Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II

[phiwum]

I don't know what you mean by that.

As noted by Wikipedia, "Many college entrance exams and nationally used school tests use norm-referenced tests" and "IQ tests are norm-referenced tests". Those tests typically consist of a finite number of multiple-choice questions, or questions of some similar type that can be graded objectively by machine. It is possible to answer every question correctly, thereby achieving the test's maximum possible score.

I wondered the very same thing, but then I wondered whether I knew what a norm-referenced test is and I couldn't be bothered to look it up.

 

[novaphile]

NB. Apologies if I've mentioned this before, but I did know someone who was a member for a year, and she didn't renew because:

"It's full of moronic brick-layers and taxi-drivers who are constantly whining that they should be in charge of everything."

I'm not so sure about the put down by profession, as I've met some remarkably interesting brick-layers and taxi-drivers throughout my life, but I certainly understand and appreciate the 'whining' part.

 

[phiwum]

I guess five statements are a bit much, so, Vixen, let me ask a series of simpler questions. I'll start with nos. 3 and 4 from the previous list, since you seemed to balk at them for no reason I understand.

Let's start with no. 3.

Are the following two statements true or false, in your estimation.

• The vehicle in the photo -- the one you say must display a battery fire -- is in the driving lane and NOT a parking space.
• The initial vehicle was in motion when the fire started[1] and hence in a driving lane and NOT a parking space.

Do you reckon both of those statements are true? Or is one or the other (or both) doubtful?

Again, there's really no trick here. I'm just trying to figure out precisely what you think about the simplest facts of the case at present. I'm not playing gotcha.

[1] As reported by the Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue service press release.

 

[JayUtah]

As noted by Wikipedia, "Many college entrance exams and nationally used school tests use norm-referenced tests" and "IQ tests are norm-referenced tests". Those tests typically consist of a finite number of multiple-choice questions, or questions of some similar type that can be graded objectively by machine. It is possible to answer every question correctly, thereby achieving the test's maximum possible score.

Yes, every test that has a discrete, bounded number of questions has a maximum score. And often for admissions, the unnormalized numerical score is what matters. If a test is notoriously easy, however, or notoriously difficult, then the norm-referenced score (e.g., percentile) is more meaningful.

 

[JayUtah]

I wondered the very same thing, but then I wondered whether I knew what a norm-referenced test is and I couldn't be bothered to look it up.

It's a bit of abstract statistical handwaving. I was mostly hoping Vixen would attempt to explain herself and therefore be amusing.

If your score on a test is your rank among all test-takers, regardless of raw score, it is a norm-referenced test. This is why the baseline I.Q. is always 100 regardless of how smart the population actually is.

If your score on a test is the raw number of points earned out of a perfect maximum, then that is certainly valid on its own. And you can apply a normalization to it, but it's not meaningful to combine concepts of normalized and unnormalized scores. This is what it seemed Vixen was doing when referring to "near maximum" scores and "normed" tests.

 

[LondonJohn]

Latest figures:

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/civil-service-fast-stream

Are you capable of working out what "one in two hundred" equates to in percentage terms? It would appear not. More amusing irony.

 

[EHocking]

I did not say I was superior I was refuting Mojo's claim that I was an 11th percenter who thinks they are 62nd percenters.

Back in the day, it was a straightforward exam and only the roughly one in two hundred who passed were invited to an interview.

… but that is not what you boasted, you boasted that, “ but only one person in two hundred passed the Civil Service Fast Track exam back in the day ”, not that 1 in 200 were invited to interview.

I passed it, so hardly an 11 percenter who thinks they are 62nd percenters.

How do you know?
The pass rate of the tested population is not given, only the interview number/rate resulting from the test.

Can you not tell the difference?

 

[JayUtah]

The pass rate of the tested population is not given, only the interview number/rate resulting from the test.

The report indicates the referral rate depends on vacancies in the various job sectors.

 

[zooterkin]

I did not say I was superior I was refuting Mojo's claim that I was an 11th percenter who thinks they are 62nd percenters.

Can you link to where this claim was made by Mojo?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I hate to dip a toe into this IQ test digression but the Dunning-Kruger effect is about subject expertise and not about general intelligence. Smart people can fool themselves into imagining they have a better grasp than they really do of a topic they haven't studied, just as surely as idiots can.

 

[CompusMentus]

Hmmmm, 11+ being more than pass or fail? Not what I heard from those who took it; and those of us (Co Durham) who had our work from our last 2 years of primary school taken in for assessment for grammar school certainly didn't get more than pass or fail.

Might be seen as a nit-pick :=]

Way back (1967 Swansea) I got more than a fail (but less than a pass) in my 11+. I had to take what they called a "borderline" re-test which had an exclusively English comprehension focus.


Compus

 

[catsmate]

One would have thought after the Luton fire, the press would be champing at the bit to report the Gatwick one - let's face it, the press are after clicks. But nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Why would "one" make such an assumption?

 

[catsmate]

Regarding your points 3 and 4. It has never been confirmed that the CCTV images widely circulated was the car in question. The source of yet another video, circulated only by someone on Twitter with 200 followers, supposedly taken from the front with a visible number plate has never been accepted as credible information by any publication that I can discern. yet catsmate thinks this video, which I believe is deep fake, as none of the press has touched it when normally they would leap on such a scoop, reveals the vehicle to be a particular Range Rover Sport 2014 and therefore diesel-fuled only.

You're lying again. I never referenced anything on TwiX. I've told you this, repeatedly, but you refuse to accept it.

And "deep fake"? Please this is just stupid conspiratorial nonsense.

Yet it is a fact that many of the early hybrids were simply registered by DVLA as petrol or diesel cars.

Evidence for this claim?

 

[catsmate]

The reference is from the LIVERPOOL ECHO 24 Jan 2019:

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/mayor-joe-reveals-what-caused-14199555

Which doesn't mean it was a hybrid. As you well know.

 

[catsmate]

As has almost anyone who has obtained at least college undergraduate degree, which I suspect comprises most of the people participating in this thread.

The categorical reasoning problem here is that a "logic test" is not the same as "a test that includes a logic component" if one's evident goal is to report the aggregate score of a comprehensive test as if specifically dealt with logic. One could score quite high on, say, the verbal or spatial reasoning components, and relatively poorly on the logic section, and still come away with an enviable aggregate score.

But the salient point is that claiming to have scored very high on multiple "logic tests" to insinuate a qualification that forces us to ignore demonstrably poor reasoning is a feeble ploy. No one asked Vixen how she scored on these or any tests. She's offering it up voluntarily as some sort of reason why we should ignore her inability to reason.

I had an older sister studying psychology, so I became deeply familiar with the Peabody, Stanford-Binet and Wechsler tests, among others.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

Might be seen as a nit-pick :=]

Way back (1967 Swansea) I got more than a fail (but less than a pass) in my 11+. I had to take what they called a "borderline" re-test which had an exclusively English comprehension focus.


Compus

A good nit pick! Thank you.

 

[catsmate]

NB. Apologies if I've mentioned this before, but I did know someone who was a member for a year, and she didn't renew because:

"It's full of moronic brick-layers and taxi-drivers who are constantly whining that they should be in charge of everything."

I'm not so sure about the put down by profession, as I've met some remarkably interesting brick-layers and taxi-drivers throughout my life, but I certainly understand and appreciate the 'whining' part.

I'm not sure on the brick layers but my elderly neighbour's friendly (and also elderly) taxi-driver has a master's in political science and a doctorate in history. He writes for a number of magazines and is a fascinating conversationalist. He's also an excellent musician.

 

[Steve]

I hate to dip a toe into this IQ test digression but the Dunning-Kruger effect is about subject expertise and not about general intelligence. Smart people can fool themselves into imagining they have a better grasp than they really do of a topic they haven't studied, just as surely as idiots can.

True. But the discussion of both here is just a bit of drift from the claim of scoring well in a number of undefined "logic" tests. And we do have a poster here who has attempted, without evidence and across several threads, to claim expertise in a number of specific subjects.

And DK does not discriminate. It can be applied to both idiots and smart people.

 

[LondonJohn]

Which doesn't mean it was a hybrid. As you well know.

Not to mention the fact - which Vixen still seems to be (conveniently) ignoring - that the Beds Fire & Rescue Service has now made it explicitly and unequivocally clear that the initial vehicle that caught fire was an ordinary diesel car, and not a hybrid vehicle of any kind.

Vixen is, IMO, trying to throw up a smoke screen around whether the vehicle on fire in the early photos was "Car Zero", or whether some other as-yet-unidentified vehicle was "Car Zero". But that's an entirely moot attempt at an argument now - because whatever vehicle was "Car Zero", we now know for certain that it was not an EV of any variety.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Not to mention the fact - which Vixen still seems to be (conveniently) ignoring - that the Beds Fire & Rescue Service has now made it explicitly and unequivocally clear that the initial vehicle that caught fire was an ordinary diesel car, and not a hybrid vehicle of any kind.

Vixen is, IMO, trying to throw up a smoke screen around whether the vehicle on fire in the early photos was "Car Zero", or whether some other as-yet-unidentified vehicle was "Car Zero". But that's an entirely moot attempt at an argument now - because whatever vehicle was "Car Zero", we now know for certain that it was not an EV of any variety.

It's a curious example of desperately trying to find a way to avoid being seen to have been wrong. Having nailed her colours to the burning car looking like a lithium battery fire, but then learned the fire service are adamant the car in question was no type of EV, the only hiding place is to deny that the photo is the same car.

When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is left, however ridiculous, must be proclaimed as the truth. In this case, as usual, the impossibility Vixen has eliminated is that of her being wrong.