and found out there really is such a thing but has nothing to do with this sort of thing. It's apparently not on tumblr, either.

Or read the Huffpo piece on Fairleigh Dickinson, which started it all and seems more reliable, but talks about current events knowledge, not IQ. Yahoo News should just fold, or at least not be considered any more reliable than, say, Renze. If it's less reliable than Huffpo, what's the point of it?

I wouldn't despair, just realize it's the barking dog effect around here-- but after all is said and it's done just the sound and fury signifying nothing.

On edit-- after actually reading through most of the thread, it seems I'm not the first to spend five minutes on the google, but with all that scepticism, who's reccing it?

Many people want to believe that people they disagree with are very stupid, because that paints themselves in a better light. And so they recommend it, without bothering to examine the claim for realism.

There is a reference in the thread to claims from a psychologist that 'very conservative' young people have an average IQ of 95; that man is, however, infamous for claiming various statistical differences between races, or that some races are 'objectively' less attractive. But a mean of 95 for a group is far more believable than 80 (other than a group with mental health problems, that is).

It'll be interesting to find out who is really behind it; DigitalJournal, another site that just picks up with PRWeb says without checking it, has it on their site, including a link to where it should be on the PRWeb site - http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/12/prweb10205115.htm - but that link now just goes to PRWeb's front page. So I think someone has told PRWeb it was made up, and they've deleted it, but the sites that copy from them are still hosting it (PRWeb was used in a fraudulent stock pump-and-dump operation a couple of weeks ago, so they may have further problems, if they still put out anything anyone pays them to).

I was a fairly active New York Mensa member for 10 years or so and any "political" members I met were invariably libertarian.

(Of course, most members weren't that active and most of those that were didn't get political. And-- Mensa members were small sample of those who were eligible for membership. So that is merely mildly interesting and proves nothing. I just brought it up to brag about being in Mensa.)

BTW, I'm not bothering to check what's happening now, but there were a number of IQ scales in use a while back and while they all claimed 100 to be "normal" none could agree on just what "normal" was or how to stretch the scale. On one scale I was 132, and on another I was over 150. So, 5, or even 10, points either way is really meaningless without knowing more. Mensa uses percentiles for each test, which makes a lot more sense.

Sad thing, but a good observation.

Also, indicative of the futility, often times, of the rec feature.

A lack of critical thinking skills can be found across the political spectrum, and liberals/progressives aren't immune.

because it's funny as hell as satire. I assume at least some of those recs are for the same reason.

They can do simple jobs and maintain their living situation. They might need help paying bills and managing money and figuring out things like bus schedules and transfers but once they learn these things, they can do them.

People with IQs of 80 aren't any more mentally ill than the general population.

However, I think your despair might be premature. I recognized the article as satire when I read it. I have to think quite a few people who recommended the post also recommended it as satire.

you are going to have to have a lot of people well below it. Someone with an IQ of 95 needs balancing by 3 with 75. Someone with 110 needs balancing by 3 with 70, and so on.

As for whether any recommenders saw it as satire: I admit I haven't tried to match up the rec list with any of the replies. But I can't see it as good satire, myself; it seems more like "I wonder how many people I can get to think this is real".

Many people here jump all over any trash science (and there is a lot in this area) that shows democrats are smarter than republicans. Anytime ANYTHING makes a claim that group A is smarter than Group B I get suspicious. What infuriates me is most of these people will say stuff like the book "The Bell Curve" is bad science, but not anything thats pro-liberal in this area. The hypocrisy of this really doesn't surprise me but it still makes me mad. Critical thinking skills are not common in this country.

I remember a few threads blaming Bush for gun-violence, for the unhealthy fascination with guns.
Guess what? He was an incompetent power-hungry greedy liar, but he's totally innocent in terms of the gun-culture.

tell the difference between serious articles written by real psychologists and satirical pieces.

Take a look at some of the articles at Psychology Today online. The article about Fox Viewers having lower IQs than the national average wouldn’t seem out of place there.