_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Friday, February 27, 2009

Mensa: Proving that IQ doesn’t make you smarter since 1946.

Attention Eggheads,

A couple of things:

1) Being able to punch out a 98% percentile on the Stanford-Binet doesn’t necessarily not make you an ass.

1) Using the phrase “I am a member of Mensa, are you?” during the course of an argument definitely makes you an ass.

2) Not understanding why using the phrase “I am a member of Mensa, are you” makes you an ass, makes you a clueless ass.

3) Being a member of Mensa is not the same as having education, certification, experience, or authority on every given subject known to man or even necessarily in one subject. Pretending that it does makes you a horse’s ass.

5) In reference to item (f sub 4) above, insisting that that you’re not being an ass while obviously talking out your ass, makes you an arrogant horse’s ass.

8) If you believe any of the following:

a) the so-called “Face on Mars” is anything other than a naturally occurring rocky outcrop

b) the 1969-1972 US moon landings were faked

c) Big Foot

d) reincarnation

e) alien abductions

f) Elvis with a high-powered silenced sniper rifle on the Grassy Knoll

g) Earth will be destroyed by black holes created by the Large Hadron Collider

h) George W. Bush lit the fuse on the World Trade Center demo charges personally or any variation of the same going back to Pearl Harbor

i) Creation Science, intelligent design, or that T-Rex ate coconuts

j) Reki massage, crystals, aura manipulation, or the power of homeopathic bark tea to prevent infectious disease

k) Ted Steven’s innocence

then you are an idiotic ass. Note: if you can’t figure out which parts of that list are hyperbole, then you’re about average for your organization.

13) If you write to me, try not to use “I’m an active member of Mensa” and junior high school Facebook L33Tspeak in the same sentence, otherwise you are a juvenile ass. If you're responding to something on my website and you haven’t read the commenting rules and you insist on ending all of your sentences with LOL! you are an irritating ass who can’t follow simple directions, and really that’s not an indicator of superior intellect. Just sayin’.

21) If you write to me and you’re trying to impress upon me the genius superiority of your master race Mensan intellect, try not to make your paragraphs a random assemblage of mismatched and partially formed thoughts interspersed with all CAPS and emoticons, otherwise I’ll peg you as a dumb ass. Note: if you need help with this, let me know, I’ll have my 12-year old give you a lesson in proper paragraph structuring, I’m pretty sure he remembers enough of it from fourth grade.

34) Please don’t tell me how your ability to solve logic puzzles and do math problems makes you superior to me intellectually. I spent two decades as a Navy cryptologist. You want to try puzzles? Spend a couple years as a code breaker at the Puzzle Palace and get back to me. The mere fact that you tout your Sudoku scores as a measure of your superiority makes you a pathetic insecure little ass. Really, when’s the last time you got laid?

55) Your Mensa membership impresses me about as much as Julie Peterson’s does – but at least she has a nice ass.

89) For the cream of human intellect, your organization hasn’t really done a hell of a lot. Has it? A couple of scholarships, some free IQ testing, and what else? You play a mean game of Scrabble, but I don’t see Mensa rushing to solve the world’s problems. Hell even your own founder, Dr. Lance Ware, lamented that Mensa as an organization spends far too much time playing word games and solving the Junior Jumble instead doing anything remotely constructive with its abilities. So forgive me if I’m underwhelmed by your claim to intellectual superiority, asshole.

Frankly, unless you’re Buckminster Fuller, Marilyn Vos Savant, or Stormin’ Norman, I don’t think you’re half as smart as you think you are.

So, really, stop bringing it up, because mostly all you’re doing is making yourself look stupid.

62 comments:

  1. HAHAHAHAHA!*

    You crack me up.


    *Tania, of course, is exempt.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have no problem with Mensa per se, or with members of Mensa in general. I have a major problem with the little hanger-on's that act like being a member of Mensa entitles one to act as described in the post.

    Some of these idiots really, really could take a lesson in class from Tania.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So I suppose my high school National Honor Society membership doesn't mean shit, either?

    The disillusionment!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it does. It is an achievement based on work and scholarship. Just don't use it to be an ass.

      Delete
  4. Jim's not in Mensa because he can't count.

    Hehe.

    ReplyDelete
  5. High score on IQ tests != intelligent

    intelligent != expertise in any particular field

    expertise in one field != expertise in another field

    Jeri, membership in it, like in Mensa, does mean something. Just not what far too many believers think it does. This, of course, is not a problem you have.

    And I prescribe chocolate for your disillusionment.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So, I guess saying that I refused to join Mensa because, you know, that's what I need is go to a few more meetings a month, probably wouldn't help their case. Not to mention that, yeah, I don't see them doing much to help others.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hey, it's all about the puzzles and personals. Entertainment value of the personals in the magazine is fantabulous.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yeah, after spending time around some annoying Mensa members of this type, I pissed them off by saying that I felt far too smart to join.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hey! I like Marilyn, Tania. I dig chicks with big, uh, brains.

    Big firm brains.

    Tasty tasty braaaaaaiiiins...


    (Please excuse Jim. He's been out in the shop and is on a sawdust bender. Beer may be involved)

    ReplyDelete
  10. I've called Marilyn vos Savant on a couple of errors in print. She even wrote me a nice reply once. I'm too busy for a social club. I have no interest in Mensa.

    "Sanford-Binet" -- can I buy you a "T"?

    I don't know the form, so I can't speak to percentiles. But my junior high guidance councilor "accidentally" left the room after I asked what I'd scored and he said he couldn't tell me. The file was left on the table. It was 165.

    I don't need Mensa to tell me I'm smart -- or that I can be dumb, too.

    Just sayin'.

    Dr. Phil

    ReplyDelete
  11. "sanford-binet"

    Doh!

    Who is the dumbass now?

    The problem is that when I proofread I see what I meant, not what I actually wrote. Maybe I'm too smart for my blog?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jim, you also can't count.

    But you do cool shit with wood, so it's all good.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Actually, that was on purpose. It seemed funnier at the time though, now it just seems, uh, not funny.

    ReplyDelete
  14. my condolences you didn't get accepted to mensa....ass.

    ReplyDelete
  15. And yet, I still manage to find a way to go on...

    ReplyDelete
  16. It seems strange, but I also have more fun without being a member.

    And just for the record, anon, they asked me. I said no. Something about not really needing another set of meetings in my life. As well as I choose to do something with my life.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It seems strange, but I also have more fun without being a member.

    You know, I initially read this as you having more fun without having a member...

    ReplyDelete
  18. I figured out your code, even without the help of the resident cryptologist. Said cryptologist is exceedingly impressed that I figured it out.

    P.S. I have never been asked to join Mensa, which is clearly an oversight. LOL!

    P.S. Said cryptologist says "4 years of "C" school, and that the best you can do? Asshole."

    ReplyDelete
  19. Well, it's really not a code - I just figured that surely a Mensa member could figure it out in nothing flat, they like number problems.

    ReplyDelete
  20. neurondoc, don't you be takin' my member away. I don't know what I would do without it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Why am I hearing a Paul Simon song?

    Baby, don't take my member away, baby don't take, baby don't take, lorena, please don't take my member away...

    ReplyDelete
  22. Steve -- have no fear. I am a neurologist, not a urologist. Those are two very important letters in this case... :-D

    And Jim -- I am still amazed that I figured it out; I am so totally math-challenged.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Natalie, I think your specialty still applies. See it has to do with where most men keep their brains...

    ReplyDelete
  24. My one memorable brush with a Mensa member was having the honor to meet actor William Windom many years ago. And the only reason we found out he was a member was we asked what the symbol on his fishing hat meant. Turns out it was the Mensa logo.

    Mensa aside, he was pretty cool about hanging out with a bunch of college students.

    WendyB_09

    ReplyDelete
  25. Well, again, I don't have issue with Mensa as an organization or a destination or a scrabble club.

    I have a problem when somebody is acting like an idiotic asshole, and when they get called on it, they respond with "I'm a member of Mensa and therefor your arguement is invalid, I win" or words to the that effect.

    Which is what keeps happening to me - and is precisely what prompted this post. An obnoxious little twit from Rochester NY, and you know who you are, Aleda, took exception to something I said on Hot Chicks back in June of last year. Thinking she was commenting a current post, and thinking she was actually commenting on Janiece's blog - she emailed me. Now for a superior intellect, she didn't realize that the post was 8 months old, was written by somebody named Janiece and not Janice and certainly not me, and that she was emailing me and not in fact actually posting a comment on a completely different blog. And she was downright nasty about it. And when I called her on it she got even more rude, nasty, and juvenile - and did I mention that the crux of her ire was my disbelief for the NASA conspiracy to hide the Face of Mars? Well, maybe I forgot to mention that just because it's so fucking stupid that I'd rather not have to type it. Her response was to lie about her credentials (really, you shouldn't have a unique name, lie about your education, and leave your facebook and Linkin profiles public, just saying) and to state: I'm a member of Mensa, are you?

    Unfortunately, Aleda, and utter fucking idiots like James Tankersley (who also tried to use the Mensa membership trump card to validate his retarded belief in LHC world destroying black holes and the Sainthood of Walter Wagner) make everybody else in the organization look like idiots.

    __________________________


    Attention: Tankersley, Wagner, et al - and yes, I see you snooping around - Don't comment. Go away. If you attempt to comment here, you will irritate me. If you irritate me, I may take an interest in slapping you around some more.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Natalie, I think your specialty still applies. See it has to do with where most men keep their brains...

    Jim, you do have a point. I'll keep it in mind. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  27. Please don't irk Jim. He's almost been downright jolly recently. No sense in ruining it for the rest of us.

    ReplyDelete
  28. He's almost been downright jolly recently.

    Well, mostly that has to do with the events of January 20th

    ReplyDelete
  29. We do have a Global Risk Reduction special interest group in American Mensa. Folks here are welcome to join our group if they can qualify for Mensa—1 in 50 qualify, (actually more since any of many tests qualify) so it is not that hard.
    -
    Too often thought about global risk issues is less than optimal, so the objective of this special interest group is to improve thought in this area—an objective folks posting here seem to share, in a way. Collider risk is one of many global risks. Pressure from various collider critics got CERN to redo their safety study. We were a small part of that pressure. In a sense CERN’s better safety study did make the world safer. Some components of the new study agreed that safety factors of previous studies were inadequate. Even a small reduction in risk has an enormous expected value (probability times value, the standard metric of decision theory) since the negative value at issue is the death of 6.5 billion people.

    ReplyDelete
  30. We do have a Global Risk Reduction special interest group in American Mensa.

    You know what that makes me think of?

    Statistical Probabilities

    ReplyDelete
  31. Bloggett, you really are a one trick pony, aren't you? You'd be the "et all" in my last comment. Go away

    ReplyDelete
  32. Oh for crying out loud. It’s Super Risk Adjuster Mensan again. James, please. Who, pray tell, is going to listen to your report when it’s done? Was it commissioned by anyone? Outside of Mensa that is? No? Then I’m afraid it’s very expensive toilet paper.

    CERN published their risk report as an extension of their PR. They realize that Wagner, Rossler, and Plaga have been screaming that the well has been poisoned, and now everyone who even drinks from a nearby river is thinking that they taste bitter almonds in the brew. It’s psychological suggestion based on noise from the LHC lawsuits, but what were the lawsuits based on? Plaga’s faulty reasoning. Rossler’s kooky reasoning. Wagner’s broadcasting of same. CERN decided that another review was easier than endless arguing, after all it’s not their money, it’s the European taxpayer’s. The safety studies conducted for the Brookhaven facility would have been enough to cover the LHC in a rational world, if the three Henny Pennies, and their hangers-on (you, Tankersley, et al) hadn’t made enough noise in the media to get people concerned.

    And how do you all raise the alarm? In exactly the way Jim is criticizing here. Inflating your credentials, most especially in the media. Wagner never got beyond undergraduate physics classes, he was never able to pass a graduate class. His greatest physics achievement was as a pair of hands. Then he filled out shipping reports for radiomedicine deliveries. His terminal degree is a JD. Suddenly this makes him Dr. Nuclear Physicist. And when we call him on it? He points to a fucking test score. How typically Mensan. And it wasn’t even a validated IQ test mind you, you guys at Mensa ought to be all over him about that. All you lot have is your test scores to prove how special you are, and if people start watering down that currency, you are going find that you have nothing with which to fend off the disdain that the rest of us reserve for you and the hardcore, costume-wearing Trekkies. William Shatner was talking about you, too.

    See, out here in the real world, we measure people by what they’ve done, not how they’ve scored. I know plenty of people who test very well and accomplish little. The ranks of grad-school drop-outs are full of them. Part of it, in my experience, is fear of failure. The expectations form those high test scores scare them. Seriously, your little “risk committee”? No one’s listening. The real world is full of people in real risk-mitigation jobs making predictions, and well, taking risks. General risks, financial risks, health risks. Are any of your super-Mensa risk team actually working in any of those bodies, you know, as a professional? Because professionals generally run far away from associating with cranks such as Wagner.

    In point of fact, I’m a member of a risk management committee for product development at my firm. And you? You impress me, as a professional whose responsibilities carry over into that field (although it is not my primary focus) - you impress me not at all.

    Where are your statistical analyses? Cut-off numbers? When experiments that could impact human health are run, a-priori the experimenter selects an upper bound. If the experimental numbers run beyond that risk bound, the experiment stops. The most famous example of that that I can think of off of the top of my head is here.

    That's how the real world works. Where’s your cutoff criteria, and what assumptions are they based on? Talking about risk without talking about numbers is exactly like the conversations I used to hear out of non-hacking grad students with high test scores who were about to be bounced out of their lab for non-performance. You people are non-hackers, and only non-hackers fall back to talking about test scores and Mensa memberships. The rest of us out here doing things don’t give a rat’s how smart you are, we care about how smart you work.

    And I’ll give you another free whack with a clue-bat. Beyond a minimum threshold, scores don’t impress us out in the real world all that much. I’ll ask Jim’s question again: What has Mensa accomplished? I’ll get more specific on the high-IQ fetish: What’s Maryln Vos Savant done with her life? Cured a disease? Solved a previously unsolvable theorem? What of use has she done beyond a common-sense advice column? I know people with less smarts who have achieved far more than her because they worked and studied. And those people are the ones I invite to be in my club. The club of useful human beings use their smarts to do hard things, not invest in conspiracy theories. The club of people who wring every ounce of potential out of their abilities to make a better world – whatever that potential happens to be.

    Go carp on the sidelines somewhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  33. My goodness.

    Perhaps I should change the name of my blog to "Instigating Chicks Dig Smart Men."

    ReplyDelete
  34. Hello, “John the Scientist”
    -
    You say:
    -
    >The safety studies conducted for the Brookhaven facility would have been
    > enough to cover the LHC in a rational world.
    -
    I have been over the next paragraph before, so I will keep it short:
    -
    You mean this Brookhaven study [1], published in 2000. I agree that it seemed adequate when first published. It stated, among other things, that black hole creation required energy beyond the reach of any collider. However, shortly after publication, new physics papers appeared, based on new theory and unrelated to the collider controversy, predicting creation of black holes at colliders. [2],[3] Then in 2003 CERN published a new safety study [4] that anticipated black hole production, touting the great science that could be done if black holes were available for study. Black hole production would be safe, the study said, because they would dissipate instantly in a burst of Hawking radiation. [5] At about the same time, and unrelated to the collider controversy, physicists published papers questioning the fundamental theory behind Hawking radiation, a radiation that has never been seen. [6],[7] Two other safety factors that later eroded were the idea that strangelets should be electrically positive on their surface and not attract normal matter, refuted in [8] and the “weak” version of the collider/cosmic ray analogy, refuted in [9].
    -
    It seems strange to say that this history was “enough to cover the LHC.” The best safety factor left was the fact that theories enabling disaster were somewhat speculative, albeit published in peer-reviewed journals. Given the erosion of safety factors, and given the stakes, I say it would have been immoral to launch without further checking.
    -
    Fortunately, CERN was persuaded to do another safety study, released in 2008. [10] Michelangelo Mangano, one of the study authors, did a fairly good job and developed new safety factors. My point is that, without collider critics, CERN would have launched without this check. Some of us debate whether it was good enough, but at least it was a lot better.
    -
    The dialog of criticism can lead to truth. You guys are critics too. With a slight difference in focus and style, or perhaps even with your current focus, you can perform important service.
    -
    REFERENCES:
    [1] W. Busza, R.L. Jaffe, J. Sandweiss, and F. Wilczek; "Review of Speculative ‘Disaster Scenarios' Brookhaven, 2000
    -
    [2] Steven Giddings and Scott Thomas, "High energy colliders as black hole factories: the end of short-distance physics," Physical Review D 65(5) (2002) 056010.
    -
    [3] Savas Dimopoulos and Greg Landsberg, "Black holes at the Large Hadron Collider," Physical Review Letters, 87(16) 161602, (2001).
    -
    [4]J.-P. Blaizot, J. Iliopoulos, J. Madsen, G.G. Ross, P. Sonderegger, and H.-J. Specht, "Study Of Potentially Dangerous Events During Heavy-Ion Collisions At The LHC: Report Of The LHC Safety Study Group" CERN, 2003
    -
    [5] Ibid, pg 12. “Thermal processes” in this context means Hawking radiation.
    -
    [6] Adam D. Helfer, "Do black holes radiate?" Reports on Progress in Physics. Vol. 66 No. 6 (2003) pp. 943-1008.
    -
    [7] William G. Unruh and Ralf Schützhold, "On the Universality of the Hawking Effect," Physics Review D 71(2005) 024028.
    -
    [8] G. X. Peng, X. J. Wen, Y. D. Chen, New solutions for the color-Favor locked strangelets Physics Letters B 633 (2006) 314-318.
    -
    [9] Steven B. Giddings and Michelangelo L. Mangano, "Astrophysical implications of hypothetical stable TeV-scale black holes, Physical Review D, 78, 035009 (2008)
    -
    [10] John Ellis, Gian Giudice, Michelangelo Mangano, Igor Tkachev, and Urs Wiedemann, (Large Hadron Collider Safety Assessment Group(LSAG)) "Review of the Safety of LHC Collisions," CERN June 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Janiece Murphy says:
    > Chicks Dig Smart Men
    -
    No kidding. My theory is that IQ is a secondary sexual characteristic, like a peacock’s feathers. I disagree with the nerd theory. I should mention that I have been happily married for over 30 years. My wife does appreciate me, although she can find things to complain about.

    ReplyDelete
  36. James, the name of my blog is actually "Hot Chicks Dig Smart Men."

    I was just making a comment about my penchant for stirring things with a stick.

    Mind you, sometimes it's on purpose, but in this case, it was inadvertent.

    However, the idea that High IQ is either a primary or secondary sexual characteristic is the point, and has been bouncing around the Intertoobs for some time.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Oh look! References!

    That makes this a GEN-U-WINE argument right? [1]

    Well color me impressed![2]

    [1] i.e. Where Gen-U-WINE = complete and utter bullshit

    [2] Where impressed != impressed

    PS: Jim, has ShopKat had her kittens yet? That'd be a nice reprieve from this bullshit.

    ReplyDelete
  38. OK, look I've been outside prepping generators just in case the volcano blows, and I've got a number of other projects that need to be completed before the Iditarod starts next weekend, so I'm pressed for time and even more irritated than usual - Now, just so we all understand each other, I DO NOT have time this week to suffer fools gladly, nor will I do so.

    _______________________

    Mr. Bloggett, I told you to go away, which part of that didn't you understand? I won't put up with the LHC bullshit, see below. However, your comments to Janiece I find slightly interesting. So, you may continue to comment regarding mensan membership as a secondary sexual characteristic, providing:

    1) You immediately stop with the goddamned footnoting. It doesn't legitimize your posts, it doesn't make you look all scientific, and it's irritating the hell out of me. If you must provide a reference, then hyperlink it like everybody else on the Internet. Surely a Mensan of your genius can figure out the right format for the venue. If you do it again, I will delete your comment.

    2) Stick to the post at hand - as I said in my first response to you and as anyone of superior intellect should have been able infer from the "one trick pony" comment, I am not amused by your single minded and transparent attempt to turn my blog into a podium for your LHC nonsense.

    Now for the Mensan's in the room, allow me to spell it out: THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT THE FUCKING LHC.

    Got it? Any further attempts to turn this comment thread into yet another discourse into your pseudo science bullshit black hole nonsense WILL BE DELETED. If you feel that you must make a comment regarding your mumbo jumbo LHC nonsense, then go to the Wagner/LHC post and make it there - and I'm sure you know how to find it since you anti-LHC nuts visit it on a weekly basis.

    This is my site. You will adhere to the rules I've laid out above, or you will be thrown out on your ass, right next to Wagner and Tankersley. I don't care if you don't like it, and frankly I cannot understand why you and the rest of your ilk keep coming back here.

    __________________________________

    Michelle, no ShopKat has not had kittens. My wife has pointed out that she is significantly past the end of the feline gestation period. Further details to follow.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blodgett could always start his own blog..

      Just sayin'.

      Delete
  39. Jim, I love how expressions of contemp for idiots bring them flocking to do the exact same things which earned the contempt in the first place (and second place, and third, etc).

    I was going to ask why, once they've proven they are idiots, they expect the same behavior will change anyone's mind about them, but then I realized that the answer was self-evident.

    They are idiots. QED.

    ReplyDelete
  40. And I was thinking about posting some sort of satirical anti-LHC comment, but I figured nothing I can say would be as annoying or stupid as what that crowd says. And anyway, I have to go entertain the kid. It snowed 4 or 6 inches, so school was closed. (sigh)

    Natalie (non-Mensan)

    ReplyDelete
  41. Jim, I hope it's a false pregnancy and (ahem) not a tumor.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Michelle, I doubt it, she seems very healthy - I may simply have allowed her to overeat. It's not just me though, a number of folks have looked at her and said, Whoa! That cat is going to have kittens any minute! She looks pregnant. I'll take her to the vet next week and have her checked. The problem is that if she isn't pregnant then I'm in trouble, because I've promised kittens to several folks including regular Alaskan commenter, Karl.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I can tell you that Karl will be sad, but as Catherine is a Vet Tech, she has access to an unlimited supply of fuzzies.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Nooooo!!! ::tears out stubble from crew-cut:: j/k

    Hey, Jim - no worries - if we were to get new kitties I'd rather they were from ShopKat first - but if it turns out that she's just ridin' the gravy train, then, well, yeah - no worries. If it's a tumor, then, well, ew.

    If she is ready to drop octuplets, though - we're road trippin' your way in about 8 weeks :) Anything you need hauled south, besides more kitty litter? :Þ

    ReplyDelete
  45. My mom has a fat cat, and she just looks fat. She's the same frame size as my small cat (Kit) but weighs twice as much as Kit. She's very wide, and the weight is fairly evenly distributed.

    Which is what made me guess false pregnancy.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Who was it who said "I wouldn't want to join a club that would have me as a member?"

    I, too, qualify for exalted Mensa candidacy - and my reaction was, ehhh, why? Do they have great parties, or discounts at my favorite stores? I never make it to my professional organization meetings, I certainly don't need something else to not make it to.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Please accept my resignation. I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member.

    Groucho Marx (1895–1977), U.S. comic actor.
    Letter to Hollywood’s Friar’s Club. Quoted in: Arthur Sheekman, The Groucho Letters, Introduction (1967).
    (Microsoft Bookshelf '95)

    ReplyDelete
  48. Either you're up really late, Phil, or really, really early. No classes tomorrow? er Today?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Jim Wright writes to me:
    >your comments to Janiece I find slightly interesting.
    >So, you may continue to comment regarding mensan
    >membership as a secondary sexual characteristic…

    -
    Wow. I can stick around and rumble. I’ve got muscles. I put the moves on your biker chick.
    -
    Tough warrant officers are good guys. They wear a US uniform. Tough civilian cowboy bikers with flaming skulls could be bad or good. Use your powers for good.
    -
    The rumble in this thread is Mensa? Okay, I see three points made here. 1) Mensans claim to be bigshots. Okay, some do. Some shoot their mouths off inappropriately. That should make them fit in here. 2) Mensans mostly play scrabble. Right again. But our special interest group is doing things that are socially relevant. 3) Some mensans are wrong about the collider issue. Opps, I can’t talk about that here. But you are the one who said, in this thread, that they are wrong. I can’t respond, and say they are right? Remember, being the good guy is the ultimate issue.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Biker chick?!

    Did you just call Janiece a BIKER CHICK?

    Holy shit!

    (plops down on the sofa to watch the entertainment)

    ReplyDelete
  51. By the way Jeri, I even thumbed my nose at the Nat'l Honor Society.

    The teachers who were in charge of my school's recommendations had kids in my class competing with me for class rank.

    So I prefer to take the Groucho Marx line--excluding the UCF of course. :)

    ReplyDelete
  52. (Sits down on the couch next to Michelle)

    Pass the popcorn and raisinets!

    And James -- Use a spell-check...

    ReplyDelete
  53. And there you have it folks, isn't he cute? Let's give him a big round of applause.


    Bloggett is a like a Turing machine, as long as you stick to the script, he sounds almost intelligent. Force him off that script however and you get confused gibberish.

    You're done now, Bloggett, even your entertainment value is marginal at best. Go away. Any further comments from you will be deleted out of hand.

    ReplyDelete
  54. James, that was so very...odd and disjointed. Almost incoherent, in fact.

    And while I don't ride (that would be Hot Chick Anne's bailiwick), I don't take the term "Biker Chick" as an insult, other than to note if I did ride, I would not be "Jim's" Biker Chick, but my SmartMan's.

    And I do look good in leather.

    But I don't feel like a "big shot." Does anyone else here? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

    ::scampers off, laughing maniacally::

    ReplyDelete
  55. "Biker Chick"?

    Okay, that's just weird.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Wooo! Biker chicks rock! (Well, this one does anyway.) James probably knew you have an awesome red leather jacket and got confused. He better not have drawn the conclusion from your equally awesome shoes that you take a backseat to anyone.

    James, for future reference...
    Military experience != Biker
    (as a Mensan, I expect you to understand that relational operator)

    ReplyDelete
  57. I'm way late to the party, but:

    I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member.

    I'd like to also go on record as saying that I'm not joining any club that thinks I'm a dick. (apologies to Steve and Natalie.)

    Signed,

    Nathan,
    Possibly the oldest, but unquestionably the most immature regular here.

    ReplyDelete
  58. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Which part of "Go Away" are you not understanding there, Genius Boy?

    And for the record, Bloggett, your interpretation of my response is utterly in error. Just like your physics.

    ReplyDelete

Be sure to read the commenting rules before you start typing. Really.