I've come across this phrase from Yahya's site (which Bex gave without provenance) about intelligence being related to brain organisation. It was paraphrased from a creationist called Marvin Lubenow, who said:

Quote
"the crucial element is not brain size but brain organization. A large gorilla brain is no closer to the human condition than is a small gorilla brain".


I came across this while I was re-reading one of the sources I linked to two posts ago, about brain size. I think I can see what is meant now: this is claiming that we're looking at the brain as being part of that particular species and how it uniquely works for them, rather than brain size alone and comparing it amongst obviously different species. (I think.) What I said about brain size relative to body size would seem to be relevant here, and this article goes into the subject in detail. This is how the article addresses Lubenow's comment:

Quote
Lubenow's point is correct. If evolution is true, transitional creatures with brain sizes between 650 and 800 cc must have existed, but finding a skull with such a brain size does not prove that its owner was a transitional form. To be a convincing transitional form, a skull should not only have an intermediate brain size, but also an intermediate morphology.

This is exactly what is found in some H. habilis fossils. While there are no habiline fossils for which both brain and body size can be measured, it is fairly clear that they were smaller than humans, and many times smaller than male gorillas, the only apes with comparable brain sizes. Nor do H. habilis skulls have the crests and bone ridges found in large ape skulls. In addition, the insides of their skulls show many modern features (Tobias 1987). They are both larger and more modern, internally and externally, than the skull of any comparably sized ape.


In other words, homo habilis shows clear transitional features from apelike to human; and its brain size is also quite small. This would appear to answer the point, which appears to have been that in order to compare brain sizes, we need to be sure that we're looking at closely related species in order for it to have any meaning. The above source then goes on to present a graph of average brain sizes between related hominid species over time, and gives some references to information about how intelligence can be estimated.

I keep waiting to see a creationist here look these things up and evaluate them. If I'd read this statement somewhere myself, I'd look into it because it's phrased in an odd way and I'd be wondering what the evidence for it was.