How Smart Are You?

[The Dude]

Take this test and FIND OUT (http://web.archive.org/web/20030603170049/http://www.dur.ac.uk/t.m.jackson/intelligentietest.htm)

I could lie and try and boast myself,but i wont......I only got 3/11 right http://www.webhostingtalk.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[pun]

I messed up. Only 10/11. Me bad.

[Guest]

only people who THINK they are clever take this type of test those of us that know they are clever dont tend to bother :blink: what always puzzles me is the basic learning like , 7 days equal 1 week , 52 weeks equal 1 year, 1 year equals 365 days , but when ya try 7 days x 52 weeks it equals 364, where the bloody hells that other day gone ? :blink:

[Guest]

Originally posted by Guest@Sep 19 2004, 01:49 PM
only people who THINK they are clever take this type of test those of us that know they are clever dont tend to bother :blink: what always puzzles me is the basic learning like , 7 days equal 1 week , 52 weeks equal 1 year, 1 year equals 365 days , but when ya try 7 days x 52 weeks it equals 364, where the bloody hells that other day gone ? :blink:
It's called LEAP YEAR!!!!!!

You just put your self in the NOT CLEVER group.
Nice going to brag then prove that you have no clue what you are talking about.

BRAVO

[locustfurnace]

Originally posted by Guest@Sep 19 2004, 02:29 PM
It's called LEAP YEAR!!!!!!

leap year
A calendar year containing 366 days. According to the present Gregorian calendar, all years with the date-number divisible by 4 are leap years, except century years. The latter are leap years when the date-number is divisible by 400.

The guest was meaning, except for leap year; which has 366 days, all years have 365 days.



A common year is a calendar year of exactly 365 days and so is not a leap year. More generally it is a calendar year without intercalation.

A common year of 365 days has exactly 52 weeks and one day, so consequently the next new year is one day of the week later


the actual time it takes for the Earth to travel around the Sun is in fact a little longer than that-about 365¼ days (365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, and 46 seconds, to be precise).

[pun]

Actually the leap year enters every 4 years.

365.2422 days is the time it takes the Earth to make 1 full trip around the Sun.

Some extra rules for Calender years

1.) Every year divisible by 4 is a leap year.
2.) But every year divisible by 100 is NOT a leap year
3.) Unless the year is also divisible by 400, then it is still a leap year.

http://www.timeanddate.com/date/leapyear.html

The 52 weeks in a year is the number of FULL weeks in a year. The extra day serves to off set the year so that the date falls on the next weekday. (Every leap year it is 2 days off the last day for that date. So if March 1st 2003 is on a Saturday, then on March 1st 2004 is on a Monday {leap year 2 days later} then in 2005 March 1st will be a Tuesday.)

There is no real mystery here so long as you keep ALL the facts in mind not trying to make your idea of the facts fit the problem.

[Jaime Andrés]

I got two wrong and I still fall for the same silly trap. For example:

Big Eskimo and little Eskimo were walking in the snow. Little Eskimo is Big Eskimo's son but Big Eskimo is not Little Eskimo's Father. So who is big Eskimo ?

[Guest]

Originally posted by Guest+Sep 19 2004, 02:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Guest @ Sep 19 2004, 02:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Guest@Sep 19 2004, 01:49 PM
only people who THINK they are clever take this type of test those of us that know they are clever dont tend to bother :blink: what always puzzles me is the basic learning like , 7 days equal 1 week , 52 weeks equal 1 year, 1 year equals 365 days , but when ya try 7 days x 52 weeks it equals 364, where the bloody hells that other day gone ? :blink:
It&#39;s called LEAP YEAR&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

You just put your self in the NOT CLEVER group.
Nice going to brag then prove that you have no clue what you are talking about.

BRAVO [/b][/quote]
i actually never claim to clever , was i going to brag (NO) IF YOUR INTELLECTUAL LEVEL CAN IN ANY STRETCH TO IT reread what was written and you will see that i actually stated i struggled with basic learning (not true) i have probably forgot over my 19 years of being a university lecturer what it is actually like to struggle to understand things. the problem i wrote was a basic mind challenge that you yourself could not deal with, as you were so far off the mark, unless every year in your small mind is a leap year. yeah that would make things add up. so i guess you just made yourself look dumb. as for the other guys locustfurnace and pun well done lads. if i need a hand on a computer problem i will know which replies are most likely accurate.


j.y.bonner

[Guest]

Originally posted by Jaime Andrés@Sep 19 2004, 04:34 PM
I got two wrong and I still fall for the same silly trap. For example:

Big Eskimo and little Eskimo were walking in the snow. Little Eskimo is Big Eskimo&#39;s son but Big Eskimo is not Little Eskimo&#39;s Father. So who is big Eskimo ?
the problem does not state that the big eskimo is male or female so therefore the big eskimo walking along would most likely be the little eskimos mother, or indeed could be anyone that is infact a big eskimo compared with the little eskimo.

[Jaime Andrés]

Originally posted by Guest+Sep 19 2004, 10:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Guest @ Sep 19 2004, 10:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Jaime Andrés@Sep 19 2004, 04:34 PM
I got two wrong and I still fall for the same silly trap. For example:

Big Eskimo and little Eskimo were walking in the snow. Little Eskimo is Big Eskimo&#39;s son but Big Eskimo is not Little Eskimo&#39;s Father. So who is big Eskimo ?
the problem does not state that the big eskimo is male or female so therefore the big eskimo walking along would most likely be the little eskimos mother, or indeed could be anyone that is infact a big eskimo compared with the little eskimo. [/b][/quote]
Guest puzzled
the problem does not state that the big eskimo is male or female so therefore the big eskimo walking along would most likely be the little eskimos mother
Correct. Logically the only person big Eskimo could be is the Mother


or indeed could be anyone that is infact a big eskimo compared with the little eskimo. Incorrect. The only person that could be the little Eskimo&#39;s son is either the Father or the Mother and is was established that the big Eskimo was not little Eskimo&#39;s Father.

[Guest]

QUOTE
or indeed could be anyone that is infact a big eskimo compared with the little eskimo.
Incorrect. The only person that could be the little Eskimo&#39;s son is either the Father or the Mother and is was established that the big Eskimo was not little Eskimo&#39;s Father.

this could go on a long time , the problem only stated that big eskimo was little eskimos father (obvious) as he was not present during the walk and the problem only stated that the walking big eskimo was not his father then obviously it could of been brother sister even aunty freda as long as they were bigger than himself

[Jaime Andrés]

Originally posted by Guest@Sep 19 2004, 11:22 PM
QUOTE
or indeed could be anyone that is infact a big eskimo compared with the little eskimo.
Incorrect. The only person that could be the little Eskimo&#39;s son is either the Father or the Mother and is was established that the big Eskimo was not little Eskimo&#39;s Father.

this could go on a long time , the problem only stated that big eskimo was little eskimos father (obvious) as he was not present during the walk and the problem only stated that the walking big eskimo was not his father then obviously it could of been brother sister even aunty freda as long as they were bigger than himself

this could go on a long time , the problem only stated that big eskimo was little eskimos father (obvious) as he was not present during the walk and the problem only stated that the walking big eskimo was not his father then obviously it could of been brother sister even aunty freda as long as they were bigger than himself



this could go on a long time No it can&#39;t.
How could the the little Eskimo be the son of his brother or sister...impossible&#33;&#33; The little Eskimo could be aunty Freda&#39;s son which would make her his Mother as is the correct answer

edit I hope guest that you do not write code for a living LOL.

[Tomb]

Originally posted by Jaime Andrés@Sep 19 2004, 06:07 PM

this could go on a long time No it can&#39;t.
How could the the little Eskimo be the son of his brother or sister...impossible&#33;&#33; The little Eskimo could be aunty Freda&#39;s son which would make her his Mother as is the correct answer
A result if incest perhaps? Sadly not beyond the realms of possibilities.

Not that&#39;s what I am saying eskimo&#39;s get up too mind you but a factor if you do statistics and analysis for a living.

Indigenous People

THE PEOPLE

Inuit are a people who live near the Arctic. Their homeland stretches from the northeastern tip of Russia across Alaska and northern Canada to parts of Greenland. Inuit refers to the people formerly called Eskimos. The term Eskimo comes from a Native American word that may have meant &#39;eater of raw meat&#39;. They prefer the name Inuit, which means &#39;the people&#39; or &#39;real people&#39; and comes from a language called Inuit-Inupiaq. The singular of Inuit is Inuk, which means &#39;person&#39;.

[Goslow]

I knew it
(I&#39;ve been farming here 150 years give or take a day,I have mail)
Perhaps Big Eskimo (noun) is actually a little&reg; (adj) eskimo than little Eskimo (noun) so whom big eskimo now ???
b.t.w. whats "the sun" ?

[Jaime Andrés]

Tomb pondered
A result if incest perhaps? Sadly not beyond the realms of possibilities.


Incest is just a Red Herring. How could anyone be the son of their own brother or sister, ......impossible (you don&#39;t write code do you Tomb ? LOL)

[Guest]

Originally posted by Jaime Andrés was confused
Incest is just a Red Herring. How could anyone be the son of their own brother or sister

Think about it Jaime. It&#39;s not that hard to work out.

Let&#39;s say Little Eskimo has an elder brother and an elder sister. They commit an act of incest. He is born. He is, in this case, the son of his brother and sister.

Incest happens I am afraid. There was a case a couple of months ago in the States which matches this scenario almost. A teacher overheard a child complaining to a friend that he had to call his brother "dad". Sad to say when followed up by the school and the police this was just the case and he was born as a result of an incestorous relationship between his elder brother and mother. Or are you indenial that such things happen?

Of course incest happens in the animal world on a daily basis - you only have to look at the cats in my neighbourhood or indeed the British Royal family. :lol:

[Jaime Andrés]

Guest still cannot fathom a basic family tree
Think about it Jaime. It&#39;s not that hard to work out.

Let&#39;s say Little Eskimo has an elder brother and an elder sister. They commit an act of incest. He is born. He is, in this case, the son of his brother and sister.


Just think logically about what you have just written. They cannot be his elder brother and sister.

I rest my case LOL.

[Guest]

Well smarty pants my elder brother is my dad so if you want to come round and discuss it feel free.

[Jaime Andrés]

Originally posted by Guest@Sep 20 2004, 09:49 PM
Well smarty pants my elder brother is my dad so if you want to come round and discuss it feel free.
How the hell can your elder brother be your father. He can only be your elder brother OR your father. Not both.
If I had the time and the geographical advantage I would certainly come round and discuss basic family trees with you.
would you like me to draw a diagram to show you that your elder brother is not your father?

[Guest]

Originally posted by Jaime Andrés+Sep 19 2004, 06:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jaime Andrés @ Sep 19 2004, 06:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Guest@Sep 19 2004, 11:22 PM
QUOTE*
or indeed could be anyone that is infact a big eskimo compared with the little eskimo.
Incorrect. The only person that could be the little Eskimo&#39;s son is either the Father or the Mother and is was established that the big Eskimo was not little Eskimo&#39;s Father.

this could go on a long time , the problem only stated that big eskimo was little eskimos father (obvious) as he was not present during the walk and the problem only stated that the walking big eskimo was not his father then obviously it could of been brother sister even aunty freda as long as they were bigger than himself

this could go on a long time , the problem only stated that big eskimo was little eskimos father (obvious) as he was not present during the walk and the problem only stated that the walking big eskimo was not his father then obviously it could of been brother sister even aunty freda as long as they were bigger than himself



this could go on a long time No it can&#39;t.
How could the the little Eskimo be the son of his brother or sister...impossible&#33;&#33; The little Eskimo could be aunty Freda&#39;s son which would make her his Mother as is the correct answer

edit I hope guest that you do not write code for a living LOL. [/b][/quote]
well well well , i guess you missed the point that the problem also does not state that the little eskimo is the son of the big eskimo walking with him so yes it could be aunt mable, the only parent link mentioned in the problem was the fact that big eskimo was his father , and as far as the remarks on family trees, two children born of the same mother are in fact brothers, if they are from different fathers they are half brothers so if an older boy had an incestuous relationship with his mother and she gave birth to his child then the younger child would have a brother who was also his father , not rocket science just plain fact.

[Jaime Andrés]

well well well , i guess you missed the point that the problem also does not state that the little eskimo is the son of the big eskimo walking with him
Yes it does. The problem clearly states that the big Eskimo is not the father, but little Eskimo is the son of the big Eskimo

Original question
Big Eskimo and little Eskimo were walking in the snow. Little Eskimo is Big Eskimo&#39;s son but Big Eskimo is not Little Eskimo&#39;s Father. So who is big Eskimo ?

[Guest]

Originally posted by Jaime Andrés@Sep 21 2004, 01:04 AM

well well well , i guess you missed the point that the problem also does not state that the little eskimo is the son of the big eskimo walking with him
Yes it does. The problem clearly states that the big Eskimo is not the father, but little Eskimo is the son of the big Eskimo

Original question
Big Eskimo and little Eskimo were walking in the snow. Little Eskimo is Big Eskimo&#39;s son but Big Eskimo is not Little Eskimo&#39;s Father. So who is big Eskimo ?
i will not haggle any longer with your obvious lack of basic understanding,you keep plugging away at them simple problems and perhaps one day you will suddenly realise the point i was making was correct

[The Dude]

This thread is getting seriously off topic http://www.webhostingtalk.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

So w/o anymore furthur or do,lets get BACK ON TOPIC (http://www.oldversion.com/talk/index.php?act=ST&f=1&t=3056) http://www.webhostingtalk.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

[logical-guest]

Originally posted by Jaime Andrés+Sep 20 2004, 03:57 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jaime Andrés @ Sep 20 2004, 03:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Guest@Sep 20 2004, 09:49 PM
Well smarty pants my elder brother is my dad so if you want to come round and discuss it feel free.
How the hell can your elder brother be your father. He can only be your elder brother OR your father. Not both.
If I had the time and the geographical advantage I would certainly come round and discuss basic family trees with you.
would you like me to draw a diagram to show you that your elder brother is not your father? [/b][/quote]
Basic family tree:

If a mother commits incest with her son then the child would be HALF-brother/sister to the father (son) and a full son/daughter to the mother and father (the mother&#39;s son).

If the father commits incest with the daughter then the child would be HALF-brother/sister to the mother (daughter) and a full son/daughter to the father and mother (the father&#39;s daughter).

If the brother and and sister committed incest then they are the child&#39;s full parents BUT because the brother and sister DON&#39;T share a common parent between their child and themselves (their parents being the child&#39;s grandparents) then there is no way a brother/sister incest can answer the orginal question. The only logical answer is the Big Eskimo
is in fact the Mother as the father is already eliminated. And the mother/son incest would create a HALF brother to the son BUT the mother still fits the answer as the son.


I got two wrong and I still fall for the same silly trap. For example:

Big Eskimo and little Eskimo were walking in the snow. Little Eskimo is Big Eskimo&#39;s son but Big Eskimo is not Little Eskimo&#39;s Father. So who is big Eskimo ?

Most logic questions can be answered if you use a little common sense.

[Jaime Andrés]

Thank you. At last someone with some sense and the logical skills to understand the above problem. I just hope you do not get harangued by those above for whom the penny never dropped.

[Guest]

i really think is amazing,[If a mother commits incest with her son then the child would be HALF-brother/sister to the father (son) and a full son/daughter to the mother, and there it is as i already stated , if a mother commits incest then yes a child can have a father who is his older brother (all be it half brother but brother never the less) anyhow i guess you like guests who help with your debates as that one posted and you never passed a single slur or insult. amazing unless you just didnt bother signing in and posted as a guest just to help yourself out. now that would be mega sad

[Jaime Andrés]

This particular contributor posts as logical-guest so at least he is an individual that can be identified.
To suggest that I posted under that pseudonym to prove my point is beneath contempt and just reflects on your poor psychological makeup.
I&#39;m sure that the admin and moderator who can view the individual IP addresses of each post would also be dismayed at your dishonourable tactics.

[straight talker]

there ya go, now ya know how to address me, not at all dishonourable tactics as you claim,in a debate it is just a suggested possibility, please do not tell me that posting without signing in is not a possibility, you could of easily done so and i didnt claim you had i merely highlighted a possibility as i did in the original problem.as from now i will be known as the STRAIGHT TALKER and soon will register as a member using that same name, but for now i will be away for a day or two. tara chuck

[locustfurnace]

I think the topic of this post was titled "How Smart Are You" and not "Who are you" or "Who&#39;s that Eskimo&#33;"

I can&#39;t see an ending to this debate without everyone getting in their last shot, which is understandable. So I&#39;ll close this thread to help you out.