Is anyone here unfortunate enough to be an Asian American?

[Heraclitus]

The Middle East still enjoys the benefit of the Flynn effect, for now. However everything known about psychometrics and genetics indicate that at the very least the nations with Subsaharan admixture won't reach 100.

Also IQ dosen't automatically mean succes. I've previously commented on high IQ crazy North Korea. Even with a average IQ of 107 you can't make socialism work, so economic policy is still important.

[Heraclitus]

Also you are completley failing to realize the real point. We aren't just comparing countries, but averages of individuals from differing populations.

Whites who are born and spend their entire lives in Japan don't magically get a IQ of 106. Neither do those living in more multiracial Asian cities like Singapur. Neither do children of gentile converts enjoy high Askenazi IQs.


How can so many people belive that the selective advantage of inteligence or lets say for the sake of argument IQ differs around the world in exactly the right way that there are no differences among populations that have radically different histories of population size and interconectedness!

Either they belive this or they belive the evolution of the human brain stopped 200 or 100 or 40 thousand years ago! A event that would require supernatural intervention, not to mention make the skulls of the last 40k years hard to explain!!!
All the other theorising about Jews, Asians, Whites, Blacks is just icing on the cake and less likley to be true (even though its still supported pretty thourughly).

Really this is the gist of my argument why the existance of differences in average genetic predisposition for IQ is overwhelmingly likley.

[Al B. Sure!]

Hera:

Let's get some things straight then (if you can provide me with Moldova, Ukraine, Latvia, etc. IQ stats, it might help out, as well)...

1) Mediterranean people likely in the past had a higher relative IQ than northern Europeans.
2) This changed over the last 300 years or so.
3) The Mediterranean countries that are poor have lower IQ's and IQ's that are all about the same.
4) Countries with similar economic statuses that have Mediterranean ancestry but Mediterranean ancestry from when they were still relatively high IQ populations (ie- Latin Americans) also have lowish IQ's comparable to the IQ's of other countries with similar levels of education, nutrition, etc.
5) A wealthy Mediterranean country (Italy) has higher IQ's than the rest of their Mediterranean brethren
6) IF Eastern Europe is in the same ballpark with regards to IQ as Greece, Spain, Syria, Argentina, and other countries that are economically about the same...

Do you not see the obvious conclusion?

Education and economics shape population IQ. NOT ethnicity.

[Heraclitus]

[Al B. Sure!]

What the **** is an AVASB, genius boy?

[Heraclitus]

First off, this post you have ignored:

Also you are completley failing to realize the real point. We aren't just comparing countries, but averages of individuals from differing populations.

Whites who are born and spend their entire lives in Japan don't magically get a IQ of 106. Neither do those living in more multiracial Asian cities like Singapur. Neither do children of gentile converts enjoy high Askenazi IQs.


How can so many people belive that the selective advantage of inteligence or lets say for the sake of argument IQ differs around the world in exactly the right way that there are no differences among populations that have radically different histories of population size and interconectedness!

Either they belive this or they belive the evolution of the human brain stopped 200 or 100 or 40 thousand years ago! A event that would require supernatural intervention, not to mention make the skulls of the last 40k years hard to explain!!!
All the other theorising about Jews, Asians, Whites, Blacks is just icing on the cake and less likley to be true (even though its still supported pretty thourughly).

Really this is the gist of my argument why the existance of differences in average genetic predisposition for IQ is overwhelmingly likley.

I will however indulge.

Hera:

Let's get some things straight then (if you can provide me with Moldova, Ukraine, Latvia, etc. IQ stats, it might help out, as well)...

1) Mediterranean people likely in the past had a higher relative IQ than northern Europeans.
2) This changed over the last 300 years or so.
3) The Mediterranean countries that are poor have lower IQ's and IQ's that are all about the same.
4) Countries with similar economic statuses that have Mediterranean ancestry but Mediterranean ancestry from when they were still relatively high IQ populations (ie- Latin Americans) also have lowish IQ's comparable to the IQ's of other countries with similar levels of education, nutrition, etc.
5) A wealthy Mediterranean country (Italy) has higher IQ's than the rest of their Mediterranean brethren
6) IF Eastern Europe is in the same ballpark with regards to IQ as Greece, Spain, Syria, Argentina, and other countries that are economically about the same...

Do you not see the obvious conclusion?

Education and economics shape population IQ. NOT ethnicity.

Economics and education do shape IQ to a extent! But IQ is not entirely maleable, remember the 0.6 to 0.9 heredability estimated by experts. My argument is that IQ also shapes economics and education.

Also your poverty > low IQ argument is very weak. Look at the Persian gulf states for examples of rich but low IQ countries. Also look at North Korea for the inverse.

Also don't you remember my thread on the important role of the environment and geography as well as genes in understanding history?

Northern Europeans aren't smart. I'm not a frikking nazi with a Nordic fetish. The smartest Europeans (excluding Askenazi Jews) are probably central Europeans (Alpids in 19th century speak) like Germans or Dutch and Northern Italians not Danes or Swedes.

[Heraclitus]

What the **** is an AVASB, genius boy?

AVSAB

Sorry this wasn't posted to respond to your last post. Also the image is googled up, I didn't make it.

[Al B. Sure!]

Whoever made the image is a dumbass. AVASB. It's ASVAB.

Hera, what about the fact that Black Americans have done progressively better on IQ tests, SATs, ASVABs, etc. over the last 60 years? Are they evolving to be smarter in that short time frame or is it purely because of improving economic status?

[Heraclitus]

Whoever made the image is a dumbass.

Lots of people are dyslexic.

Hera, what about the fact that Black Americans have done progressively better on IQ tests, SATs, ASVABs, etc. over the last 60 years? Are they evolving to be smarter in that short time frame or is it purely because of improving economic status?

In Adult IQ Blacks made impressive gains closing a third of the original gap in the first 30 years of your time frame. The gap however has ceased to shrink since then. Its still closing in school results for 9 year olds for example. But adult IQ is the one which predicts outcomes so neatly.

This is in my opinon environmental due to improvments in living standard.



Also American Blacks have become in skeletal features more caucasoid over the past 100 years. This is due to a little thing called the one drop rule.


I don't really care that much about Blacks either way to be honest, can you please respond to the basic argument against perfect racial egaliterianism in the post you are so vehemently ignoring?

Also you are completley failing to realize the real point. We aren't just comparing countries, but averages of individuals from differing populations.

Whites who are born and spend their entire lives in Japan don't magically get a IQ of 106. Neither do those living in more multiracial Asian cities like Singapur. Neither do children of gentile converts enjoy high Askenazi IQs.


How can so many people belive that the selective advantage of inteligence or lets say for the sake of argument IQ differs around the world in exactly the right way that there are no differences among populations that have radically different histories of population size and interconectedness!

Either they belive this or they belive the evolution of the human brain stopped 200 or 100 or 40 thousand years ago! A event that would require supernatural intervention, not to mention make the skulls of the last 40k years hard to explain!!!

All the other theorising about Jews, Asians, Whites, Blacks is just icing on the cake and less likley to be true (even though its still supported pretty thourughly).

Really this is the gist of my argument why the existance of differences in average genetic predisposition for IQ is overwhelmingly likley.

[Al B. Sure!]

Hera:

I'm not sure intelligence tests are not culturally biased.

[Asher]

What the **** is an AVASB, genius boy?

I think it meant "AVAST!"

[giblets]

How can so many people belive that the selective advantage of inteligence or lets say for the sake of argument IQ differs around the world in exactly the right way that there are no differences among populations that have radically different histories of population size and interconectedness!

You're making the assumption that intelligence was much more advantageous in Europe and Asia than in Africa. I haven't seen you provide an explanation for why you think this would be true.

[Al B. Sure!]

If anything, the more advanced a civilization is, the less selection pressure you would expect unless you're talking about Spartans leaving unhealthy babies to die in the hills. What percentage of people are near-sighted? 30-40%? Would any near-sighted person have survived 10,000 years ago or even 500 years ago before the invention of glasses? Civilization has consistently allowed the weakest among us to live and reproduce. For the most part, people don't take issue with this. (interesting aside, isn't near-sightedness associated with higher IQ scores?)

I would think intelligence would be more valuable to a hunter-gatherer than to a peasant farmer.

[Heraclitus]

You're making the assumption that intelligence was much more advantageous in Europe and Asia than in Africa. I haven't seen you provide an explanation for why you think this would be true.

You didn't read my post carefully. If selection for inteligence was exactly as strong, and the trade offs where completley comparable in all the places human settled, we would still see cognitive differences due to different population sizes of various populations and their varying levels interconectedness with each other.

The only way to get a exactly egalitarian distributions in cognitive abilities among populations (ie races, subraces, ethnicities) is to have selection pressures vary across the world just right to offset this.

[Heraclitus]

If anything, the more advanced a civilization is, the less selection pressure you would expect unless you're talking about

Not less selection pressures. Different selection pressures grashopper. You should be carefull in how you phrase this.

Also I'm not talking about any other traits here except things like, future time orientation, higher IQ, ect.

Also why do you keep missing my most important point I'm trying to make, as to why perfect racial cognitive egalitarianism is very very unlikley without something inteligent design being behind it? I'm talking about the point I just restated gribbler.