Nobel Prize scientist - Black people are dumb

[Rduke55]

Jeez, I can't believe I missed this entire thread.

Phil, I thought you conceded and were done with all this?

We've done this here, here, here,
Just to name three.

And if you're starting again, you still haven't sent that wealthy subsaharan african vs. poor chinese intelligence study that you promised me.

[Phil153]

Hi RDuke,

I didn't concede anything. I remember saying that the evidence for the genetic case is not strong. But the other side's evidence is even less compelling IMO.

I didn't start this thread. Just responding to claims that ethnic IQ differences are entirely cultural, and that Crick's statements are inaccurate - they're not if you actually read them. He never even mentioned genetics. All of his statements except for the employment one are reasonable and backed up by facts.

[ QUOTE ]
And if you're starting again, you still haven't sent that wealthy subsaharan african vs. poor chinese intelligence study that you promised me.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't remember saying there was a study on this. What I do know is that wealthy African Americans show the same differential as poor African Americans. Scroll down to the bottom of this page, and look at the charts:


http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm

Wealth is not closing the gap here, and neither is parental educational attainment. This is also seen across professions such as bar pass rates (guess what - a standard deviation).

Furthermore, Chinese IQ is widely reported at being 100-106. This is very close to Korean and Japanese IQ, which have very different cultures, and vastly different incomes and education levels. At the time these tests were done, the average yearly income in China was around $1000, with 16% of the population below the poverty line. Compare that with a $30,000 average income for black households in the US. Blacks have access to better medical care, universal education, and the benefits of a prosperous society. To claim that their results are due to poverty is absolutely ridiculous - both the lowest and highest levels of black society score far worse than Asians. Even the wealthiest blacks, with college graduate parents, are beaten by the poorest, below the poverty line Asians, with parents who didn't attend high school. If that doesn't give you pause, I don't know what to say.

These scores are indisputable facts. On the face of it, it seems reasonable that there is some actual, race based difference in IQ and ability to succeed in tasks that require high level cognition and planning. The overwhelming evidence of this, combined with Occam's razor, makes inborn differences a slam dunk in my opinion. The burden of proof is on the doubters to show why this isn't the case, to show that these massive differentials, which span all levels of society, multiple countries, multiple cultures, and anecdotal evidence such as cultural sophistication, are caused entirely by culture effects or bias in testing.

It really pisses me off that people can look at all this evidence dismiss it immediately. Points such as the above have never adequately been answered by those who disagree, in my opinion. There's a lot of bluster but little hard evidence.

[Phil153]

By the way, I would be willing to agree to a couple of things.

The first is that the IQ difference may not be genetic. I think there's a quite a bit we don't know about inheritance, and I think it's entirely possible that part of the reason for the differential is epigenetic type issues that span generations. I think this may also be the cause of the Flynn effect.

I also think it's possible that Africans have equivalent intelligence potential, but brains that are wired somewhat differently in a behavioral sense, causing a lack of certain intellectual development in childhood. This is one of the reasons this issue is so important, and why it should be researched thoroughly instead of swept under the rug by try hard do gooders. Academia's response to public discussion of these issues is an embarrassment.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, I would be willing to agree to a couple of things.

The first is that the IQ difference may not be genetic. I think there's a quite a bit we don't know about inheritance, and I think it's entirely possible that part of the reason for the differential is epigenetic type issues that span generations. I think this may also be the cause of the Flynn effect.

I also think it's possible that Africans have equivalent intelligence potential, but brains that are wired somewhat differently in a behavioral sense, causing a lack of certain intellectual development in childhood. This is one of the reasons this issue is so important, and why it should be researched thoroughly instead of swept under the rug by try hard do gooders. Academia's response to public discussion of these issues is an embarrassment.



[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Phil,

Your last paragraph is very interesting. Intelligence is almost certainly a multidimensional phenomenon. Genetics doesn’t logically play a large part, if any part at all. However, clearly and undisputably, Asians perform slightly better on intelligence tests then Caucasians and blacks perform 10% worse then Caucasians regardless of the testing performed. Also, at the age of one years old, a test ( see the Freakonomics blog on this subject ) indicates that there is no difference in intelligence among the races ( this one test, surely isn’t definitive but nonetheless interesting). Therefore, I agree with you, that to sweep the issue under the rug is insane, given that the solution is environmental, behavioral, cultural, etc, and can be determined with careful scientific testing.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
Genetics doesn't logically play a large part, if any part at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's a bold claim given what we know and don't know.

The study of one years olds is meaningless. It hasn't been published (it was actually rejected for publication), we know nothing of the methodology (likely very faulty, since it was rejected), and to draw conclusions from it seems extremely premature. And as I responded to deuces above, there are so many reasons why it proves nothing, even if true.

But otherwise I agree with your points - this is something that should be in the public eye, since it's one of the defining characteristics of a nearly a billion people. What an absolute tragedy if African blacks are suffering 2 standard deviation IQ differentials due solely to poverty and disease. What a tragedy if this is the reason they can't get out of their cycle of poverty, corruption and war and build stable and prosperous societies. The reality is that deep down, most people agree with my position on this. It would be a huge service to the world's poor if this position was proven indisputably to be false.

Why are people afraid of letting science decide?

[ABM]

[ QUOTE ]
I read about this today, thought it would make it here.

An interesting thing is that Asian-Americans outperformed both white and black counterparts in IQ tests.

Personally I don't see why there is any reason to believe that one group of spicies...

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't care how hot their food is, using this term to refer to Asians is racist

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
Genetics doesn't logically play a large part, if any part at all.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That's a bold claim given what we know and don't know.


[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by bold statement? Did you not read what I posted about the genetics of intelligence?
[ QUOTE ]
From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes little sense that race and intelligence are strongly linked. The various races of the world began to diverge about 100,000 years ago in waves of immigration from Africa, long after humans evolved their large brains, which took millions of years of evolution. So the races of the world are a relatively new phenomenon, whereas, human intelligence is much more ancient. (DNA analysis, further, clearly shows that the greatest genetic variation exists, not between races, but within races.)


[/ QUOTE ]

[InTheDark]

[ QUOTE ]
It really pisses me off that people can look at all this evidence dismiss it immediately.

[/ QUOTE ]

There has been an entire generation of educational indoctrination whose purpose was, in part, to first marginalize these ideas and later to turn them into thought crime. They've nearly succeeded. When you engage most any recently college educated person you'll smack up against this.

[Jamougha]

Phil,

the deviation in SAT scores that you show is perfectly explained by the Stereotype Threat effect that is discussed elsewhere in the thread.

Testing cannot accurately show differences between races in the US.

[Phil153]

[ QUOTE ]
the deviation in SAT scores that you show is perfectly explained by the Stereotype Threat effect that is discussed elsewhere in the thread.

Testing cannot accurately show differences between races in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's astonishing to me that the race issue can make otherwise intelligent people come out with silly, unsupported statements.

The stereotype threat has no proven validity when applied to SAT or IQ scores. Firstly, where's the proof that this factor doesn't apply to the dumb half of white students, thus pulling down white scores as well? Secondly, where's the proof that the stereotype threat is actually occurring outside of controlled conditions, on important tests such as the SAT? Thirdly, the largest change the researchers could get under any contrived conditions wasn't even half the actual gap.

From wiki:

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, while Sackett et al. do not dispute the fact that stereotype threat has a real, measurable effect on test scores, they posit that in the part of the experiment where Steele and Aronson removed the stereotype threat, the achievement gap which did remain correlated closely with the existing African American - White achievement gap on large-scale standardized testing such as the SAT. In their own words:

Thus, rather than showing that eliminating threat eliminates the large score gap on standardized tests, the research actually shows something very different. Specifically, absent stereotype threat, the African American-White difference is just what one would expect based on the African American-White difference in SAT scores, whereas in the presence of stereotype threat, the difference is larger than would be expected based on the difference in SAT scores.

[/ QUOTE ]