O RLY?
So someone with an IQ of say 40, can articulate and speak just as well on any subject as someone with a 140 IQ?
Can you back up this claim with some evidence?
No? Didn't think so.
your appeal to the outliers falls flat.
anyone with an IQ below 70 is a buffleheaded dimwit who cant even wipe the drool of his own chin, while someone who scores above 120 is a brainiac from the planet Smartron 4. comparing these two is like putting stephen hawking in a boxing ring with cassius clay. the outcome is predetermined.
when two individuals with similar educational experiences, and similar levels of achievement are placed beside each other the difference in their "intelligence" as perceived by the observer is greatly influenced by their ability to perform on stage, not by their native intelligence. case in point:
the debate between lloyd bentsen and dan quayle. quayle came up looking like a dipshit, despite the fact that he is not stupid, he just doesnt communicate well on stage, while bentsen was a leader of men, and thus had experience dominating in a room full of big egos. does this mean bentsen is smarter than quayle? no, it means bentsen ran the debate because quayle, a man with 30 years less experience in running a room was made to look like a misbehaving schoolboy. likewise, bill clinton could sweet talk the shit out of a crowd, but when it came down to ideas and facts, he was hopelessly lost. does this mean clinton is smarter than bush sr? not a chance. it just means clinton was a better salesman that bush sr, and bush sr's own baggage helped drag him down.
smooth talking may help convince the rubes that the smooth talker is smart, but those who dont fall for pithy one liners and suave bon motts see people like clinton and barry seotoro for what they are, not clever, not smart. lowlife panderers running a conficence game to trick people into selling their buttholes for the profit of their new overlord.
pimps.
