@Deleted User

bell-curves is too christian-centrist...
call them menorah-curves instead.

They would have over 35 million with an IQ over 115.

Get what I am saying @Deleted User .

Ok, that would be true in theory yes
But that's not what we're facing

My statement was obviously with built in assumptions

I admit

``` Physical quantities that are expected to be the sum of many independent processes (such as measurement errors) often have distributions that are nearly normal.[3] ```

You would have under calculated by more than half.

*independent* and *nearly*

I'm speaking about a 56% population

The bell curve deals with how humans produced variety. Even in America, the populations act differently. Let me get the graph.

Yeah that's just the clt @You feel safe with an account

you can't always force data into neat concepticons like that, even though it gives the statistician the most leverage

it's just a theory

You can't add the populations together. It is based of the Law of Independent Assortment.

Bruh, almost everything we know in the domain of social science assumes the legitimacy of that theory
Its a null assumption

it's why social science is shit

^

probably

Biology too then?

pretty much

when it comes to those details

Social science is really shit. You learn more psychology in biology, lmao

How do you think your 23&me works

I'm on day four now

<:CHAD:396569198404435969>

there are NO neat bell curves in nature

unless you produce very nice random measurement errors

I never said anything about a perfectly normal distribution

which happen a lot around very strange attractors

that is because of selection processes and environmental factors. Humans do reproduce in a bell curve fashion.

I appealed to the clt
Which is a convergence to the normal distribution

then i'm out of silly things to say

convergence in where the ivory tower?

i was speaking of exactly that

Which all of data analytics assumes,even race science

it doesn't converge in the real world

Dude lmao

I need jf in here