even about IQ tests) but intelligence does exist . So does differences between people . And there are people that are way way above the average .
ultranet 4 months ago
Comment removed
iceman8067 4 months ago
I'd like to say "if he's really this smart, why isn't he teaching global politics at MIT" or something, but in a way it makes sense that he might be doing something like bouncing. Maybe he's one of these people who has a super-high functioning intellect, but is lower-functioning in the social skills department, or in the ability or motivation to obtain a more prestigious position in life.
iceman8067 4 months ago
@iceman8067 Maybe he doesn't like the picture of corrupted society, so maybe everything which add to this picture (prestigious position in life requests this addition) repels him. Society isn't even close to ideal, so in order to move it closer to it, you need to be "lower-functioning in the social skills department" (kind of apparent paradox: to be "social" in the highest degree you have to be "anti-social").
mujotomi 4 months ago
Comment removed
mujotomi 4 months ago
Comment removed
mujotomi 4 months ago
You here this same litany from patients in mental wards. He has lost touch with reality. It's to bad. His talents could have been used better.
AnswerFortyTwox 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"I'd look at his productions."
Mate, your productions end where your brain meets your skull. If raw intelligence matters, don't waste yours by sitting around proposing ways to improve society, and actually contribute.
wardy2294 4 months ago
Comment removed
wardy2294 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
is an IQ 113-119 good for a 17 year old
ThOutRider2 5 months ago
Dammit...*this is a* (Damn typos).
JCman19 5 months ago
This is is very smart guy, and deep down I agree with a lot of what he says, but at the same time, he seems to be an elitist. Having a high IQ gives you the ability to think up ideas more easily, and to rationalize your ideas (very effectively in his case), but I really don't know how easily the pragmatism of these ideas can be measured. I really don't see how someone with a lower IQ is incapable of coming up with a pragmatic idea, even if they can't back it like him.
JCman19 5 months ago
@JCman19 *This is*
JCman19 5 months ago
I like his idea of emergence from coherence.
MrKittenvidfan 5 months ago
I'd vote for this guy for president.
TylerRathel 5 months ago
This guy may be smart but I wouldn't want him controlling the world, it would be a god damn dictatorship!
ZenMaster1992 5 months ago
Wow, this guy is a scumbag. "Freedom is not a right." he says.....This guy needs to get the fuck out of America.
cschopf 5 months ago
For all this guy's brains he knows squat about one way/reason humans evolved and that IS due to mutation which to many of us would be considered 'bad genes' by our standards.
Prescribing 'eugentics' or whatever the hell he decided to call it, can essentially stunt our evolution and even, wait for it--wait for it-- CAUSE the dying off of our species.
Why? Because variation is the key. Variation in a species is needed as an affront to future viruses etc. It's settled--smart people-not so smart.
Cleverbot777 5 months ago
This fella is opinionated sure...He may be intelligent, but his wisdom is limited to his own morals and values...you only know as much as there is to know he doesn't have answers anybody else hasn't already discussed and I believe his thinking is along the lines of a famous dictator known for controlling the population...need I say more?
mfitz35 5 months ago
what a waste of time that shit was... douche bags you have your leading follow him to the pub
Windle83 5 months ago
One thing with which I agree: humanity is going to perish. The chances of any human being seeing the age of Capricorn is negligible.
kroovyandcal 5 months ago
Chris: Don't you think it's possible that you might be stupid compared to God?
whataboutbob53 5 months ago
Intelligence does not equal wisdom.
Kazooka 5 months ago in playlist 67itghiuuy
Langan likens people agreeing about something to 2+2=4. Well that's very true, and if we are to liken the concept of everyone's happiness to 4, well then 2+2 isn't the only way of getting there. We also have 1+3, 5-1 etc. In other words, one person's way (ie Langan's) isn't the only way we need do things.
wilson2012 5 months ago
As to skepticism about his intelligence, he got a perfect on the SAT and scored extremely high on IQ tests, so that's sufficient evidence that he is indeed extremely intelligent.
ClamCrunchy 5 months ago
@ClamCrunchy There is little doubt of how fast he can learn things, how he can comprehend on a level higher than average. But what does he know? Knowledge and intelligence go hand and hand but they are not the same thing. He has an impressive potential for learning but what has he contributed?
AnswerFortyTwox 4 months ago
I think someone's measure intelligence lies in their accomplishments, actions, experiences and influence. Until this man says or does or says anything of note, his IQ means nothing.
wilson2012 5 months ago
"I'm super smart. I'm a Bouncer. I don't want to be a bouncer." It's easy to NOT be a bouncer. Get a different job. Problem solved.
maxleonardhenderson 6 months ago
@maxleonardhenderson lol true
lilnastiaaa 5 months ago
he should meet me.We will have a good discussion.
cric45master 6 months ago
If he was so smart, he wouldn't keep that shitty mustache.
PunchKickGames 6 months ago
what the buck another Manhattan project this guy is crazy.He may be smart but he hasn't any common sense.
LetArtsLive 6 months ago in playlist 67itghiuuy
Sadly, this guy is right. Those who disagree, are the idiots of whom he speaks.
sponkboglin 6 months ago 4
@sponkboglin I too, can misuse, commas.
JoSoong 5 months ago
@sponkboglin
Anti-disgenics should have been done a long time ago. Our planet is doomed. Our resources are finite and with massive, ecumenical quandaries such as global warming and overpopulation looming over our heads, it seems our problems are just too great.
Not too great to solve theoretically. Evolution has conditioned us to deal with nearly anything that we must. But too great in scope considering the fact that morons are the vast majority of first world democratic societies.
RBG02005 3 months ago
This guy is an egotistical, megalomaniacal, totalitarian sociopath.
stevehayes13 6 months ago
Good job making a lot of assertions without backing them up! Unfalsifiable positions FTW!
ghilliemaster 6 months ago
sick fuck
crusaders36 6 months ago
also " the dumb person think he is as smart as the smart person" when later on he says "we are all equal" what the unholy fuck is he talking about... he is just talking fucking nonsense.
Henricos24 6 months ago in playlist Chris Langen
seems like he is talking about holding the 'lower class/dumb people" at the bottom and that the 'smart' people should be "elite"
fuck off, really... just fuck off.
Henricos24 6 months ago in playlist Chris Langen
Sat through the 3 part serious, where I waited for this so called worlds smartest man to share any new ideas. He shared nothing.
TermsB 6 months ago in playlist Chris Langen
Pantheism - is the view that the Universe (Nature) and God (or divinity, gods) are identical.
Kouga66 6 months ago in playlist leveled up
I like this fascist imperial surging music.
hymnofashes 6 months ago in playlist Chris Langan
This guy is a delusional fraud. He gets a high score in the IQ test and now he wants to order society so the control rests with those who score high in IQ testing ? Sounds like a fascist presupposition to me. You can't fucking measure intelligence into one single digit, you have to be an insurmountable idiot to believe that possible. In fact in a Darwinian evolutionary sense survival and ability to survive is interchangeable with intelligence. Not a fucking IQ test.
Pomaori 6 months ago 2
@Pomaori IQ is a measure of intelligence ;)
petunized 4 months ago
@petunized Lol OK, I hope that was a joke
Pomaori 4 months ago
@Pomaori no, its not. just google it
petunized 4 months ago
@Pomaori hes simply telling you and me what the truth is about society
jmanzkickin 3 months ago
@Pomaori He said he does not think that the IQ test determines ones intelligence himself. Your jealousy is obvious think before you post.
utube2344 3 months ago
@utube2344 Have you even watched the interview ? he states numerous times that he believes IQ is the foundation for determining human intelligence.ITS WHAT THE WHOLE FUCKING VIDEO IS ABOUT A MAN WITH A HIGH IQ. Holy shit can people be more stupid. Your sexual last for chris langan is obvious think before you post.
Pomaori 3 months ago
@Pomaori No, It is definitely not interchangeable with intelligence, neither is an IQ test. Now einstein and newtons works for example, is.
nikeabdallah 3 months ago
@nikeabdallah Actually it is. Seeing as evolution is the process by which nature determines which traits are more useful than others and intelligence is a by product of evolution. Evolution is always in command of intelligence. Ability to survive and adapt to an environment are the only kinds of intelligence that evolution favours. Whether or not you come up with the general theory of relativity has no direct bearing on your ability to survive. Put Einstein in the desert see how long he lasts.
Pomaori 3 months ago
@Pomaori We both have our opinions, and while I respect yours, I do have to say your words are rather Illogical.
nikeabdallah 3 months ago
Mainly because you are stating that Evolution is in command of intelligence, which is ridiculous.
nikeabdallah 3 months ago
@nikeabdallah It is though. It is in command of all living organisms and the genetic traits which they pass on such as intelligence
Pomaori 3 months ago
@Pomaori Ok but how does that have to do with anything with darwin, for example, being intelligent because of that theory.
nikeabdallah 3 months ago
@nikeabdallah Evolution only prioritises application of theories into an advantage for the proponent. Having superior scientific knowledge may lead to a heightened sense of intelligence or advantageous awareness, in an evolutionary sense, but this only becomes relevant in the application of that knowledge. Also the exclusion of that knowledge from others, which almost all scientific knowledge is inclusive and used for the good of all. Humans can't measure intelligence only evolution can and has
Pomaori 3 months ago
@Pomaori Evolution cannot measure intelligence, and i do not wish to argue with someone who believes evolution is the cause of life on earth.
nikeabdallah 3 months ago
@nikeabdallah Evolution didn't cause life on this earth that is the theory of abiogenesis. Evolution is the theory of how life diversifies once it already exists. I don't wish to argue with someone who, presumably, thinks 'godidit'. That is the most illogical answer of them all.
Pomaori 3 months ago
@Pomaori Well god did do it and if you don't think that you are either an atheist or just confused. I honestly do not wish to argue further on this topic and I will not reply anymore.
nikeabdallah 3 months ago
Wow... fail.
|
v
DsHacker14 6 months ago
he dint look smrt
mizsigzLLR 6 months ago
Who's holding the universe in its mind that he would hold?
Screwthatable 6 months ago
Comment removed
Screwthatable 6 months ago
The fallacy in his argument: if his production is greater than mine, he is smarter than me. Ergo, bill gates, Larry Page, Mark Zukerberg, Charles Darwin, Barack Obama are smarter than him
ktflamebird 6 months ago
Oh, how I want to punch that big head of his.
ktflamebird 6 months ago 2
@ktflamebird go ahead! go find the bar where he works and unleash yourself ;)
petunized 4 months ago
He makes the same mistake that many smart people make. What is a friend? Another I. When you are really good at some small area of life, it is very hard to avoid re-writing the definition of intelligence in terms of whatever it is you are good at. One of the hardest skills to learn is selective humility. Ironically, this is relatively easy if you are in the center of the bell curve.
I was born near the top end of the bell curve and this is something I struggle with every day.
sfjeff1089 6 months ago
CTMU is not a Langan idea! It's obvious that we're all connected to everyone who's ever taken LSD or psilocypbin for starters.
Nautilus1972 6 months ago
I feel that each person is smarter than the other one. What do I mean by that, I mean that maybe you may be smarter math that I may be. I may be smarter than you in something else. I just feel that if we all have the ability to stay in control and not try to beat one an other to the top then we will reach the top together.
AGUYMON2009 6 months ago
we need to get all high iq people in a society and ask them to solve problems and give them money the world is going to shit very fast
bob1012112 6 months ago
Does anyone else notice the contradiction while he explains his philosophy of how the future society ought (should be)? "those with greater intelligence (ability) should be separated from those with less intelligence, only by accepting greater RESPONSIBILITY. I am skeptical of his genius, although he does appear to be quite smart, he is still a bouncer. If he wants to make a difference, he should work on getting his "productions" or philosophies publicized and gain some actual accreditation.
youngsav5 6 months ago
@youngsav5 Ah! Paper!
Nautilus1972 6 months ago
He is suppose to be the smartest person in the word, making him the dumbest person in the word as well. His name alone the side of names like einstein or darwin is an atrocity to history. All the people on this list choose to do something with their gift, they became somebody and did extraordinary things for human kind. He took his gift and choose to be a loser, a bum, a bouncer....?? However, I can show my children how a mind can be wasted away without a purpose or goals. So thank you Chris..
chamoluised 6 months ago
@chamoluised I'd rather people like Chris decided our fates than people like George W.
Nautilus1972 6 months ago
@brajamtho757
He answered the questions his interviewer posed. Why would he bother going off on a tangent that the vast majority of viewers wouldn't understand? Also, remember that this is a very, very intelligent man whose world view has been tempered by a lifetime of dealing not only with "average" minds but cruel and drunken minds.
MsRustyrobot 7 months ago