The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Chanda Chisala Archive
The IQ Gap Is No Longer a Black and White Issue
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

If only environmental factors were responsible for the different IQs of different populations, we should expect to find some countries where Africans had higher IQs than Europeans. The failure to find a single country where this is the case points to the presence of a strong genetic factor.” Richard Lynn.

Regression would explain why Black children born to high IQ, wealthy Black parents have test scores 2 to 4 points lower than do White children born to low IQ, poor White parents.” Arthur Jensen.

The fact that black immigrants to the United States have shown achievements that are superior to native black Americans has been a phenomenon studied since at least the 1970′s. At first it was just the Caribbean blacks who were a subject of this unexpected outcome. As black Africans kept immigrating into the US, they showed even higher levels of achievement than the native blacks. Many scholars theorized on the reasons for these differences, from Thomas Sowell’s proposal that this disproved the validity of discrimination against native blacks as an explanation for their underachievement (Sowell, 1978), to other scholars who suggested that these immigrants were just the most highly driven members of their home countries as evidenced by their willingness to migrate to a foreign country (Butcher, 1990).

What most of these theories failed to predict was that the children of these immigrants would also show exceptional achievements, especially academically. It is only in recent years, as the immigrants have stayed long enough to produce a sufficiently high number of offspring, that it has been observed that they are over-represented among high academic achievers, especially when compared to native blacks, particularly at very elite institutions. What has been missed in the IQ debate is the full logical implication of these achievements: they have effectively nullified any arguments for a racial evolutionary explanation of the well-known IQ test score gap between blacks and whites. Even more fatal for the racial hereditarian side of the debate has been the corroborating data of school children performance in the UK, particularly when the black Africans are divided into their respective nationalities and tribal ethnicities, as reported in the latter section of this article.

Arthur Jensen gave at least two empirical tests that could potentially falsify his thesis of a race based genetic explanation for the black-white IQ gap. Firstly, if the gap is caused by genetic racial differences, the blacks with more white admixture should tend to show a higher IQ than blacks with less whiteness. Secondly, “regression to the mean” implies that children (or siblings) of extraordinarily high IQ blacks should tend to a lower IQ than the children or siblings of similarly high IQ whites. Social experiments concerning the first test have not been decisive, especially due to the difficulty of separating out environmental factors since lighter American blacks have historically faced more favorable socioeconomic conditions. The second test did indicate some evidence of regression to a lower black mean for African Americans, which only means that the racial genetic hypothesis was not nullified; it remained a valid proposition. Until now.

Using Jensen’s own empirical framework, the racial genetic hypothesis can be tested by comparing black African immigrants with native blacks, intellectually. If the genetic hypothesis is correct, children of elite African blacks will tend to have lower IQs than children of native black Americans, and perhaps even lower than children of low IQ blacks, the same phenomenon observed between American blacks and whites since native blacks are basically “more white” than African (or Caribbean) immigrants.

In the US, it is not only at elite universities where there is a clear over-representation of black immigrant children, it is also at public gifted schools and any kinds of intellectually gifted programs that are highly selective on intelligence. For example, when the New York Times did a story to show the experiences of blacks at Stuyvesant High School in New York, they had to use the personal account of a West Indian black child there (Ann-Marie Miller); if they had many native blacks, that would have certainly been their preferred subject. Furthermore, the only other student who was interviewed for that article, Opraha Miles, a former president of the black student society at Stuyvesant, also just happened to be Jamaican; no black American student was mentioned in the story. A close look at a number of other such institutions shows even more clear evidence of a tendency for black immigrants to be over-represented as selectivity requirements for an academic institution (or complexity of a subject) goes higher.

In the world of intellectually gifted schools, perhaps the most selective in the United States is a special program called the Davidson Academy started by Jan and Bob Davison in 2006 in Reno, Nevada. The tiny school boasts of selecting only the most profoundly gifted children (the highest of the five levels of giftedness) whose IQ is so high that “only one in every ten thousand children in America” can qualify to the school in any one cohort; it is more selective than Stanford or Harvard can ever be. The school makes no efforts or pretensions to affirmative action and as such, they have had very little “diversity.” However, a search through the promotional materials of the school for a black student – all schools and colleges will always show some black faces in their promotional materials if they have any – reveals that they have had at least one black student, and it was, unsurprisingly, a Nigerian Igbo name (the parent is interviewed in the ad posted on Youtube).

Chisala-1

At the tertiary level, a special program to promote African American academic pursuit of Science and Engineering called the Meyerhoff Scholars program was started by philanthropists Robert and Jane Meyerhoff at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC). The program has attracted funding from a lot of companies by gaining a reputation for achieving something totally unexpected in American society: black students who take a deeply passionate interest in engineering and science majors and even proceed to advanced studies at elite universities. According to a book co-written by the Meyerhoff program’s leader, UMBC president Freeman Hrabowski III, they believe they have succeeded against all odds by having “strong academic advising and personal counseling, emphasis on group study and peer support, appropriate tutoring and mentoring, [and] involvement with faculty in research and access to role models in science.”

The program has been so successful that educators in other states and universities have been seeking to replicate its success by imitating its key principles and management practices. However, a closer look at the program reveals that their key to success is much simpler than it appears: they simply fill up their program with Caribbean and African blacks! For example, listening to the names of the graduating class of 2008 posted on youtube, this author could identify about half of the blacks in this class who were clearly of African (immigrant) descent. The other half can be expected to have a good number of Caribbean blacks, besides blacks with only an African immigrant mother (and black American father).

Many programs that have tried to emulate the Meyerhoff Program in other universities have failed, particularly in solving the problem of retention rates, according to one report in Science Magazine. One program that has also solved this apparently difficult task of keeping blacks enrolled after they enroll in a STEM course is another minority-focused program called the Biology Scholars Program (BSP) at UC Berkeley. However, it appears their secret to success is not different from Meyerhoff’s secret. Their homepage has a section on their members and it features the profiles of five minority students in their program, two of whom are black. Both blacks just happen to be of African (immigrant) descent!

Contrary to their boasting, neither the Meyerhoff Scholars Program nor the Biology Scholars Program has solved the intractable problem of low retention or low achievement in the real African American community (especially the African American male problem that the Meyerhoff’s program was originally intended for); their students simply come from black immigrant groups that already have those achievement and retention rates whether in their home countries or in the U.S., the U.K and elsewhere. This is not disclosed in Hrabowski’s triumphantly titled book, “Beating the Odds: Raising Academically Successful African American Males” or in its sequel on African American women!

Finally, browsing through some names of the competitive National Achievement scholars, which is the National Merit‘s program aimed at specifically recognizing and awarding academic scholarships to the best black high school graduates, also showed signs of clear over-representation of African immigrants, especially for STEM scholarships. In the 2014 Annual Report on their web site, they do not give all the names of their winners, but they give some special profiles of their most outstanding scholars. Of the three long profiles given in the report, one of the names is from the West Indies, and the other two are from Africa (one Ghanaian and one Nigerian); there is no native black American. The West Indian was awarded a scholarship to study multiple languages (including Arabic) due to her extraordinary talent in this area that has apparently been recognized by the State Department; the Ghanaian was awarded for medicine and the Nigerian for electrical engineering. Among the other smaller profiles given, the black immigrant names are still over-represented, especially for the harder sciences. This should put to rest the usual reasons given for why black immigrants are accepted into Ivy League universities more than native blacks, including the charge that these universities just favor immigrant blacks because “[whites] find them easier to get along with”, or native blacks just don’t apply to these universities, and so on. Apparently, occam’s razor wins again: they may just be smarter on average (for whatever reason).

The predictable response of the hereditarians is to adopt the environmentalist argument of super high immigrant selection to explain this unexpected trend: where some environmentalists propose that these immigrants are the most driven achievers in their countries, the hereditarians say they are the most intellectually elite, the ones from the topmost segment of the IQ bell curve in their countries; the outliers who got some lucky genes in an otherwise poor-gene environment. But like the hyper-driven-personality hypothesis, this argument cannot explain the equally, if not more impressive, achievements of their children: lottery winners never have children who also win the lottery. The stubborn refusal of their children to conspicuously regress to the much lower African genetic mean IQ (and not even to the African American mean IQ) predicted by hereditarians is simply inexplicable under their racial genetic hierarchy.

In a Harvard University paper that later sparked some unfortunate controversy, Richwine (2009) estimated the IQs of the black African immigrants from a supposedly culture-free test of backward digit span as 89. Although many in the hereditarian HBD crowd accepted these numbers on faith (and the Heritage Foundation used his paper to try to influence immigration policy), such estimates can be highly misleading. They lump together black Africans into one homogenous group when there are different kinds of black Africans, including a good number coming in as refugees from highly troubled countries, while other nationalities consist of the most educated ethnicities in America. As I demonstrate below with UK data, the different groups of African immigrants can have very large background differences that reflect in cognitive gaps among them that are even higher than the gap between American blacks and whites (and yes, these are reflected on “culture-free” tests too). In other words, the mean IQ of African immigrants may be as unrepresentative of black Igbo immigrants as it is of white South African immigrants. It’s a meaningless mean.

Without accepting this fact, the IQ approximations of Africans do not make sense in the context of their academic achievements in the US compared to black Americans. For example, when one HBD blogger broke down the IQs of black Americans by state using one of Lynn’s methods for estimating national IQs, he found over 30 states that had black IQ above 89, i.e., higher than the black African immigrant IQ found by Richwine. If these black immigrants really have a representative mean IQ from a normal distribution that is lower than the black mean in 30 whole states, there is no way they would dominate the native black Americans so conspicuously and predictably in all academically elite institutions. The black Caribbean immigrant IQ of 83 (assuming it is represented under “Central America/Carribean”), which is lower than Alabama’s black IQ, is even more implausible in the context of their well-noted achievements. Correcting the different states’ black IQ by subtracting 5 IQ points from each state would still not fix the problem of plausibility: if there is even one state with blacks that are definitely smarter than (or just equal to) the black immigrants, it would be the children of the blacks from that state who would be conspicuously over-represented in those elite programs. There certainly would be no Caribbean names there.

The only plausible way to possibly salvage Richwine’s data is to accept that there are such large variations mediated by highly variable environmental factors (rather than restrictive genetic factors) within the African (or Caribbean) immigrant group that their mean IQ is totally inappropriate to use for estimating social expectations for every black immigrant group within the United States. As the UK data below shows, it is very unlikely that children of immigrants from the Igbo or Yoruba groups of Nigeria or the Ashanti group of Ghana, for example, have an average IQ below the white mean IQ.

Chisala-2

 

AFRICAN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN THE U.K.

The most definitive proof of Africans’ grossly underestimated genotypic IQ (80 according to Lynn, or 70 according to Jensen and Rushton, et al) has come in recent years from the performance of African school children in the UK. These results sparked instant reactions in the IQ debate world as soon as they started being reported by the news media, with some strong hereditarians suddenly becoming some kind of neo-environmentalists just to explain why white school children were not showing the kind of academic superiority over blacks that they have become accustomed to in the United States (wrong tests, declining white culture, an alleged war on whites, etc – the same kinds of reasons they always dismissed from liberal environmentalists explaining black underachievement in the US).

The first report that caused some consternation in the IQ blogosphere indicated that black African pupils were apparently catching up with British white pupils on their GCSE tests and that in fact, they had already overtaken them at the lower end: the poor black kids were now performing better than poor white kids (The Guardian, 2010). Hereditarian psychometricians and scholars from Jensen to Gottfredson, Lynn, Rushton, et al had after all declared that IQ predicted test scores on all kinds of tests since a common factor of intelligence, g, was highly robust.

(How Fair is Britain? Credit: Guardian 2010)

(How Fair is Britain? Credit: Guardian 2010)

A couple of years after that news and more stories of black and other minority progress on GCSEs, GL Assessment, an independent testing organization, published results of their Cognitive Assessment Tests (CAT), indicating the performance of different ethnic groups. The CAT, though given to children at age 11, is highly correlated with GCSE results at age 16. The CAT results confirmed what the GCSEs had shown: that black Africans were catching up with British whites, and this sparked even more panic in the IQ-human biodiversity blogosphere.

Chisala-4

Many bloggers and commentators came up with countless explanations for the unexpected trend among blacks from Africa who were expected to be around two standard deviations (30 IQ points) below whites in average IQ scores, but were only half a standard deviation below. Almost all the guesses on what could be causing this unexpected trend assumed that the upward trend would not continue in future to the point of actually equaling white scores, an event that could cause a crisis in the hereditarian camp.

In fact, what most scholars and bloggers in the IQ world seemed to not know is that by the time these pieces of news were coming out in the media, there were already African nationalities that had overtaken the white average by a significant margin. The reason it seemed that the black Africans were only trying to catch up now was the usual academic tendency of lumping Africans together into one big racial group when other groups were being identified by nationality (e.g. Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, etc rather than “Asian” or “South-East Asian” etc). Grouping Africans into the monolithic “Black African” ethnicity concealed the different experiences of African immigrants from different nations, some of whom had emigrated as refugees from war-torn countries, while others lad left countries that did not speak much English and were thus disadvantaged in the tests. A negative correlation with English as Another Language was evident on both the CAT scores and the GCSE scores.

Number of Black African pupils in the 27 LAs using extended Black African ethnicity codes for 90% or more of their Black African pupils in 2005 (excluding City of London). Source: Ethnicity and Education: The Evidence on Minority Ethnic Pupils aged 5-16, Department for Education and Skills, 2006.

Number of Black African pupils in the 27 LAs using extended Black African ethnicity codes for 90% or more of their Black African pupils in 2005 (excluding City of London).
Source: Ethnicity and Education: The Evidence on Minority Ethnic Pupils aged 5-16, Department for Education and Skills, 2006.

The pupils from these groups also had varying degrees of poverty levels, determined by how many were eligible for free school meals (2008):
Chisala-6

The performances of these groups were highly varied, with some of them having already overtaken the British average, at least as far back as 2003.

Source: Back to Basics: Towards a Successful and Cost-Effective Integration Policy

Source: Back to Basics: Towards a Successful and Cost-Effective Integration Policy

As the table above shows, some African nationalities, particularly Ghanaians and Nigerians, score way above the England mean (and the white British mean), while others, like the Somalis and Congolese, score way below (but still not as low as the Portuguese immigrants, apparently). The low scoring African groups are the ones that migrated as refugees and/or could not speak English, besides being very poor. Improvements among the Somalians have been impressive, especially due to programs dedicated to teaching them English.

Although the Chinese and Indians are still very conspicuously above even the best African nationalities, their superiority disappears when the Nigerian and other groups are broken down even further according to their different tribal ethnicities. Groups like the famous Igbo tribe, which has contributed much genetically to the African American blacks, are well known to be high academic achievers within Nigeria. In fact, their performance seems to be at least as high as the “model minority” Chinese and Indians in the UK, as seen when some recent African immigrants are divided into languages spoken at home (which also indicates that these are not multigenerational descendants but children of recent immigrants).

Source: Raising the Achievement of Black African Pupils: Good Practice in Schools

Source: Raising the Achievement of Black African Pupils: Good Practice in Schools

Africans speaking Luganda and Krio did better than the Chinese students in 2011. The igbo were even more impressive given their much bigger numbers (and their consistently high performance over the years, gaining a 100 percent pass rate in 2009!). The superior Igbo achievement on GCSEs is not new and has been noted in studies that came before the recent media discovery of African performance. A 2007 report on “case study” model schools in Lambeth also included a rare disclosure of specified Igbo performance (recorded as Ibo in the table below) and it confirms that Igbos have been performing exceptionally well for a long time (5 + A*-C GCSEs); in fact, it is difficult to find a time when they ever performed below British whites.

Chisala-9

It should be noted that in fact, the Chinese and Indian groups in the UK have the smallest number of pupils qualified for free school meals, a proxy for level of poverty.

Percentage of pupils in maintained schools eligible for FSM by ethnic group (2005) Source: xxxEthnicity and Education: The Evidence on Minority Ethnic Pupils aged 5–16 , Department for Education and Skills, 2006.

Percentage of pupils in maintained schools eligible for FSM by ethnic group (2005).
Source: Ethnicity and Education: The Evidence on Minority Ethnic Pupils aged 5–16 , Department for Education and Skills, 2006.

The Chinese and Indian levels of Free School Meals are even lower than the Ghanaian and Nigerian pupils when the Africa segment is broken down into nationalities.

If these Nigerian groups really performed so well under the years in question when the media started catching the news, one would expect some names of their students to be reported in the news among the best performing students in the country. Statistically, if girls outperformed boys and Igbos outperformed other ethnic groups in 2010, one would expect an igbo girl to be among the top performers in the country. In fact, according to a Daily Mail report on the GCSE results of 2010, the best student in the whole country was indeed a Nigerian girl, Chidera Ota. A check on Nigerian names confirms that she is of Igbo descent. Ota scored 15 A*s, higher than any Chinese, Indian or white student, and higher than any student from prestigious elite schools like Eton College (she was at a state funded selective high school for girls).

To put it into perspective, these results mean that the children of black Africans (or at least West Africans) are not only not scoring below the scores of low-IQ poor white children, as Jensen’s calculations would predict, they are even able to score above children of elite whites too (who go to Eton college etc).

What are the chances of a girl from a small minority group of immigrants whose home country is 2 standard deviations below the host country’s mean IQ achieving the best academic results in the host country? If the average IQ of SubSaharan African adults is equal to 11 year old Europeans, as their IQ scores estimate (Rushton, 2004), what are the chances that an African child of such adults would ever beat all European children in academic achievement? Had the low phenotypic IQ of black Africans truly been biologically caused even to some degree, such feats should be as rare as having the fastest 100 meters runner in the world coming from the slowest running ethnicity in the world. In short, what are the chances of say, an Indian immigrant to Jamaica winning the national 100 meters sprint? Even more incredible, what are the chances that the children of such “super-selected” Indian immigrant athletes would also (on average and on top) beat the children of native Jamaicans and other immigrants known for their superior athleticism?

The academic performance of the African students in the UK is even more remarkable when the well-known fact of higher black involvement in sport and athletics (at any level) is taken into account. Whereas Chinese and Indian students are not exactly expected to lead their schools or colleges to winning athletic championships, many black students are actively involved in athletics even when they have a strong academic focus. For example, a check on the Cambridge web site reveals that Chidera Ota, the UK’s best GCSE student in her cohort, was also the fastest runner in the girls 100 and 200 meters team for Cambridge (she qualified to Cambridge’s premed program after subsequently achieving straight A’s on her A-levels). Since she could not have just become a fast runner in college, it means that she achieved her academic performance in high school while being very active in athletics. It is quite plausible that the higher athletic commitments of black African students probably hinders them from achieving even further than they do in academics; it is especially difficult to develop a deep mastery of a specific academic field since this requires much more intensive focus and time commitments. On the other hand, it is also difficult for them to suppress their natural athletic (or artistic) gifts and interests for an unbalanced academic existence.

Chidera Ota, Cambridge Athletics.

Chidera Ota, Cambridge Athletics.

This trend of African blacks (especially West Africans) being expected to achieve exceptionally in both athletics and academics is not limited to their experience in the UK. African immigrants in the US (on average) are also highly involved in athletics, like other black students, while also being expected to perform exceptionally well in academics by their parents. A story in the SFGATE in 2009 confirms this typical double commitment of African immigrants. A Ghanaian American Owusu family had five star athletes at elite American universities who also just happened to be star students because if they ever got anything less than an A, “I will take them out of sports,” threatened their father, Francis Owusu. Owusu had migrated to America on an athletics scholarship from Ghana. His sons combined star athleticism and academic performance in such elite institutions as Stanford and Harvard (with a daughter at Colombia University), a data point that in itself goes against familial regression to the low African mean predicted by hereditarians.

NBA star Andre Iguodala (Nigerian heritage), the Most Valuable Player of the 2015 NBA Finals, was not an exception to this African requirement of combining academic excellence (and character) with athletic prowess, despite having decided early to become a professional basketball player. He was an Honor Roll student in high school besides being a star basketball player.

The tendency of black Africans to excel in both academics and sport may be one reason they are on such high demand with elite academic institutions in the United States. These universities get to preserve a reputation for academic excellence while also gaining some profitable athletic contributions to their student body, besides enhancing their “diversity” public profile.

Sporting victories and diversity are apparently not as important in UK universities as they are in American universities, at least in practice. This might explain why the two most elite universities, Oxford and Cambridge do not feel too pressured to take up as many black students as would be predicted by their impressive performance on the GCSEs. When pressed about this issue, the spokeswoman for Oxford admitted that there were many more blacks that academically qualify to enter their university each year than are accepted (the minimum qualification is three A’s or better on A-levels). She explained that one of the main reasons they do not accept as many blacks as would be expected is simply that they tend to apply to oversubscribed subjects (specifically, economics and management, medicine, and maths). Although this is a plausible explanation, it also highlights the difference between black American student performance (in the US) and black African performance (in the UK): can anyone imagine a similar situation happening in the US? What is the likelihood of the top universities in America turning down many black Americans who have scored among the very top high school students in the US, and then having, say, the Harvard University spokesman coming out to explain why they could only take a small portion of blacks with top SAT scores? (The reason itself is unimaginable in the US: too many blacks want to do maths!)

Another story that emphasizes this difference between black African performance in the UK compared to African American performance in the US was a report on London’s spectacular improvements in GCSE school achievement. The capital city has in recent years been doing so well compared to other areas of the country that it attracted some hot debates from different scholars about the causes. The main reason that has been offered and debated so far came from a highly reputable scholar who argued that these achievements of London are not due to any government policy but simply a result of three high achieving groups moving to London in recent years: Chinese, Indians, and Black Africans. The fact that such a statement can even be made proves how different the black Africans in the UK are from black Americans. How conceivable is it that researchers in America would propose something like, “the reason New York City is now leading in school performance nationwide is because it has a lot of Chinese, Indians and black Americans who have recently moved into the city in high numbers”? Mentioning blacks as part of the explanation for the academic success of any American city would sound like a page from an environmentalist science fiction novel, and yet it is accepted as a valid argument for the academic success of the biggest city in the UK!

Finally, it has to be noted that even if hereditarians can somehow manage to convincingly argue that the Nigerian (or Igbo) children in the UK do in fact have a lower IQ than average white children, as their biological model predicts (despite our evidence), they also have to show that these West African children even have a lower IQ than average black American children (since the latter have more white admixture)! At the very least, they should show that these children of “elite” Africans actually have a lower IQ than the children of equally elite native black Americans: the same elite black Americans whose children already score lower than poor whites, according to Jensen. That is by no means the most enviable task in academic history.

Chanda Chisala, originally from Zambia, has been a John S. Knight Visiting Fellow at Stanford University, a Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution, and a Reagan-Fascell Fellowship at the National Endowment for Democracy.

References
  1. Sowell, Thomas (1978).Three Black Histories. Essays and Data on American Ethnic Groups.The Urban Institute, pp 41-48
  2. Butcher, K. F (1990). Black Immigrants to the United States: A comparison with native blacks and other immigrants. Department of Economics, Princeton University.
  3. Business Insider (2015). An Elite Group of Students accepted to all 8 Ivy League Schools have one thing in Common
  4. Murray T, et al (2010). African and non-African admixture components in African Americans and an African Caribbean population. Genet Epidemiol.
  5. Anekwe, P N (2009). Characteristics and Challenges of High-achieving Second Generation Nigerian Youths in the United States, Universal Publishers.
  6. Jill Rutter (2013). Back to Basics: Towards a Successful and Cost-Effective Integration Policy
  7. White British Children outperformed by Minorities The Guardian 2013
  8. Ethnicity and Education: The Evidence on Minority Ethnic Pupils aged 5–16
  9. Gottfredson, L. S. (1998). The general intelligence factor. Scientific American Presents, 9(4), 24-29.
  10. The Grio (2011). Harvard has more black students than ever, but are they African-American?
  11. New York Times (2004). Top Colleges Take More Blacks, but Which Ones?
  12. The Guardian (2013). White British Children outperformed by Ethnic Minority pupils, says Think Tank
  13. Feyisa, D. (2009). Raising the Performance of underachieving Children: Success Factors
  14. Feyisa, D. (2013). Raising the Achievement of Black African Pupils: Good Practice in Schools. Lambeth Council
  15. SFGate (2009). Speed Runs in the Owusu Family,
  16. Science Magazine (June 2009). Minority Retention Rates are Sore Spot for Most Universities AAAS
  17. The Economist (2013). Ethnic-minority pupils are storming ahead, thanks partly to tutors.
  18. Hrabowski, F. et al (1998). Beating the Odds: Raising Academically Successful African American Males. Oxford University Press.
  19. Richwine, J. (2009). IQ and Immigration Policy. Department of Public Policy, Harvard University.
  20. The Guardian (2010). How Fair is Britain?
  21. The Guardian (2015). Is London’s ethnic diversity driving its school success story?
  22. Okoye, P. (2014). Academic Achievement of Nigerian and Ghanaian Students: Report on Academic Achievement of Nigerian and Ghanaian students in Camden Schools
  23. Strand, S. (2015). English as an Additional Language (EAL) and educational achievement in England: An analysis of the National Pupil Database. University of Oxford Department of Education
  24. Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R.. (2005). Thirty years of research on Black-White differences in cognitive ability.Psychology, Public Policy, & the Law, 11, 235-294.
  25. Rushton, J.P. (2004). Solving the IQ Conundrum. Vdare.com
  26. Jensen, A.R. (1999). The g Factor: the Science of Mental Ability. Precis of Jensen on Intelligence-g-Factor. Psycoloquy: 10(023)
  27. Lynn, Richard;Vanhanen, Tatu(2002). IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger.
  28. Lynn, R. (2008).The Global Bell Curve: Race, IQ, and Inequality Worldwide. Augusta, Georgia: Washington Summit Publishers.
 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity, Science • Tags: Classic, Africans, Blacks, IQ, Race/IQ 
The Race/IQ Series
Hide 542 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Thank you for writing this piece and presenting this data. Very well done.

    It really intrigues me that the black-white IQ gap could be so much smaller in the UK. I would’ve assumed that perhaps selective migration played a role in this, but Black Caribbean (BC) migrants overwhelmingly were of non-elite origins. So it’s interesting to see that UK BC children are only about a third of standard deviation below the white mean.

  2. Excellent article! It’s high time the IQ debate takes a more refined approach and starts adopting more precise categorizations, as this article does. To that end, it would be helpful if the broad category “white” were appropriately subdivided in some rational manner. One approach would be to divide whites by religious preference, as it has long been known that white Episcopalians, Unitarians and Quakers, for example, often score higher on IQ tests than Jews, and far higher than, say, Southern Baptist whites. Razib Khan wrote an article along these lines, titled “Pentecostals are stupid? Unitarians are smart?”

  3. Drake says:

    The predictable response of the hereditarians is to adopt the environmentalist argument of super high immigrant selection to explain this unexpected trend

    Selection isn’t an “environmentalist argument”, it is simple statistics and will apply even if hereditarianism is true. No matter what causes IQ differences, if you compare non-random samples, you will not generalizable results. Eg, if you compare blacks with PhDs to white high school dropouts, your results won’t be generalizable to the black and white populations at large.

    As for selection among African immigrants, it is obvious and enormous. To use Nigerian immigrants to the US as an example, 58.6% have college degrees and 28.3% had graduate degrees. Among Nigerians as a whole, less than 10% have college degrees. The immigrants are therefore a highly non-representative selection of the Nigerian population.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_immigration_to_the_United_States#Educational_attainment

    http://wenr.wes.org/2013/07/an-overview-of-education-in-nigeria/

  4. I suppose the next natural question is: has the history of blacks in the United States been characterized by strong dysgenic trends?

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Father O'Hara
  5. Mats says:

    ISSUE 1
    I don’t understand Jensen’s second test. If a black kid has good genes, then those genes would be inherited by her offspring. Sure if the kid has superhigh IQ there would be reversion to the mean. In the more common case of two black parents with IQ of 110, I do not understand why their kid’s expected IQ would not be the same (plus and minus variation equally likely).

    ISSUE 2
    You write “predictable response of the hereditarians is to adopt the environmentalist argument of super high immigrant selection to explain this unexpected trend”. If intelligent blacks move to the US, that is neither hereditary nor environmental influence. Of course with a very broad definition of environmental it could be included, but than Jewish intermarriage over 3000 years would also be counted as environmental).

  6. On the one hand, I agree strongly with the argument that an undifferentiated “African IQ” of 68-70 is highly misleading; the British data shows this very conclusively. There are simply far too many high performing black Africans in the UK; in particular female African students are simply far too good, and consistently so. Nor is it simply elite migration; I see working class Nigerians routinely vastly out perform the (literal) princes of other nations.

    On the other hand, I don’t think this disproves genetic IQ variation among population groups, there is no reason to think that eg African-Americans do not have a genetically lowered IQ compared to white Americans. And while Afro-Caribbeans certainly out perform African-Americans, the British experience is that they do not show the brilliant academics of some black-African immigrant groups.

    The lesson seems to be that Africa is very diverse, there are a lot of low IQ population groups and some high IQ population groups, although family structures (“nepotism”) and other factors (“corruption”) mean that even these high-IQ groups have economically underperformed compared to white European groups of similar or lower IQ, but different social structures (“honesty”).

    The argument for immigration policy would be that if* high-ability immigration is desired, it needs to be selective. Nigerians, and especially groups like the Igbo, are preferable to groups like the Somalis. Furthermore, white admixture is not necessarily a magic IQ raiser; Ethiopians for instance do not seem to perform at as high a level as some Nigerian groups.

    *My own view is that there are no strong reasons for seeking mass immigration from highly divergent groups, or at least that there are significant negative externalities that need to be taken into account. But economic immigration from high-abililty groups is much preferable to “refugee/asylum seeker” immigration, where the migrating populations tend to be some of the worst on the planet in terms of human capital.

  7. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Interesting data. A few comments:

    1. From the article:”If the genetic hypothesis is correct, children of elite African blacks will tend to have lower IQs than children of native black Americans, and perhaps even lower than children of low IQ blacks”
    This isn’t necessarily what you would predict. Regression towards the mean implies that the children of elite parents will be more average than their *parents*. Whether they regress to a lower mean than black Americans would depend on how strong the initial selection for elites was. If you pick elite enough members from a population, their children can have a higher mean IQ than any reference population (until they become so rare there are fewer than two elites in the world to produce children).

    2. You downplayed the low level of admission of black students to elite universities in the UK.
    From http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/news/black-students-miss-out-on-oxbridge-(1)/
    “News this week that the total of 32 black students accepted by Oxford University in 2011 represents an increase from last year, is not much to write home about when 2010 figures show that fewer than one in 100 students beginning courses at Oxford or Cambridge were black.

    At Cambridge, the number of admissions for black students fell to 16 out of an intake of 2,624, compared with 25 the previous year.”

    From http://www.theguardian.com/education/abby-and-libby-blog/2013/dec/04/black-students-absence-diminishes-oxbridge :

    “In a statement, Oxford says it spends £4.5 million a year on outreach work “to encourage students from all socio-economic and ethnic-minority backgrounds to apply”. The university said: “School attainment is the main barrier to getting more black students to Oxford.”

    A spokesperson for Cambridge said in the Independent: “In the UK around 315 black students per year secure A*AA, our standard offer for admissions. This is around 1.2% of all UK students securing A*AA or better at A-level.”

    I don’t have an explanation that is consistent with both this and the GCSE results, so I don’t know what’s going on.

    3. Africa has the most genetic diversity of all continents. It is possible (even probable) that the average genetic IQ varies among regions and ethnic groups. I know you are taking Lynn and Jensen as the authorities on the hereditarian side, but their numbers can be off without it implying that there is a 100% environmental cause for the gaps.

    • Replies: @Stan D Mute
  8. @Drake

    ” To use Nigerian immigrants to the US as an example, 58.6% have college degrees and 28.3% had graduate degrees. Among Nigerians as a whole, less than 10% have college degrees. The immigrants are therefore a highly non-representative selection of the Nigerian population.”

    Yes, but they may be relatively representative of some tribes/groups within Nigeria (anecdotally, I see so many female Nigerian students from upper-working-class backgrounds perform so much better than the elites of other nations, it is hard for me not to believe this). In my experience, and from the data I’ve seen, the Nigerian Smart Fraction seems to be much much larger than with eg Middle Eastern populations, possibly superior to south Asia also, at least for female students.

    Nigeria seems to bear some resemblance to India, with discrete high-IQ groups and (many) lower IQ groups – Americans seem to think of Indians as high-IQ, due to selective migration, just as black Africans tend to perform highly in the UK.

    • Replies: @PB and J
  9. @Mats

    Reversion to the ancestral population mean – a child with two parents of IQ 110, whose grandparents and great grandparents had lower IQs, will tend to have a lower IQ also. If the ancestral population mean IQ was 110 then the child will on average have a 110 IQ also.

    The result is that an Igbo child of high IQ parents will also tend to have a high IQ, whereas a child of high IQ African-American parents of typical ancestry (no paper-bag tests) will tend to have a lower IQ.

  10. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Mats

    For Issue 1, Jensen’s argument is about regression towards the mean.

    An IQ score is the result of heriditary(genetic and home environment) and non-hereditary (non-shared environment) factors. For short call them genes and luck. The average white person has an IQ of 100. If there are two white people with an IQ of 100, you can expect they have average genes and average luck. There children will on average have average genes and average luck as well, and so on average have 100 IQ.

    If two white people have a 130 IQ, the situation changes. You can get an extreme score by some combination of good genes and good luck. The population of people with 130 IQ has both above average genes and above average luck on average. If they have kids, the kids will tend to have good genes, but only average luck (by definition I’m calling everything that doesn’t pass between generations ‘luck’). The kids would then have an average IQ closer to 100 than their parents (though anything is possible in an individual case). It could be 129 if genes are almost everything or 101 if luck is almost everything, but as long as both contribute, the average kid with 130 IQ white parents will have an IQ between 100 and 130.

    If blacks have an average IQ of 85, then black parents with an IQ of 100 will on average have children with an IQ between 85 and 100, lower than the children of white parents with the same IQ. This is basically Jensen’s argument.

    • Replies: @Mats
  11. Stogumber says:

    Interesting stuff and fodder for future debates. Some of this will go well with the reacosphere, like: Institutions indeed fake successes by chosing immigrant Africans instead of African Americans.
    I agree completely that African tribes and peoples shouldn’t be lumped together genetically. We wouldn’t do it in matters of athletics, so why do it in IQ studies and scores statistics?
    On the other hand, if we distinguish between genetically different kinds of “Africans”, a lot of these objections against the hereditarian theory would go down at the same time. For example, regression to the mean would mean “regression to the Igbo mean” and as such might be in accordance with the empirical data.
    (By the way, “regression to the mean” can be applicated by geneticists, but by environmentalists, too; it’s a purely statistical concept.)
    And of course, all this doesn’t cope with our most urgent social problem: What do we do with the people who indeed have a low IQ?

    • Replies: @Lawrence Fitton
  12. Lynn’s work has been discredited and debunked numerous times, as he makes up data, and cherry picks results – so no point quoting him!

    I agree with Drake above, there is massive selection for elite students from West Africa, to come to US colleges – so they are not representative of anything African. Some groups like the Ibo/Igbo of South Eastern Nigeria were rated as superior intellectually by the British, so there is no reason to believe they wouldn’t be similar today. Similar claims were made for the Tutsi of Rwanda.

  13. Curle says:
    @Drake

    A really long piece that somehow avoided the most basic of analytic filters. And you demolished the entire argument with ten words.

    if you compare non-random samples, you will not generalizable results.

    I guess I should be applauding you, but I’m really wondering what Chanda was thinking.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
  14. jon says:
    @Mats

    I don’t understand Jensen’s second test. If a black kid has good genes, then those genes would be inherited by her offspring. Sure if the kid has superhigh IQ there would be reversion to the mean. In the more common case of two black parents with IQ of 110, I do not understand why their kid’s expected IQ would not be the same (plus and minus variation equally likely).

    That’s how I understood it, too. Someone like Einstein, who is estimated to be 4 standard deviations above the mean, has a son who is also a physicist, but not quite what dad was. And then his grandson is a doctor – still smart, but not necessarily off the charts like grandpa.

  15. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Drake

    You’re right, and I can only guess why anyone would characterize it as an environmental factor. Okay, “immigration selection” would be cultural, but that’s not really what we’re talking about. The fact that they’re here isn’t hereditary, obviously, nor are the reasons for their coming, except indirectly. What does that have to do with the basis of their intelligence? Nothing.

    It may be that in practice blank slaters commonly make such arguments, in which case it would technically be an “environmentalist argument.” But there’s nothing essentially environmentalist about it.

  16. Cole says:

    You mention Andre Iguodala of the Golden State Warriors. Another example would be his teammate Festus Ezeli who played some productive minutes in their championship run. He was born in Nigeria and completed high school at age 14. He then went on to earn a degree in economics from Vanderbilt before entering the NBA.

  17. Henk says:

    If you want to get theoretically predicted values for regression to the mean, you need the theoretically assumed homogenously mixed breeding population that parents are drawn from, randomly. Is “African” a homogenous breeding population and parents of a given child are drawn “randomly” from it?

  18. sund says:

    I have several problems with this article:

    First, is the length. Plenty of peer-reviewed papers in evolutionary biology can communicate valid scientific findings without sprinkling references of cherry picked anecdotes such as the stories about the Meyerhoff Scholars Program and Biology Scholars Program. Why the scattershot approach?

    Second, is the language used. Frequent use of ‘racial hereditarian’ and ‘racial evolution’ is needlessly provocative. Biology has no theory of race, and for the author to conflate the two is sloppy science.

    Her proclamations, such as: “more fatal for the racial hereditarian side of the debate” and “the racial genetic hypothesis…remained a valid proposition. Until now.” Are pure propaganda.

    Third, and most damnably, the author has a faulty understanding of the very basic tenants of evolutionary biology, the science that seeks to understand genetics and Darwinian evolutionary processes.

    She states her logic thus: “If the genetic hypothesis is correct, children of elite African blacks will tend to have lower IQs than children of native black Americans, and perhaps even lower than children of low IQ blacks, the same phenomenon observed between American blacks and whites since native blacks are basically “more white” than African (or Caribbean) immigrants.”

    This ‘theory’ totally avoids the phenomenon of gene expression and gene silencing of recessive genes. Most first year biology students learn that a recessive traits (for example lighter skin, or blue eyes) will not be expressed if dominant genes are present in the DNA. A valid counter to her above argument is that genes responsible for higher academic achievement are recessive, and so not expressed in the target population of African Americans with European ancestry.

    I’m not saying my counter argument is true, just that the author displays academic laziness and dishonestly by not at least acknowledging that her hypothesis is just that, an unproven hypothesis.

    Her use of racist language, cherry picking of unrelated issues, faulty logic, and her inability to acknowledge that valid and respectable counter arguments exist makes it hard for me to take her claims seriously.

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @m___
  19. Vendetta says:

    Fascinating. Real tragedy that the Igbo Biafran secession failed so badly…read some accounts and was always impressed by the degree of ingenuity on display among the Igbos. The rest of Nigeria really seems to drag them down.

    I’d bet on the Tutsis as another of the more intelligent groups.

  20. M_Young says:

    Great news…Africa then should be able to develop and not swamp the UK with immigrants.

    • Replies: @Ben
  21. Richard says:

    1. IQ isn’t being reported at a fine enough level of aggregation. Thus fine level detail is being lost.

    2. The reversion to the mean theory is flawed. There are clearly subgroups that breed for intelligence. As long as they do this, they won’t revert to the mean of the larger group.

    3. Here is another case where the use of the normal distribution is flawed. It is often misapplied to things because the math is easier. Point 2 implies that the distribution (at least on the upside – I don’t know of anyone who deliberately breeds for lowered intelligence) is not going to be normal.

    • Replies: @Bill
    , @Jiminy Cricket
  22. Justin says:

    It is plausible that the elites of some African countries could have IQs in the high 90s. But just look at the countries these relatively high-functioning blacks come from; without exception they are much more dysfunctional than Western European countries. Sky-high rates of homicide, corruption, HIV/AIDS, etc.

    I don’t blame them for wanting to emigrate into a relatively functional country in Europe, but these relatively competent Africans should focus on trying to improve their own countries. To do that, they have to stay there.

    • Replies: @kilimani
  23. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @FederalistForever

    Dividing whites based on religion doesn’t reflect heredity very well. Razib explains this pretty well in the article you mentioned; there’s a lot of self-selection.

  24. Bliss says:

    Very interesting and informative article. A good counter to the dishonest, self-serving generalizations by the race “realist”/HBD gang. It is telling how they conveniently neglect to note that there are vast populations of non-SSAs such as south asians and MENAs who have IQs lower than african-americans. And among MENAs (who are classified as white caucasians by the US Census Bureau) the lowest IQ is that of the levantine syrians and lebanese who are recognized as the closest to europeans in phenotype.

    Likewise, they ignore the lower than global average IQs of european ethnicities like the Serbs and Irish…

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    , @PB and J
    , @dcite
  25. One has to keep in mind how big the recent cohorts of children from african countries are. For example in Nigeria – a country with a population as big as the population of Poland some decades ago – there were more children born in the year 2000 than in the whole European Union. So, if one assumes that selective immigration plays a role in the high IQ of African immigrants there is at least a population big enough to select from, which would make this plausible.

    Anyway I have always doubted that the IQ differences between the races is actually genetic. But this does not make HBD as a whole wrong. I still think that differences between the races in regards to athletic ability, physical strength, personality and attractiveness (especially of males) are due to genetic differences. And actually I think those differences are more important than IQ differences.

  26. Thanks for your article. I think that the problem which bedevils much research on intelligence is the difficulty of getting representative samples. It is for that reason that birth cohort studies and other full population studies are so important. Even small rates of selective attrition can affect the overall means, and where samples are small and unrepresentative less reliance can be placed on results. For example, looking at the UK cognitive data you show above, the sample size for White British is 145,000 and the immigrant groups are at best 4000 or far less. Although one can have reasonable confidence about the error terms for the White British assessment, one would have to accept larger error terms for the smaller groups. Those latter groups could only be seen as representative of their genetic and cultural societies of origin if we can obtain proper measures on representative samples in their countries of origin. PISA and TIMMS have some data (though few African countries have ever participated in such studies) and the general pattern is for immigrant groups to reflect the same averages as in their countries of origin. As a general rule, single country immigrant histories are only indicators and not always representative, and currently the UK is a magnet for immigrant groups, particularly elites.
    There is certainly great merit in looking at elite genetic groups in Africa, but so far it has been hard to get many reliable representative studies (mostly they tend to be nation based). If genetic based intelligence research can be done in Africa that would go a long way to elucidating gene-intelligence effects.

  27. SFG says:

    Kudos to Unz for showing this, which will no doubt enrage many of his commenters. Shows a true commitment to expressing different views.

    I actually do find this credible; I’ve known some pretty bright Igbo.

    Best explanation I can find is that there was some serious dysgenic selection among American blacks; supposedly they killed every slave caught learning to read, but that’s not sufficient. I wonder if it’s the ghetto culture and welfarism–if you subsidize all the kids of some layabout, irresponsible ghetto blacks with low IQ are going to have more kids than the more responsible ones who go to church and wait until they’re married. Still, that sort of selection should take centuries to happen. Any ideas? Maybe only the dumber Africans got caught by slavers?

    • Replies: @EdwardM
    , @artichoke
  28. This entire article is based on a misunderstanding of how long it takes for regression towards the mean to fully work. That is if the parents have high IQ the children will probably have a lower one, but still above the average. If the children engage in intelligence assortative mating it will take several generations for the regression towards the mean to bring the IQ to the average of that particular group and this is something that is driving the glacial pace of social mobility.
    The fact that smart immigrants have smart kids doesn’t disprove hereditarian theories.

    • Replies: @Dipwill
  29. Jefferson says:
    @Bliss

    ” And among MENAs (who are classified as white caucasians by the US Census Bureau) the lowest IQ is that of the levantine syrians and lebanese”

    The low IQ of Lebanese people is mostly among the Muslims. Lebanese Christians who immigrated to Latin America tend to be overrepresented among the wealthy Latin American upper class elite.

  30. Bruce says:

    I know next to nothing about genetics, statistics & intelligence testing but I would think that regression to the mean refers to regression to the ancestral-proximity weighted average. Not the population average.

  31. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    If the genetic hypothesis is correct, children of elite African blacks will tend to have lower IQs than children of native black Americans, and perhaps even lower than children of low IQ blacks

    That’s not how regression to the mean works. The hereditarian prediction is that children of parents with extreme traits move on average towards their racial mean, as opposed to the racial-egalitarian view that all populations regress to the same mean because they are all drawing from the same genetic deck.

    Empirically, the hereditarian prediction has held true; Where samples of parent:child or sibling pairs exist, blacks and whites regress to their respective racial means, not a common group mean, in both positive and negative directions for each group. I am aware of no environmentalist explanation for observed regressions.

    The predictable response of the hereditarians is to adopt the environmentalist argument of super high immigrant selection to explain this unexpected trend: where some environmentalists propose that these immigrants are the most driven achievers in their countries, the hereditarians say they are the most intellectually elite, the ones from the topmost segment of the IQ bell curve in their countries

    Saying that a particular sample is non-representative is neither an environmentalist nor hereditarian argument, so I suspect you misunderstood the hereditarian view.

    There can be no question that African immigration to the U.S. and Europe has been highly non-representative of Africans generally. Due to political instability and fewer opportunities in their home countries, the educated middle class of nations such as Nigeria have been fleeing for decades in the so-called “African brain drain”, to such an extent that Nigerian medical school graduates now hold class reunions in the U.S., as that’s where the majority of them are now.

    … this argument cannot explain the equally, if not more impressive, achievements of their children: lottery winners never have children who also win the lottery. The stubborn refusal of their children to conspicuously regress to the much lower African genetic mean IQ (and not even to the African American mean IQ) predicted by hereditarians is simply inexplicable under their racial genetic hierarchy.

    This sounds like a leap. Children of African immigrants do indeed regress downwards on average in the next generation in the United States. As Rauh 2014 shows, this convergences happens faster for African immigrants than for any other group, suggesting that genetic regression is a stronger force, as the hereditarian view would predict. There is nothing exceptional about the nature of African immigrants or their children, only their starting position, which is the most non-representative of immigrant groups.

    Also, I don’t think most hereditarians expect U.S. blacks and Africans to regress to different means within the same environment. Most hereditarians think the two groups are roughly similar in their potential, such that all blacks raised with a western standard of living could be a smart as African Americans are now.

    • Replies: @SFG
  32. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    This is very interesting. But a hereditarian might say that much of the logic in this article would not apply if we were to consider that an African tribe isn’t just a cultural group, but is also a sub-race, with African people much more genetically similar to others within the same tribe than to other sub-Saharan Africans.

    On the other hand, the Richard Lynn quote at top is a fairly weak argument, even if there are no African countries with 3-digit average IQs, because it rests on the assumption that the environmental factors lowering African IQs are not present in all of sub-Saharan Africa; that historical, environmental, cultural and economic factors are much more diverse across countries than are genetic factors.

    One might resolve some of these controversies by conducting IQ tests and tests on genetic similarity among the various African tribes, although I’m not sure how one quantifies whether two tribes’ genetic differences are greater or lesser than their cultural differences.

  33. jay-w says:

    If someone really wanted to be mean and snarky, they could point out that African-Americans are descended from the subset of Africans who were dumb enough to allow themselves to be enslaved by other Africans and then sold to Europeans.

    (And, for that matter, the White ancestors of today’s African-Americans may not have been the brightest bulbs on the string either.)

    • Replies: @Alden
  34. unit472 says:

    Is academic achievement a good substitute for IQ? Admission to an elite college IQ based or simply having a high GPA and letters of recommendation? To say that graduating from high school with an “A” average is indicative of high IQ is to suggest that the modern high school curriculum is challenging when all evidence suggests it is not. One might also suspect there is a bit of bias of the ‘dog walking on its hind legs’ sort. Teachers seeing a black student performing at grade level and even excelling in Algebra or Geometry is going to stand out as being ‘special’ whereas a white or Asian student will not.

    • Replies: @Epochehusserl
  35. Marian says:

    My theory on IQ is test scores are always trumped by actual accomplishment. In keeping with this thinking we live in idiotic times, and toilet paper has more value than IQ test sheets.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  36. I should have added a few more points, but will be very brief

    On GCSE results in UK I have already made a detailed comment in a previous post.

    http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/immigrants-scholastic-ability-and.html

    On regression to the mean it is important to enter an appropriate estimate for heritability. Usually researchers use 60% heritability, which is a reasonable estimate for children still at home, but for adults higher percentages up to about 80% would be more appropriate.

  37. EdwardM says:
    @SFG

    Maybe only the dumber Africans got caught by slavers?

    This was always my assumption. Perhaps the circumstances that led to African group A to successfully capture and sell into slavery members of African group B were evidence of higher intelligence in group A. So that difference has persisted among African-Americans compared to more recent immigrants.

    • Replies: @Honest Abe
    , @Ed
  38. Mats says:
    @Anonymous

    Thanks Anonymous and @Simon in London,

    I still do not get the argument. I read up a little bit on Galton’s Law. I’m comparing with selective breeding of animals. If I select for docile sheep then the offspring will be more docile on average. I understand that intelligence is probably expressed in a very complicated way (recessive genes, epigenetic effects, etc.). Still, if most of the effect is genetic, and if both parents have IQ=110, surely the reversion towards the mean should be small. What I do not understand is the idea of an ancestral population. How is the “memory” of that population actually encoded in the genome? Maybe some recessive genes.

    Okay, I’m rambling now. New to this site. Thanks for high quality comments

  39. annamaria says:
    @WowJustWow

    Correct. Perhaps the “unnatural” selection favored a less intelligent and independent-thinking population. The recent immigrants also have a strong work ethic of survivalists and the lack of victimhood complex.

  40. @EdwardM
    I think on should not to much rely on a interpretation of maybe contingent historic situations. Between 1750 and 1950 France and Germany had several wars, one time France won and could have taken each and every german as POW (though they did not), the other time Germany won. If some alien force would have taken Slaves from Europe by 1820 the French might have sold them the Germans. If the alien force would have came along by 1942 Germans might have sold French.

  41. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Marian

    Marian,

    Unfortunately IQ is highly tied to ‘accomplishment’…we can’t simply wave our hands and pretend we are above it all.

    This stuff matters – *a lot*.

    You can close your eyes and plug your ears…but these issues will not go away.

  42. Mike says:

    The entire thrust of this article implies that the genetic approach states that all whites are smarter than all blacks which has never been the contention of anyone serious. That some black groups have high IQ clusters and pass it on is utterly unremarkable.

    It is mind boggling that anyone could think all of Africa would be IQ homogeneous. Black Africans certainly don’t think so they tend to hold very strong opinions about who the smart and dumb Africans are.

  43. CCR says:

    According to Wikipedia, there are about 32 million Igbo. Has anybody done extensive IQ testing of these people? If so, what is the mean IQ?

  44. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @Simon in London

    The lesson seems to be that Africa is very diverse, there are a lot of low IQ population groups and some high IQ population groups, although family structures (“nepotism”) and other factors (“corruption”) mean that even these high-IQ groups have economically underperformed compared to white European groups of similar or lower IQ, but different social structures (“honesty”).

    So what would have selected for such high IQ in those groups?

    Remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch. The Brain is a very expensive organ to develop and maintain and if there have been no selective forces during the last 20 or so generations towards higher IQ, I would expect the other pressures (birth, development and normal maintenance) to select for lower IQ. These are the same arguments as can be used against those idiots who routinely claim that we normally only use 10% of our brains and thus can improve our performance enormously.

    Secondly, if these Black Africans have some secret genetic advantage, you would expect it to sweep through any population that has high selection for IQ because there has been enough admixture. It only takes a few percent for advantageous genes to sweep through a population under selection.

  45. Big Bill says:

    Translating the author, “don’t call me ‘African ‘, we are Igbo, and we have been superior to ‘Africans’ since time immemorial.” The question for us is why we let them migrate here instead of staying with their people and making their homelands better? And further, given their great native intelligence, (and having sold slaves to us, back in the day) why are they getting Affirmative Action?

  46. @Curle

    He’s thinking that he must by all means, by hook or by crook, attempt to prove that the continent of his ancestors really isn’t as intellectually inferior as numerous and countless scientific studies have concluded over decades and decades of research.

    Nigeria’s population is over 100 million. To suggest that less than 3% of the total (immigrants to the UK, US, etc) somehow represent the other 97% in IQ is ridiculous.

    One should also note that the author is from Zambia, which has long been noted to collectively have a higher IQ than most African nations.

    Let these people produce actual IQ scores (As Lynn, Rushton, etc have done) from within Nigeria and other African nations themselves and not look simply at the few immigrants that arrive to Western nations.

    • Replies: @Numinous
  47. RCB says:

    Lots of people have commented about the confusion with mean regression. I think some math will help.

    Suppose a mating pair of immigrants have a mean IQ of x. Suppose that their home breeding group has a mean IQ of x_mean1. Will their offspring have higher IQ than the mean into which they are immigrating – say, x_mean2? The expected IQ of their offspring is:

    h^2 * x + (1-h^2) * x_mean1 = g.

    h^2 is the heritability (the proportion of phenotypic variance due to additive genetic variance). I’ve called the expression “g” because it happens to be the mean additive genetic value (or breeding value) of the parents. The important point here is that we can’t say with this information alone whether this will be higher than x_mean2 until we fill in some numbers. What we certainly know is that h^2 is not negligible, so it’s entirely possible that the offspring will be above average in their new population if the parents are exceptional enough.

    Now let’s ask: what happens in the next generation? How will the grandchildren perform? To answer this question, you need to know how mating works. Let’s suppose, for example, that a sizable immigrant community is built up, and children of immigrants mostly marry endogamously. Let g_imm be the mean breeding value of this immigrant population. Then the expected IQ of the grandchild is

    1/2(g + g_imm)

    Continuing this forward, we conclude that descendants will decay toward the mean of the breeding group, g_imm. The important point here is that g_imm is not x_mean1; indeed, if most immigrants are like the child’s parents, then a decent guess for g_imm is just g! In that case, we would see little or no regression after the first generation!

    So, an immigrant population will not magically regress to the mean of the homeland if the population is largely founded by exceptional individuals. Immigrant communities could indefinitely maintain exceptionally high IQ via selective immigration and endogamy, even if the homeland mean IQ is low.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Mats
  48. Hepp says:

    Selective migration is the key here, as others have pointed out.

    This is like looking at the behavior of the Amish and then using it to prove that whites are just as collectivist as Asians.

    • Replies: @Myxine
  49. Hepp says:

    Shockley pointed out decades ago that there was some frightening dysgenics going on among American blacks in the 1960s ands 70s. The graphs were absolutely horrifying, beyond anything I’ve ever seen for whites.

    It’s been shown that evolution happens a lot quicker than was previously suspected. Studying immigrants to the UK is interesting in its own right, but doesn’t tell us much about American blacks.

  50. Sam Shama says:

    A superb piece, one that more that begins to put to rest the Black-White IQ gap. It also confirms what I have always suspected: that since humans use only a small portion of the brain for what defined as “cognition”, it is simply a matter of persistence and guidance, and indeed quite logically explains the achievements of narrowly defined, ethno-religious groups!

    Edison was right when he observed “Genius is 90 perspiration……..”

    • Replies: @Bruce
    , @annamaria
  51. @Mats

    In your example where both parents are of IQ 110 the average IQ of their children will be 106 to 108, depending on whether you use heritability as estimated in childhood (60%) or in adulthood (80%).

  52. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Mats

    Look at another example. Suppose you have a pocket full of coins (all fair coins), and you flip each one 100 times. Some of the coins might come up heads 70 times and others only 30, while the mean should be about 50. Suppose the most heads you got was 70, and now you flip this coin again 100 times. It might come out to be 70 or more heads of course, but probably not. The average in the future will be back all the way at the mean for all the coins, 50. The past results tell you absolutely nothing about the future under these assumptions.

    That is one extreme where the data you have is 100% noise (in the sense it is worthless for predicting future outcomes), so you get 100% regression towards the mean. The opposite extreme is where there is no noise in the data. If there is something you can measure with perfect precision (like the number of marbles in a jar) and it does not change at all between measurements, then all future measurements will be exactly the same as the first one and there will be 0% regression towards the mean.

    More realistic situations tend to be in between these extremes. The data you get has some statistical bearing on future measurements, but there is also a contribution to what you measure that has no persistence into the future.

    In the IQ examples, the “future measurements” are the children’s IQ. The parents IQ gives some information about the offspring IQ, but chance plays a role too. The really tempting thing is that when you hear someone has a 130 IQ is to assume that the underlying genetic IQ is also 130, but if you do that, you will never understand this phenomenon. If you have a 130 IQ, it is much more likely that luck is on your side than against you, just as it is much more likely that genes are on your side than that it’s all luck (there is a symmetry between the two). This means that the population of people with a 130 IQ actually on average has a genetic IQ less than 130 (though a few will have more), because chance is accounting for some of the result.

    Hope that clears it up.

    • Replies: @Mats
  53. There is another reason to question hereditarian explanations for cognitive ability. BGI Shenzhen sequenced and analyzed the genomes of several thousand smart and not-so-smart individuals. They failed to identify any strong correlates between genes and cognitive ability. They have said that successful identification of such correlates will require the sequencing and analysis of the genomes of at least a million individuals.

    Its possible that cognitive ability is rooted in epigenetics (DNA Methylation). It may also be determined in the biochemical environment of the womb during gestation.

  54. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @RCB

    I agree with everything you wrote except the last two paragraphs. It is not reasonable to assume g_imm is g. People with exceptional IQ’s as a population tend to have a higher than average non-genetic factor contributing to their IQ just as they tend to have a higher genetic contribution. That has to be the case statistically.

    g_imm should be between g_mean1 and g. Where in between depends on the heritability, and non-homogeneity of the source population is also a complicating factor.

    • Replies: @RCB
  55. ViCB3 says:

    Interesting article. However, I didn’t seem seem to read word one about culture, specifically the American Ghetto/Urban Sharecropper culture that seems to discourage parenting and intact families, academic achievement, and self-control. Wholly disfunctional, it stands in stark contrast to, say, the Jamicans, who do seem to value and stress academics, intact families, a work ethic, emotional control and self discipline. In other words, they’re high-functioning mainstream.

    Just a thought.

    VicB3

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @AshTon
  56. Mats says:
    @RCB

    Thanks for clarification. So with your argument you are pretty much trashing the main argument of the article.

    • Replies: @RCB
  57. So, the best that Africa has to offer can measure up to the non black US average, and this means that ‘tabula rasa’ is valid? Some magical contortions going on here.

    I guess next Chanda is going to propose that blacks are athletically average. Or was ‘intellectually equal and more physically gifted’ the goal to begin with? Typical progressive dogma; physical differences are freely admitted, differences in mental ability must be rationalized away at all costs. One such cost is progress, which can’t be made until we’re ready to look at the issue honestly.

    There is a very poor understanding of regression to the mean here. If two parents both have IQs of 130, then thier mean average is 130. Why would you average the IQs of individuals who didn’t contribute any genetic material into the mean? If you’re going to consider the mean average of the larger group as the point being regressed towards, you need to bring their genes into the equation. Thus if a parent with an IQ of 130 pairs with someone whose IQ is the larger group’s mean (100), then you can expect a regression towards the larger groups mean. But not because it has anything to do with the larger group’s mean, it is because the new mean average of the parents is 115.

    Also, when you measure regression by scholastic achievement, you have to factor in that children of elites rarely have the ‘want to’ of their parents, due to their upbringing. Scholastic achievement is not entirely based on IQ.

    • Replies: @SFG
    , @AaronB
    , @Nico
  58. SFG says:
    @Anonymous

    ” this convergences happens faster for African immigrants than for any other group, suggesting that genetic regression is a stronger force, as the hereditarian view would predict. ”

    That’s one view, but you do have to consider that there is a very powerful anti-academic bias among African-Americans, and as the kids are brought up here, they are going to face strong pressure to ‘act black’. Some of them are going to succumb.

  59. SFG says:
    @Ozymandias

    Doesn’t mean that ‘tabula rasa’ is valid, just that some subgroups of Africans are highly intelligent. That doesn’t mean genetics don’t play a factor in our current racial troubles, with a different group of people of African descent.

  60. RCB says:
    @Anonymous

    Notice I said “if most immigrants are like the child’s parents, then a decent guess for g_imm is just g.” Put another way: if all immigrating pairs are like the original pair I assumed, then when we do the heritability calculation to find g, we must get the same answer. So g_imm = g. I’ve already accounted for non-heritable factors: g < x.

    Now if the original pair is exceptional *even among the immigrants*, then you would be right.

    Heritability is a single-generation phenomenon: it gets you from the phenotype to the breeding value (or an estimate of it). From there on, it's all breeding.

  61. tomv says:

    lottery winners never have children who also win the lottery.

    When you’re talking about genetic lottery, of course they do. It’s even more likely, relatively speaking. What are the genetic lotto balls from which a child’s draw is made, if not the parents’ genes? This is consistent with both hereditarianism and regression to the mean.

    I’m not sure what the point of this article is. If it’s to dispute hereditarianism, then showing a persistently high performance of a small sub-group (despite poverty!) is a curious way to go about it. If it’s to argue that the “black” IQ estimates are too low, then again singling out a small subset of blacks (e.g. Igbo immigrants to the West) is a non-starter. After all, you could do the same kind of analysis with the Chinese, the Indians (especially), and, gasp!, even whites. What are the average IQ and educational achievement of a white Episcopalian American expatriates in China, for example? I suspect they will be significantly higher than those of white Americans in general.

    Apparently, children of African immigrants are doing quite well. A perverse consequence of this, unmentioned in the article, is that they often clean up top affirmative action slots originally meant for descendants of America’s slaves. Still, ethnic boosterism feels good and everyone deserves it now and then. I will caution, though, that any inclusion of Kofi Annan as an example of excellence is in fact damning with faint praise.

  62. RCB says:
    @Mats

    I wouldn’t say I trashed the original article. I’m just pointing out that the regression-to-the-mean argument is flawed. But that’s only a small part of the article. I don’t know anything about IQ variation within Africa, but it strikes me as likely that different subpopulations would show variation.

    I’d like to point out that regression to the mean is not an exclusively genetic phenomenon. It’s a statistical phenomenon that ultimately arises from persistence of quantities that can only be measured with error. In the case of genetics, the persisting thing is the genetic value, and the error is the environmental variance. But it could arise other ways: suppose that there are cryptically transmitted environmental and cultural variables that drive behavior, but we can only measure these with error. This would also yield regression to the mean, just like quantitative genetics (in short, replace “genetic value” with “cultural value”). So regression to the mean alone isn’t good evidence of heredity. (Twin studies are.)

    Another demonstration of this: give a classroom a series of tests. You will observe regression to the mean across test scores: people who score really well on the first test tend not to do as well on the next. Why? Because at least part of their great scores were due to chance (depending on how hard the test is, etc.). This isn’t a matter of heritability, it’s about measurement error around one’s “true skill.”

  63. Bill says:
    @Simon in London

    Nor is it simply elite migration; I see working class Nigerians routinely vastly out perform the (literal) princes of other nations.

    There is a creeping danger of equivocation in this bit. The hereditarian is going to argue for selective immigration of the cognitive elite which may or may not be coextensive with the economic, political, and social elite. As long as you believe that the economic returns to cognitive skill are higher in the developed world (and how could you fail to believe this?), then you should also find selective immigration of the cognitive elite plausible.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
    , @Ron1
  64. Great article. My personal and 100% anecdotal observations completely coincide with the article’s thesis. That is, I have seen African and European blacks do perfectly fine at the highest levels of education in tough stem disciplines.

    But I’ve never seen American blacks do well in even ordinary first year university technical classes.

    To put it bluntly, successful African and European black people seem to be European-minded. They have European ideals, European manners, and European aspirations.
    While “African Americans” seem to be gangsta-minded.

  65. @Simon in London

    Bingo. How much of a role does assortative mating play in all of this?

    Heck, how much of a role is assortative mating playing in society in general these days? Has there ever been a time in history when we segregated people by intelligence and then left them to do what nature does when you put young men and women together, i.e. have babies?

  66. AaronB says:
    @Ozymandias

    ‘Measure up’ to the non-black average? You wish.

    They are SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the non-black average in the UK. By a lot.

    Higher than Chinese as well.

    First of all, that the ‘best Africa can offer’ should outperform the white elite – Eton educated whites – as well as the ‘best China can offer’ (since presumably chinese immigration is selective as well) is itself hugely distubing.

    Second, the criticism that these are non-random samples has been addressed in the article, yet conveniently ignored by everyone bringing up the selective immigration idea.

    For a long time the data about IQ, I felt, very inadequately described what we see in the real world (for instance high IQ Asian nations are neither the wealthiest nor the best intellectual performers, and similar IQ European nations with similar institutional advantages yet display intellectual output of vastly differing quality, and have historically), and that the HBD people discussed IQ in so unintelligent a manner, simply ignoring glaring discrepancies and prefering abstractions to chaotic reality in a bland self satisfied manner that one might expect from the first person in a rural village to get a college diploma and is still excited that he learned some math, that it’s hugely refreshing to see even more discrepancies come to light.

    The truth is that now IQ has only limited ability to tell us anything about human achievement, and much more work has to be done.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
    , @Nico
    , @Mats
  67. Bruce says:
    @Sam Shama

    Your first sentence suggests that you see putting the black-white IQ gap to rest as a mission/goal. Why shouldn’t we want to understand the truth?

  68. “Doesn’t mean that ‘tabula rasa’ is valid, just that some subgroups of Africans are highly intelligent.”

    I wish we could get our progressive leaders to admit even this much. But their political agenda trumps all, and thus any “immigrant” who is likely to vote for them is declared just as good as any other immigrant. Under this agenda, we have fashioned a program that enables certain segments of society to reproduce as rapidly as possible. And what members of society will accept a career in raising as many children as possible? (with bonus money for raising them in a single parent household) Well, it ain’t our best and brightest, that’s for sure.

    This is the problem I have with our societal engineers, an examination of their actions quickly reveals that they have no interest in engineering a society that benefits humanity, their sole interest is short term benefit to themselves. A focus on propagating the least productive members of society in order to create a government dependent class does not benefit that society unless one were to consider the entrenchment of a ruling class a benefit. Personally, I see this entrenchment as unavoidable in the long term, and perhaps beneficial if that ruling class did have the advancement of humanity as a prime consideration. But this potential ruling class is actively sabotaging humanity to advance themselves.

    Here’s a couple of questions for our resident mathematicians. The mean IQ of a group is 100. One particular member of the group is above average at 110. This member pairs with another member of the group whose IQ is unknown. What would be the expected IQ of the offspring?
    A: Save your answers, no one cares.

    Second question:
    The IQ of the second member is known, it is 190. Will the expected IQ of the offspring regress towards the mean of the group (-110), or will it regress towards the mean average of the parents? (150)
    A: Mathematicians; lots of brains, no common sense.

    • Replies: @RCB
  69. Nico says:
    @Ozymandias

    Typical progressive dogma; physical differences are freely admitted, differences in mental ability must be rationalized away at all costs.

    That’s only for cognitive traits. For physical traits, i.e. sex, the progressive reminds us that it is what is in the mind that counts. Chelsea Manning and Chaz Bono know all too well: “WO! I fell like a she-man!”

  70. Nico says:
    @Drake

    if you compare non-random samples, you will not generalizable results.

    For those wanderers who find this article too long and tedious to read and advance to the comments, I am bumping Drake’s words here to confirm that you did not miss anything.

  71. Jensen’s argument of global racial IQ differences was largely based on extrapolations from US data to the world. It is certainly possible that the African American population, or the white American population, or both, are greatly genetically different from the rest of the black and white races, respectively, when it comes to IQ genes, due to strong selective pressures specific to these populations. However, the admittedly spotty international IQ data that have traditionally been available have been consistent with the thesis that the robustly attested black-white IQ gap in America reflects a global racial reality, justifying Jensen’s hypothesis of deep evolutionary roots for the gap.

    Traditionally, the black-white gap in the UK has been smaller than in the US, but a parsimonious explanation for this has been selective immigration: voluntary immigrants tend to be cognitively selected. As others have pointed out, selective immigration is not an “environmentalist” explanation but simply a logical and statistical one. I don’t think anyone would claim that immigrants are a random sample of their populations of origin.

    In recent years, some data from the UK have suggested that the black-white IQ gap in the UK has more or less closed. This appears to have happened very suddenly during the last 10-15 years. This is not expected on hereditarian grounds because cognitive selection among immigrants would have to have been extreme. The best evidence for the closing of the gap comes from GCSE results. On the other hand, GCSEs have seen extreme grade inflation over the very period when this closing happened (PISA exam results for the UK have declined over the same time period).

    As Anonymous pointed out above, blacks constitute only 1.2 percent of all students securing A*AA or better at A-levels (secondary school leaving qualifications), which are more difficult than GCSEs and taken at a later age. Blacks are 3 percent of the British population and a larger percentage of younger cohorts, so they appear to be strongly underrepresented among the very best students, regardless of Chisala’s anecdotes to the contrary.

    So, the British situation, while showing some good evidence of IQ convergence between whites and blacks, remains unclear.

    When it comes to America, Chisala’s case is entirely anecdotal and unconvincing. The fact that black immigrants and their children tend to attend exclusive educational institutions can be explained by reference to selective immigration and affirmative action. John Fuerst has showed that the children and grandchildren of black immigrants in America have similar IQs to slave-descended African-Americans.

    It is reasonable to expect there to be black populations in Africa with higher natural intellectual capacities than others. Any data firmly showing this remain scarce, though.

  72. @AaronB

    “Second, the criticism that these are non-random samples has been addressed in the article, yet conveniently ignored by everyone bringing up the selective immigration idea.”

    So you understand that this was a whole lot of cherry picking, yet you want to pretend it is somehow representative. Gee, I don’t know why everyone won’t play along.

  73. This essay is confused about Jensen’s arguments, regression toward the mean, the distributions of IQ scores, the hereditarian position, etc. Extreme environmentalists have existed in the past, and this may still represent a PC stance; “hereditarians” have always accepted a substantial environmental influence on IQ scores. Isn’t dividing Africans into tribal groups hereditarian (racist)? We still have the lack of intellectual achievement in Africa and the Caribbean to explain. Advances in genetics will probably provide some answers in a decade or two. Let’s hope we will someday see the end of confused argumentation.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  74. rec1man says:

    Has there been any data of how many blacks, including sub-sets like Igbo, Caribbean, etc, get National Merit Scholarships . In the 2015 list, for California, total winners = 2100, of which ;
    1100 are Orientals, 330 are Indians

    http://www.docstoc.com/docs/172418022/2015-National-Merit-Semifinalists-in-California

  75. “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data.  Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”

    https://chandachisala.wordpress.com/about/

    Looks like Mr. Chisala is working hard to manufacture the facts that will fit his theories.

  76. Qasim says:

    This article reminded me of something Razib Khan posted several months ago…

    http://www.unz.com/gnxp/back-to-africa-and-the-bantu-explosion/

    Here are a few of the most important snippets:

    For far too long Africa was conceived of as a blackbox in genetic terms, eternally useful as an outgroup, basal to the rest of humanity…. Yes, everyone could agree that there were back migrations along the periphery of the continent, the great swath north of the Sahara around to the Horn of Africa, but Sub-Saharan Africa was neglected in these treatments. No more….

    For me the big topline result is in the figure above, where you see the collection of results suggestiong admixture into African populations from Eurasia and also between agriculturalists and hunter-gatherers….

    What is more interesting is that they observed Eurasian admixture within Yoruba people. This admixture has been suggested by others, as the Yoruba have traces of Neandertal ancestry. This group dates the admixture back to nearly 10,000 years ago, so it as likely associated with goings on that were trans-Saharan.

    Personally, I know a lot of Igbo who are highly educated, often physicians. I have also noticed that many have a skin tone and eye color (light brown) that one would not initially expect in West Africans. It would be ironic if their high achievement, rather than refuting the genetic hypothesis, actually ends up strengthening it!! I doubt too many researchers will be too gung-ho about trying to find out if there is a correlation between high African educational achievement and percentage of Eurasian ancestry though…

  77. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @ViCB3

    Jamaica has atrocious levels of violence and disfunction, worse than the US by far.

    Again, you are looking at a small, elite sample of Jamaican immigrants who have the education and aptitude to get to the US in the first place – and comparing them to the *average* American black. It’s not a useful comparison.

  78. AshTon says:

    Ancient Igbo, Benin, and Yoruba art was quite sophisticated for its time. Perhaps more than European at the same time. It reminds me a bit of Chinese art.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ife

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benin_Bronzes

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Igbo-Ukwu

    • Replies: @IA
    , @Dr_MMH_MD
  79. Nico says:
    @AaronB

    I am highly skeptical about your lauding of “high-end” black Africans outperforming “high-end” (if that is what you actually meant by “elite”; the two overlap but are not necessarily synonymous) white Americans. There is quite a bit of variety even within the top 1000 of anything, but the fact that a given member of group A has a lower mark than a given member of group B in no way precludes group A from having a higher mean, median and/or mode than group B. Or vice-versa. Relatively few who take the position that a genetic role in IQ goes a way to explaining mean, median and mode for various differentials between phenotypes argue otherwise.

    In the same vein, relatively few who argue that genetics plays an important role in the outcome of an individual’s IQ argue that it is the only important factor.

    Most critics of cognitive racial determinism or of “biological determinism” appear to want to lump anyone who accepts such a correlation or role under those rubrics and discredit them summarily, on the basis of guilt by supposed association with those who would have us believe that the genes which produce dark skin, nappy hair and broad noses are responsible for cognitive ability or that environmental inputs do not significantly alter the expression of cognitive traits. But it’s easier to argue against a caricature than to engage in actual science, isn’t it?

    To wit, you also appear to confuse “human achievement” and “human development.” Those are even more complex topics as we move to societal scales even further removed from the individual, but a case can still be made that civilizational and economic *potential* is strongly correlated with average IQ. It is less than exact science but if you accept that there is more to truth than the scientific method it can be quite powerful.

    • Replies: @Alden
  80. Numinous says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi

    Let these people produce actual IQ scores (As Lynn, Rushton, etc have done) from within Nigeria and other African nations themselves and not look simply at the few immigrants that arrive to Western nations.

    The whole point of comparing IQs of different races within a country (like the UK or the US) is to eliminate the “environment” variable. Since everyone agrees that the “environment” in countries like Nigeria is much crappier than that in countries like the UK, such measurements as you propose will do nothing to change anyone’s mind. Non-hereditarians will point out that the studies haven’t been controlled for environmental factors, and HBDers like you will stick to your guns and claim that blacks have lower IQs.

    If, as you HBDers claim, IQ is determined by race, then the IQs of immigrant children must regress toward a lower African mean, regardless of which portion of the source population gets to immigrate. And the writer has written a long article attempting to show that such regression does not occur. An article which you evidently did not bother to read in full.

    • Replies: @RCB
  81. Realist says:

    This comment section is loaded with trolls. I take it Chanda brought them with her.

  82. Myxine says:
    @Hepp

    Wait, are there people seriously arguing that the Amish are genetically predisposed towards collectivism?
    Or “Asians” (which ones?) for that matter.

    • Replies: @Hepp
    , @HA
  83. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Mean % difference from England mean, 2010-11 ; Ethnicities:
    Nigerian +21,8; White British/English -2,3 ; Italian 2,8; Albanian and Kosovar 12; Turkish/Turkish Cypriot -19,7%; Pakiusatn mirpuri -23; White Eastern European -23,7

    There must be a reason for those funny results. Let´s take a look at the PISA 2012 results

    Mean score mathematics:
    Estonia 521; Poland 518; Slovenia 501; Czech Republic 499; United Kingdom 494; Latvia 491; Portugal 487, Italy 485, Slovakia 482, USA 481, Lithuania 479; Israel 466; Turkey 448, Cyprus 440; Albania 394; Tunisia 388; Indonesia 375

    Mean score science:
    Estonia 541; Poland 526; Slovenia 514; Czech Republic 508; United Kingdom 514; Latvia 502, USA 497, Lithuania 496, Italy 494, Portugal 489, Israel 470; Turkey 463, Cyprus 438; Albania 397; Tunisia 398; Indonesia 382

    • Replies: @annamaria
  84. RCB says:
    @Numinous

    “the IQs of immigrant children must regress toward a lower African mean, regardless of which portion of the source population gets to immigrate.”

    No, this is not what genetics predicts. Read comment #47 to see why not. Excuse the self promotion.

    • Replies: @Chanda Chisala
  85. AaronB says:
    @Michael_L_Stewart

    So the IQ data about blacks are consistent with lack of achievement in Africa.

    Do you feel the IQ data do a good job explaining the difference in intellectual achievement (and even wealth) between Asia and Europe, and between similar European countries? Or the fact that American Asians are 15%-20% of our elite universities (and should be much more), yet bring in only 5% of American Nobel’s?

    I know – you will reach for a host of non-IQ environmental factors.

    Yet such factors, apparently, can only be selectively applied to patch up holes in the IQ theory. Got it.

    Its sort of like the multiverse in physics – presented as an explanatory triumph, yet in reality is a theoretical invention to help hide the inadequacy of physics to explain everything.

  86. Hepp says:
    @Myxine

    Yes on both.

    https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=amish+quotient

    https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2014/03/10/big-summary-post-on-the-hajnal-line/

    Amish selected into their lifestyle and have seen their less collectivist members leave, so it would be quite impossible for that not to leave a genetic mark.

  87. So…in conclusion, eleven year-old blacks are at the bottom (more or less) of the IQ hierarchy in the UK, much like in the US, but the bottom there is higher. And the Chinese eleven year-olds over there are really smart—well, on two out of three tests, and perhaps their relatively low verbal reasoning score is partially a language thing, but the other immigrant groups do not seem to have been hit nearly as hard.

    Or maybe black and East Asian IQ is no higher there than here, while white British IQ is lower than the rest of whites in the Anglosphere, it’s just that the British IQ on this test is artificially inflated somehow. That might explain why despite this test showing a fairly high white British IQ, they do significantly worse than the rest of us on PISA tests.

    I’m not sure how relevant course pass-rates are, especially when the majority of all groups are passing. Show me numerical scores. Don’t the British take something like the SAT? I actually thought they did, and that the GCSE was just a preliminary.

    Maybe the Igbo, or whatever other African group, do have high IQs. But this is hardly conclusive evidence. You hypothesis that they have a high IQ based on their course pass-rates, but the only IQ chart you provide does not (at the racial group level anyways) seem to correspond all that strongly to pass-rates. The IQ chart shows Caribbean blacks as equal or slightly higher than African blacks, but their pass-rates are significantly lower, and it shows whites scoring at least as high as Indians, but they too have significantly lower pass-rates.

  88. @Richard

    1. Sure. Applies to all groups, not just blacks.

    2. Regression to the mean is a mathematical fact, not a theory. You can beat it with assortative mating, but that doesn’t falsify it.

    3. Yeah, there’s evidence that the upper tail, too, is fatter than expected based on the normality assumption, but this isn’t really relevant here. The lower tail is fatter than expected because of large-effect mutations and the like.

  89. HA says:
    @Myxine

    “Wait, are there people seriously arguing that the Amish are genetically predisposed towards collectivism?”

    Evolutionary theorists Henry Harpending and Gregory Cochran have recently argued that the Amish….“have probably experienced selection for increased Amishness—an increase in the degree to which Amish find their lifestyle congenial, since those who like it least, leave.”

    http://takimag.com/article/race_of_the_amish_steve_sailer/print

  90. RCB says:
    @Ozymandias

    “Second question:
    The IQ of the second member is known, it is 190. Will the expected IQ of the offspring regress towards the mean of the group (100), or will it regress towards the mean average of the parents? (150)”
    (I assumed you mean to write “100″ instead of “-110.”)

    Neither. But math is beneath you, so I won’t elaborate.

  91. annamaria says:
    @Sam Shama

    “…since humans use only a small portion of the brain for what defined as “cognition”…
    What empirical evidence can you offer to support this statement?

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  92. annamaria says:
    @Anonymous

    You did suggest a great puzzle!

  93. @RCB

    RCB, Your argument is contradicted by the data. Children of high IQ, wealthy native black Americans do apparently regress toward a lower mean than whites. By your argument, that shouldn’t happen (since they are quite assortatively mated, which would be the equivalent of African immigrants marrying each other).

    As for others who are correcting my formulation of regression to the mean, I did not mean (obviously) that the IQ of African immigrant children should become equal to the average IQ in Africa. That’s not what regression “to” [or "toward"] the mean means. However, whatever regression happens to the immigrant blacks, it should be more than the regression that happens, not just to whites, but even to elite native blacks (see paragraph above), assuming that Jensen was right.

    Finally (for others still), this article is not about proving that everything that hereditarians say is false. Its limited objectives are clearly laid out in the article.

    (Oh, final finally: another commenter took issue with my use of the word ‘racial’; s/he is probably confusing it with the word ‘racist’.)

    • Replies: @RCB
  94. Wally [AKA "BobbyBeGood"] says: • Website
    @Simon in London

    ” … white admixture is not necessarily a magic IQ raiser …”

    I submit that whites who breed with blacks generally have much lower IQs than whites in general.

    Thanks

    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
  95. Concerning selective immigration from countries like Nigeria I actually doubt that it can be that selective, at least not in a meritocratic sense. In third world countries those who get things – like visa, green cards, a fake passport – are often not those who achieve most in a cognitive sense, but those who have the best contacts to people in offices, who are most corrupt etc.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  96. J1234 says:

    So why does this researcher have to go to fairly specific scenarios to find some level of parity between black and white IQ? Confirmation bias involved? Possibly, but I also think it’s probable that there are notable differences from nation to nation in sub-Saharan Africa. I remember a few Nigerian foreign students in college being bright…probably better students than me ( but I wasn’t that great.) They also had a far more agreeable, engaging and academically confident attitude than American blacks. Not even in the same ballpark. This was 35 years ago.

    My wife – an academic – has often told me that minority grad students and colleagues who have come from affirmative action sources just aren’t up to snuff. (Asians are bright, though language can be a barrier.) She did say, however, that she had a Jamaican grad student who was very good.

    Still, I find the following “evidence” this researcher presents as something less than scientific (at least when trying to make a case for a larger population):

    In the world of intellectually gifted schools, perhaps the most selective in the United States is a special program called the Davidson Academy started by Jan and Bob Davison in 2006 in Reno, Nevada. The tiny school boasts of selecting only the most profoundly gifted children (the highest of the five levels of giftedness) whose IQ is so high that “only one in every ten thousand children in America” can qualify to the school in any one cohort; it is more selective than Stanford or Harvard can ever be. The school makes no efforts or pretensions to affirmative action and as such, they have had very little “diversity.” However, a search through the promotional materials of the school for a black student – all schools and colleges will always show some black faces in their promotional materials if they have any – reveals that they have had at least one black student, and it was, unsurprisingly, a Nigerian Igbo name (the parent is interviewed in the ad posted on Youtube).

  97. @Wally

    Now where have I heard this idea before…

    Oh yeah!

    Jede Kreuzung zweier nicht ganz gleich hoher Wesen gibt als Produkt ein Mittelding zwischen der Höhe der beiden Eltern. Das heißt also: das Junge wird wohl höher stehen als die rassisch niedrigere Hälfte des Elternpaares, allein nicht so hoch wie die höhere. Folglich wird es im Kampf gegen diese höhere später unterliegen. Solche Paarung widerspricht aber dem Willen der Natur zur Höherzüchtung des Lebens überhaupt. Die Voraussetzung hierzu liegt nicht im Verbinden von Höher- und Minderwertigem, sondern im restlosen Siege des ersteren. Der Stärkere hat zu herrschen und sich nicht mit dem Schwächeren zu verschmelzen, um so die eigene Größe zu opfern. Nur der geborene Schwächling kann dies als grausam empfinden, dafür aber ist er auch nur ein schwacher und beschränkter Mensch; denn würde dieses Gesetz nicht herrschen, wäre ja jede vorstellbare Höherentwicklung aller organischen Lebewesen undenkbar.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  98. Chuck says: • Website

    Hello Chanda,

    You must have missed my paper:

    Fuerst, J. (2014). Ethnic/Race Differences in Aptitude by Generation in the United States: An Exploratory Meta-analysis. Open Differential Psychology.

    I showed, based on the results from 18 nationally or semi-nationally representative samples, that first and second generation Black immigrants to the U.S. perform, on highly g-loaded tests, about as poorly as do Black natives.

    “Cognitive ability differences between racial/ethnic groups are of interest to social scientists and policy makers. In many discussions of group differences, racial/ethnic groups are treated as monolithic wholes. However, subpopulations within these broad categories need not perform as the racial/ethnic groups do on average. Such subpopulation differences potentially have theoretical import when it comes to causal explanations of racial/ethnic differentials. As no meta analysis has previously been conducted on the topic, we investigated the magnitude of racial/ethnic differences by migrant generations (first, second, and third+). We conducted an exploratory meta-analysis using 18 samples for which we were able to decompose scores by sociologically defined race/ethnicity and immigrant generation. For Blacks and Whites of the same generation, the first, second, and third+ generation B/W d-values were 0.79, 0.79, and 1.00. For Hispanics and Whites of the same generation, the first, second, and third+ generation H/W d-values were 0.76, 0.67, and 0.57. For Asians and Whites of the same generation, the first, second, and third+ generation d-values were -0.08, -0.21, and 0.00. Relative to third+ generation Whites, the average d-values were 0.99, 0.84, and 1.00 for first, second, and third+ generation Black individuals, 1.04, 0.71, and 0.57 for first, second, and third+ generation Hispanic individuals, 0.16, -0.18, and -0.01 for first, second, and third+ generation Asian individuals, and 0.24 and 0.04 for first and second generation Whites.”

    Thus, if you are correct that U.S. Black immigrant excel in educational indices, such as years of schooling attained, it must be that they do so on account of factors other than g.

    That might suggest a possible explanation for the GCSE scores, which are substantially non-g loaded. As for the UK CAT3 results, it so happened that the same version of the test in the U.S. (called CAT7) also showed only a 0.5 SD difference in the standardization sample, one given at the same time as part of a joint country standardization (Lankin and Gambrell, 2012). This opens the possibility that we are dealing with a test construct issue. On the other hand, the most recent A-level results show only about a 0.5 SD difference too.

    This isn’t to say that the UK results are not interesting. They are just not compelling. It is notable that you chose not to mention other results (UKCAT (2005-2014), LNAT, PIAAC (2012), ONS (2000), AMPS (2007) which make any neat explanation difficult. Instead, you more or less recycled an argument which I had previously made: https://z139.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/is-global-race-realism-still-tenable/

    Anyways, if you are interested in serious research, and not repeating points previously made, feel free to contact me.

    “Social experiments concerning the first test have not been decisive, especially due to the difficulty of separating out environmental factors since lighter American blacks have historically faced more favorable socioeconomic conditions.”

    Well, I have a data set which has genomic admixture and cognitive ability data. It would help to have a more diverse set of authors when it comes to analyzing, writing up, and publishing the findings.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Chanda Chisala
  99. Irving says:

    Being myself an Eritrean-American, I can attest to the fact that 1) Eritrean-Americans do far better than African-Americans academically and economically and that 2) this disparity is not due to selective migration. Though in the 70s and early 80s some of the Eritreans who came here were students who simply decided to overstay their visas and to settle permanently, the overwhelming majority of Eritrean-Americans, including my parents, came as refugees fleeing war and poverty. I generally have no problem with accepting the validity of HBD–that is to say, I have no problem with the idea that IQ is at least partly genetic and that the IQ differences between the races, ethnicities, genders, etc, are also at least partly genetic–but I do agree with Mr. Chisala that the experience of African immigrants in the West complicates the matter greatly.

  100. @Bill

    “The hereditarian is going to argue for selective immigration of the cognitive elite ”

    Personally I’m against mass immigration from any highly divergent group unless perhaps there is a critical manpower shortage – eg “We better populate Australia/USA quickly or the Chinese/Spanish will get it” sort of thing. I suspect there is an economic advantage to UK GDP per capita from Igbo immigration, but I’m not sure that makes it a good idea. For one thing, the Igbo tend to compete with and outcompete many natives. For another, more people means less space. Still, it’s a much better idea than mass immigration of many of the low-IQ, high-crime groups we do get.

  101. RCB says:
    @Chanda Chisala

    I wasn’t making an empirical argument, so it can’t be falsified by data. I was explaining how genetic theory allows for the possibility that very smart immigrant parents can have smart children (and grandchildren), even if they come from a country with low IQ. It is perfectly consistent with group-level genetic variation in IQ. It was you who prematurely claimed to have falsified a hypothesis.

    The math exercise was applied to exceptional immigrants, not native black Americans. If native black Americans do mate endogamously, and that population has a lower mean genetic IQ than the white American population, then certainly we expect the descendants of smart black Americans to regress toward the lower mean. You can use the same math to show this, but now assume that x_mean2 < x_mean1.

    As for the regression point: I think I understand you now. The simple hereditarian position would predict that if you took 3 pairs of parents of *equally high* IQ, 1 of which is white European, 1 black American, and 1 black African, then you would expect the lowest IQ among children of the latter. I think that's what you meant in the last comment. Now, if the black African couple comes from a subpopulation with high genetic IQ, then this would be wrong. That's totally plausible, to me. Has this test been done? I'd be curious to know; I don't see any such measurements in your post. I only see you saying that smart immigrants have kids are smarter than the local average, which is a totally different matter.

    • Replies: @Chanda Chisala
  102. Merema says:

    Very good article.

    One thing I have noticed here in the US is how white parents make sure their kids receive the help they need to succeed should their kids have ADHD and other challenges. I am convinced that one of the reasons Black American boys do badly in school is many of them have undiagnosed ADHD and other mental/emotional health issues that are left to fester. These kids are very disruptive and so not much learning happens in the classrooms for anybody else.

    Some of these mental/emotional health issues are probably as a result of the stresses of American poverty and its dysfunctions such as poor parenting, child abuse, parental alcoholism and drug addiction and so on. How are these kids to do well in school when they live in chaotic child unfriendly households?

  103. David says:

    This article says that for or a kid to test into Davidson Academy his IQ has to test at the 99.99th percentile nationwide. Can someone point me to a black man that I can believe has an IQ of 156?

    • Replies: @Abc
  104. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    So offhand comment, but I don’t think I fully get this regression to the mean thing.

    If the average white has an IQ of 100, then it seems to follow that, as a group, their genetic potential is that of 100- with some having higher (and getting unlucky in terms of their inherited genes, and some having lower (and getting lucky) but the average overall being that the average white with average luck has an IQ of 100.

    Why would this change when it comes to statistically less common IQs? It doesn’t seem to make sense that there is a lower pool of people with the mean genetic potential of IQ 130 than 2% of the population unless that IQ is being selected against when it appears.

    dunno if people are following what I am saying here?

    • Replies: @anon
  105. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Chuck

    We need a breakdown of 2nd generation Igbo and Yorubi Americans. Studying the aggregate of black immigrant descendents isn’t detailed enough.

    As for sports, this year’s NBA finals MVP is Igbo. His teammate is also Igbo, who turned down Harvard basketball. Their two superstar teammates, which includes this year’s overall MVP, both have 1 black and 1 white parent each.

    It seems clear to me that both Nigerians and mixed black-white athletes do disproportionately well at sports and academia. I’m not aware of any other genetic group that dually talented, other than that one singular multiracial golfer, who was a genetic golfing freak who also attended Stanford.

    • Replies: @Chuck
    , @Chuck
  106. Stonehands says: • Website

    American blacks, like people of any color, have been sunk into a life of degradation and violence by the drinking of ardent spirits.
    Africans, on the other hand, are usually Muslim.

  107. @EdwardM

    What sort of people gets systematically enslaved, anyhow? And in Africa, no less. I mean, it’s not like the bar is very high over there.

  108. rod1963 says:

    Proof is in the pudding.

    Africa had a stone age civilization when the white man set foot there. They had squat. If they had all these super intelligent blacks then why didn’t they develop a civilization over the last 3000 years instead squatting in grass huts and laying about(black men in Africa don’t work, females do).

    Even to this day, there is no real discernible civilization there, just squalor, corruption and violence on level unknown elsewhere in the world, except say parts of the ME.

    Now folks say they are at the top of STEM fields. I call BS on that. When I start seeing black principal design engineers at Xmos, Intel, Nvida, AMD, Cypress or even Google I’ll be impressed.

    Right now those companies are loaded with Chinese, Hindus and Whites in the brains department.

    In the medical field I’ve met a couple of blacks from Africa, I wouldn’t let them touch me. They were incompetent, they didn’t wash their hands before touching a patient, couldn’t communicate very well, and they didn’t like whites.

    • Replies: @Joe Davis
  109. Mats says:
    @Anonymous

    Clear response but genetics is not luck like drawing coins from an urn. I think it is more a situation in which we do not know yet exactly how the genes are related to intelligence (different genes interactive, recessive genes, epigenetic switching on and off). So if we could track everything the only random component would be mutations.

    If for instance slaves had lower intelligence because the most intelligent were not caught as slaves and the current immigration of say Nigerians are the university educated, then I do not understand how we can talk about the same underlying ancestral population. (compare Ashkenazi Jews).

    The article claims that the recent immigrants’ children do not regress towards the mean as expected by Jensen (as interpreted by the author). In my mind this indicates that the parent generation is not representative of any larger black population. A claim made by the author.

  110. Chuck says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    @Prized Igbonels

    The Black immigrant population is too small to do this for actual measures of cognitive ability. One ends up decreasing the sample size and, as a result, increasing the confidence intervals of the estimates (and thus decreasing their reliability). That said, I did look at some SAT/ACT scores at elite schools in the U.S. by nations of origin, here:

    Fuerst, J., & Kirkegaard, E. O. W. (2014). Do National IQs Predict U.S. Immigrant Cognitive Ability and Outcomes? An Analysis of the National Longitudinal Survey of Freshman. Open Differential Psychology.

    I noticed nothing remarkable concerning variance for the (small) self identified Black/African sample. (Data is in the Suppl. File.) Also, the standard deviations in the Black immigrant samples are not inflated as one might expect were it true that Black immigrants from different nations vary wildly in measured cognitive ability.

    Generally, the only way you can currently do such national analyses is to use cognitive proxies such as educational attainment. This, of course, is problematic since these measures involve large non-g components. Also, for some indexes, positive discrimination is a factor — for example in the NLSF elite school survey both Black Africans and Black West Indians scored ~ 1Sd below the white mean, yet were not underrepresented in attendance, as one would expect if selection was solely based on aptitude (indeed they were wildly over-represented).

    If you want to make your case, try to find some actual cognitive data by nation of origin.

  111. Mats says:
    @AaronB

    You write

    The truth is that now IQ has only limited ability to tell us anything about human achievement, and much more work has to be done.

    One study showed that if you had IQ 140 or 150 did not explain human achievement. There might be countervailing forces. The 150 person might require more stimulation that might not be available. Or the 150 might cruise along and become more lazy for cultural reasons. However, if you compare across the relevant span of IQ, the situation is different. Add a person with IQ=80 and one with IQ=110 and you will see a clear picture of IQ having a huge ability to predict human achievement. Naturally, environmental factors matter too so it is not full determinism from the individual’s perspective.

  112. @RCB

    “I wasn’t making an empirical argument, so it can’t be falsified by data.”

    I don’t know what that means, but we can let that one go [from where I stand, theoretical arguments/explanations etc can be contradicted by data even if you're not "making an empirical argument"]. But let me get to your main point:

    “Now, if the black African couple comes from a subpopulation with high genetic IQ, then this would be wrong. That’s totally plausible, to me…”

    Correct. But this plausible alternative scenario precisely falsifies the racial genetic hypothesis. If there are African “subpopulations” (by which I believe you mean nations or tribes/ethnicities etc) that have a genetic mean IQ that is higher than the genetic mean of whites (or black Americans), then the American black-white gap can not be due to the “blackness”, genetically, since that subpopulation is also black. You’re agreeing with me by disagreeing with me!

  113. Chuck says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    I should note also that I was responding to claims such as the following:

    “The black Caribbean immigrant IQ of 83 (assuming it is represented under “Central America/Carribean”), which is lower than Alabama’s black IQ, is even more implausible in the context of their well-noted achievements.”

    Again, I looked at numerous samples and found that the U.S. meta-analytic first generation Black – native White gap was 15 points and that the second generation Black – native White gap was 13 points. The few samples that decomposed differences by African and West Indian origin did not show marked differences. Implausible as it may seem, this is what it is.

    Unfortunately, my cross-temporal meta-analysis of cognitive differences in the U.K. has been put on indefinite hold. I will just note that the general results are difficult to interpret.

  114. Sterling says:

    A country, a people, a nation is only as good as its average citizen.

    • Replies: @David
  115. AshTon says:
    @ViCB3

    Chisala has a 4 part series on ‘how Black pride produces poverty’ on his website which describes the ghetto mentality.

  116. @Chuck

    Chuck: “It is notable that you chose not to mention other results (UKCAT (2005-2014), LNAT, PIAAC (2012), ONS (2000), AMPS (2007) which make any neat explanation difficult.”

    Do those results (and your research) make subdivisions into nationalities/ethnicities etc? You probably don’t understand the point I was making on the uk data (which may be why you think I was repeating your points!). In the article I do explicitly acknowledge that some of this data was already noticed in the HBD blogosphere and some of the logical implications were noted [the very first comment in your article tells you that others had analyzed this data before you]. My only aim here was to point out that the black African group in this analyzed UK data was not divided into its subgroups, which means the discussions were on data that was not as convincing as the current sub-grouped data.

    Chuck: “Thus, if you are correct that U.S. Black immigrant excel in educational indices, such as years of schooling attained, it must be that they do so on account of factors other than g.”

    Yes, such as.

    I will take a look at your paper, but this point reminds me of something in computing called the Turing Test. If black immigrants are excelling in educational indices which native blacks do not excel in, and this failure has been attributed (ultimately) to their lower g (by hereditarians), then if black immigrants are excelling using “factors other than g” that somehow mimic a high g, the hereditarian case is obviously weakened (or pointless).

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
    , @matt
    , @Chuck
  117. David says:
    @Sterling

    A country has no credit but in its prophets.

  118. pyrrhus says:

    Here’s a really simple explanation–selection bias. Very few black Africans have the money or motivation to get to the West. Those that do are much more intelligent than the average subSaharan African…

  119. scoops says:

    in the us we know white british are the dumbest you sent us piers morgan

  120. pyrrhus says:

    By definition, of course, IQ is not an “issue”, it is just a fact of life. Some people are more intelligent than others….so what?

  121. Hepp says:
    @Chanda Chisala

    Correct. But this plausible alternative scenario precisely falsifies the racial genetic hypothesis. If there are African “subpopulations” (by which I believe you mean nations or tribes/ethnicities etc) that have a genetic mean IQ that is higher than the genetic mean of whites (or black Americans), then the American black-white gap can not be due to the “blackness”, genetically, since that subpopulation is also black. You’re agreeing with me by disagreeing with me!

    The average woman in the WNBA is taller than the average male. Thus, “gender” can’t explain that male-female difference in height in the United States.

    That argument is indistinguishable from the one you’re making here.

    • Replies: @Hepp
  122. Art says:

    Oh my god’ – is it true – African blacks are smarter than American blacks – same genetics – what happened – how did African blacks evolve smarter than American blacks?

    Did 200 years of slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow and 50 years of family crushing politics by the Jews retard black folks.

    Hmm – it’s true – America has retarded its black people!

    What other logical conclusion can an honest person come too?

    p.s. Truth is a bitch.

  123. Hepp says:
    @Hepp

    In other words, the question that Jensen and others try to answer is whether the black-white IQ gap in the United States can be explained by genetics. Furthermore, people claim that the different fates of Europe and Africa can be explained partly by genes.

    No one claims that there’s this magical quality called “blackness” that automatically makes any group that has that quality less intelligent than others.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  124. Sam Shama says:
    @annamaria

    this in not what you think I alluded to, (about the 10% urban myth). I do have friends at 2 top institutions, doing incredible work in the area of elevating “cognition” and indeed defining consciousness.

  125. Sam Shama says:
    @Chanda Chisala

    Chanda I totally agree with your premise, analysis and conclusions. The fact that US blacks are greatly drawn from West African populations, and West African sub-ethnicities clearly demonstrate superior capabilities, a very reasonable conclusion is that the common property of “blackness” does not explain the gap observed in the US. While this might be a missing variables problem (and I can easily think of what that might be!), the question of averages, that someone down the thread disputes as being explanatory, was actually dealt by you (if I am not mistaken) via the tight standard deviation of that parameter among, at least, some of the ethnicities.

  126. @Stonehands

    > Africans, on the other hand, are usually Muslim.

    Mostly what she’s talking about an effect, which is pretty obviously simple elite immigrant selection–African immigrants heavily weighted to the elite with college degrees.

    But notably that the Igbo–which is the largest high performing disapora group–are Christians. Most of the others are mostly Christian. And even in mixed groups, i’d bet the high performing immigrants are skewed so even more particularly. No essentially Muslim African group is high performing.

    Just glancing around the world, at countries with where an ethnic group has religious minorities, Islam seems to knock about five points off a group’s IQ. It’s hard to separate genetics–selection for people who converted to Islam–from environment. But pick most any ethnic group and the Muslim faction of it is generally the dumber faction.

    Yeah, if you’re a drunk, converting to Islam is probably good for you. Otherwise you’re wise to skip it.

  127. David says:
    @Chanda Chisala

    If you have to take a special subset of “black and gifteds” and compare it to the “genetic mean of whites,” aren’t you agreeing with RCB by disagreeing?

    Maybe it’s time for the Dustbuster of fate in Africa: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/science/no-time-for-bullies-baboons-retool-their-culture.html

    I’ll keep checking back here in case someone can identify for me a black man with a 156 IQ.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  128. IA says:
    @AshTon

    No painting. No perspective. No vanishing points and horizon lines. No bodies with contra postura (weight-shift). No landscapes or believable illusion. No story-telling beyond beetle-faced warriors in full frontal pose. Above all else, no sense of tragedy. The Greeks were doing this and much more by 480 BC.

    • Replies: @FirstPerson
  129. IA says:

    White male dhimmitude continues apace.

  130. Ed says:

    Thank you for writing this article as an Ashanti born and raised in America your article rings very true. School came pretty easy for me although I became lazy during my high school years.

    I’m not sure though that these trends among Ghanaians and Nigerians in the USA can continue as many African children marry Black Americans, so some slippage is bound to happen.

  131. Ed says:
    @EdwardM

    This is spoken of among the Ashanti and other slave trading groups in Ghana. The slaves they sold were “useless”. There are accounts by European slave traders complaining about African traders trying to pass off lame slaves and driving hard bargains.

  132. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “The stubborn refusal of their children to conspicuously regress to the much lower African genetic mean IQ (and not even to the African American mean IQ) predicted by hereditarians is simply inexplicable.”

    It is quite explicable: the children of middle-upper class whites don’t regress to the “Walmart white” mean. It is a form of economic class gene-culture co-evolution.

  133. Sam Shama says:
    @Chanda Chisala

    Chanda brilliant equivalence with the Turing Test premise and threshold!

  134. matt says:
    @Chanda Chisala

    IQ differences between people with fetal alcohol syndrome, iodine deficiency, prenatal cocaine exposure and traumatic brain injury and those without these maladies apparently aren’t due to g either.

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/flynn2014.pdf

  135. Craken says:

    The large table showing the CAT results is for 11 year olds. Numerous studies have demonstrated that the black-white gap increases with age until IQ stabilizes at 18-20 years of age. Therefore that table probably underestimates the meaningful numbers (adult IQ levels)–and it is consequently misleading. It helps to have reasonable knowledge of a field before writing about it. Added to the logical mishaps, statistical blundering, strategic vagueness at various points, and several other informational gaps–this piece comes across as rather clumsy propaganda.

    The only interesting takeaway is the prospect of research into the possibility that Africa may be blessed with some relatively high cognition subpopulations. One possibility along these lines, per Greg Cochran: if a tribe eschewed procreation by older men, then its genetic load would be lower than neighbors practicing polygyny. Evolutionary theory, per Steve Hsu, dictates that lower genetic load tends to equate with higher IQ.

    • Replies: @Jack
  136. E. Harding says: • Website

    I actually looked at studies like this a few weeks ago and also found the failure of downward mobility to appear in the second generation surprising. I’m hypothesizing that this is purely due to IQ differences, not ones in effort, mainly due to personal experience. Note that in the graphs, educational outcomes from the Caribbean (which, due to the Caribbean’s ethnic homogeneity and upper-second-world status, should be less controversial than the African) are pretty darn low.

  137. Jack says:
    @Craken

    Cracken, it also helps to have reasonable comprehension skills before commenting on an article. The article did give links to a paper that showed that those tests at 11 correlate strongly with other test results at 16.

    • Replies: @Craken
  138. E. Harding says: • Website

    Note that there being a large gender gap and a nonexistent class gap among Chinese compared with a tiny gender gap and a jaw-droppingly large class gap among White British is strong evidence for Unz’s “East Asian exception” theory.

  139. RCB says:
    @Chanda Chisala

    To be clear:

    I agree it’s possible that SSA sub-populations (tribes, ethnicities, etc.) vary in genetic intelligence. In fact it’s likely. Perhaps even substantial differences. In that case it wouldn’t be very informative to lump them all together. (You could still, of course, measure an African mean, but it would have a very large standard deviation – again, not very informative.) I’m with you there, although I’d like to see numbers.

    I disagree with your assertion that a persistently successful immigrant community proves that the homeland community is not low mean IQ. I (and others) have shown how this outcome is consistent with a typical hereditarian hypothesis.

    I outlined a good experiment in my last post. If you can provide evidence like the kind I outlined there, it would be a convincing use of regression-to-mean theory. The evidence you have provided so far do not pass that test.

    I don’t have a big stake in the outcome of this debate. I just dislike faulty arguments.

  140. PB and J says:
    @Simon in London

    Thanks for your comments. The comparison with Indian sub-populations is interesting — I’ve had plenty of encounters with immigrant Indians here in the USA who were highly intelligent, and the contrast between these men and women with rural Hindus in India proper is striking, despite their physical resemblance.

    There are simply far too many high performing black Africans in the UK; in particular female African students are simply far too good, and consistently so. Nor is it simply elite migration; I see working class Nigerians routinely vastly out perform the (literal) princes of other nations.

    Years back I saw an anthropology program on TV that included mid-20th-century video footage of a very large coastal West African market, most likely from Nigeria. What was striking was that all the buying and selling was done exclusively by women, and in a boisterous manner; the few men who were there were mostly working as physical laborers. Admittedly this is one scene from one town in a vast region, but it’s quite possible that generations of positive selection for sophisticated female merchants has created groups of high intelligence which tends to be particularly consistent among the women.

  141. […] chanda chisala, formerly a visiting fellow at both stanford and the hoover institution, and who is originally from zambia, has written a blogpost at unz.com that’s generating a lot of interesting discussion: The IQ Gap Is No Longer a Black and White Issue. […]

  142. rec1man says:

    @chanda

    do you have US National Merit Semifinalist data

    For 2015, for CA,
    total 2100 slots
    1100 Orientals
    330 Indians

    how many Igbo or other blacks in this

    • Replies: @Hobbesian Meliorist
  143. hbd chick says: • Website
    @Chanda Chisala

    If there are African “subpopulations” (by which I believe you mean nations or tribes/ethnicities etc) that have a genetic mean IQ that is higher than the genetic mean of whites (or black Americans), then the American black-white gap can not be due to the “blackness”, genetically, since that subpopulation is also black.

    i agree. mostly. (^_^)

    • Replies: @Chuck
    , @Craken
  144. […] chanda chisala, formerly a visiting fellow at both stanford and the hoover institution, and who is originally from zambia, has written a blogpost at unz.com that’s generating a lot of interesting discussion: The IQ Gap Is No Longer a Black and White Issue. […]

  145. PB and J says:
    @Bliss

    And among MENAs (who are classified as white caucasians by the US Census Bureau) the lowest IQ is that of the levantine syrians and lebanese who are recognized as the closest to europeans in phenotype.

    I’d like to see where you get this claim from, Bliss. Don’t quote Lynn, as others have mentioned he has been pretty thoroughly discredited.

    I picked this out because it rings about as true as “Everyone knows the Swiss are the least intelligent people in Europe.” The Levant has been a crossroads of trade from three continents for millennia. I have a very, very hard time believing that descendants of ancient Phoenicians, Arameans, Assyrians, Akkadians, etc. are less intelligent than the average among, say, Berber Algerians.

    Someone else already noted the exceptional business acumen of Christian Levantine emigrants (not just in Latin America, but also Africa btw). And let’s not forget that Steve Jobs’ biological father was a Syrian Muslim.

    • Replies: @Bliss
  146. JayMan says: • Website

    Forgive me for not reading through the multitude of comments. So I apologize in advance if I repeat what’s been already said:

    The fact that black immigrants to the United States have shown achievements that are superior to native black Americans has been a phenomenon studied since at least the 1970′s. At first it was just the Caribbean blacks who were a subject of this unexpected outcome. As black Africans kept immigrating into the US, they showed even higher levels of achievement than the native blacks. Many scholars theorized on the reasons for these differences, from Thomas Sowell’s proposal that this disproved the validity of discrimination against native blacks as an explanation for their underachievement (Sowell, 1978), to other scholars who suggested that these immigrants were just the most highly driven members of their home countries as evidenced by their willingness to migrate to a foreign country (Butcher, 1990).

    What most of these theories failed to predict was that the children of these immigrants would also show exceptional achievements, especially academically. It is only in recent years, as the immigrants have stayed long enough to produce a sufficiently high number of offspring, that it has been observed that they are over-represented among high academic achievers, especially when compared to native blacks, particularly at very elite institutions. What has been missed in the IQ debate is the full logical implication of these achievements: they have effectively nullified any arguments for a racial evolutionary explanation of the well-known IQ test score gap between blacks and whites. Even more fatal for the racial hereditarian side of the debate has been the corroborating data of school children performance in the UK, particularly when the black Africans are divided into their respective nationalities and tribal ethnicities, as reported in the latter section of this article.

    Only a mystery if you think that immigration always gives you a perfectly representative sample of the source population. That’s almost never the case (at the very least, there’s usually going to be selection for willingness to migrate vs. staying put).

    The predictable response of the hereditarians is to adopt the environmentalist argument of super high immigrant selection to explain this unexpected trend: where some environmentalists propose that these immigrants are the most driven achievers in their countries, the hereditarians say they are the most intellectually elite, the ones from the topmost segment of the IQ bell curve in their countries; the outliers who got some lucky genes in an otherwise poor-gene environment. But like the hyper-driven-personality hypothesis, this argument cannot explain the equally, if not more impressive, achievements of their children: lottery winners never have children who also win the lottery.

    The breeder’s equation | West Hunter:

    R = h2 S.

    imagine a set of parents with IQs of 120, drawn from a population with an average IQ of 100. Suppose that the narrow-sense heritability (in that population, in that environment) is 0.5 . The average IQ of their children will be 110. That’s what is usually called regression to the mean.

    The kids get the good additive genes, but have average ‘environmental’ luck – so their average IQ is 110. The luck (10 pts worth) goes away

    The next point is that the luck only goes away once. If you took those kids from the first group, with average IQs of 110, and dropped them on an uninhabited but friendly island, they would presumably get around to mating eventually – and the next generation would also have an IQ of 110.

    This isn’t that hard to understand.

    My family is a high average IQ one from Jamaica. The next generation (mostly all the products of Jamaican immigrants) also have above average IQs, if a bit lower than the previous generation.

    The general rule is this: the bigger the barrier, the better the immigrant (and vice versa). You can see this with Muslim immigrants to Europe vs. Muslims to North America (a matter of crossing the Mediterranean vs. crossing the Atlantic). You can also see this with African and Indian immigrants to the U.S. vs. Mexican and French Canadian immigrants. In the French Canadian migration, the U.S. got an immigrant population that was significantly below the mean of the source population (Quebecois and Acadians in Canada).

    • Replies: @CCR
    , @Chanda Chisala
  147. Chuck says: • Website
    @Chanda Chisala

    Chanda,

    I appreciate your argument. I will look over the GCSE data, though, generally, I find these test results to be difficult to interpret. For one, it’s difficult to believe that the Nigerian latent ability, relative to the UK White mean, was raised 10 GSCEQ points (going by the pass rate differences) in 8 years. If population scores are this malleable, then, to my mind, this calls them into question.

    I imagine you would argue that prior, in 2003, the UK Nigerian GCSEQ was environmentally/culturally/linguistically depressed, but now it isn’t. Now, you would argue, Nigerians are expressing their latent GSCE ability which is understandably high because they are heavily immigrant selected. Yet the reverse argument works just as well.

    What you need to shown is that differences now are measure invariant (i.e., no psychometric bias) but were not before — thus explaining the secular change. In the US, between (native) Blacks and Whites, MI is fairly established. We know for a fact that manifest differences are commensurate with true cognitive ability ones.

    Now, regarding hereditarian hypotheses, I would make a few observations. First, there is direct population genetic evidence that supports the position that the very populations which you are discussing are genetically depressed in cognitive/educational ability.

    Piffer, Davide (2015): A review of intelligence GWAS hits: their relationship to country IQ and the issue of spatial autocorrelation.

    It seems to me that such evidence must count for something. (If the results replicate with the new batch of 74 cognitive alleles to be released, the evidence will be, seemingly, dispositive.)

    Second, you infer that if a global hereditarian hypothesis is incorrect, then local ones must be. But the logic of migrant selection entails otherwise. It is notable, in this respect, that both Jensen and Eysenck initially suggested migrant selection — slave selection — hypotheses to explain differences in the Americas.

    • Replies: @Chanda Chisala
  148. Chuck says: • Website
    @hbd chick

    “i agree. mostly. (^_^)”

    You both are being ridiculous. Race, in the Darwinian sense, is defined in terms of propinquity of descent, which is indexed by neutral variation. Few argue that cognitive differences resulted from drift. Thus, strictly speaking no such differences would be “due to race”. Rather races, owing to differential selection, would coincidentally differ on average in such traits.

    Generally, there is more to race than just behavioral genetic differences (BGD).

  149. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The Dutch are tall and average about 6 feet in height while the Japanese are about 5 foot 7. It’s easy to see genotype differences when it comes to the physical body, but it’s harder to define their intelligence.

    There’s a risk that people might respond with negative remarks about how caucasians are somehow more “evolved” and advanced if we keep going on about all these testing methods and scores.

    The left wing always talk about equality. I’m concerned how this type of research will upset them and affect the social landscape.

  150. In general, it’s very easy to explain the high IQs of African immigrant kids through selective migration & better nutrition

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/comment-page-1/

    It’s possible that there are specific ethnicities within Africa that are above the black genetic mean analogous to how some speculate that certain castes in india are well above india’s mean, or it could just be random fluctuation (small samples) or more extreme selection in some groups over others.

    It’s also worth noting that these high scores are on scholastic achievement tests, not official IQ tests.

    • Replies: @Chanda Chisala
  151. Joe Davis says:
    @rod1963

    A fair number of Sub-Saharan African societies were in the Iron Age when they were first discovered by Europeans.

    • Replies: @Dipwill
  152. Interesting article.

    How far could skilled white emigration from the UK be reducing the average IQ of those whites still left in Britain? This academic seems to think so:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11435529/Britains-brightest-leaving-in-brain-drain-and-replaced-with-low-skilled-migrants.html

  153. What you’ve mostly falsified here is the proposition that American blacks do badly because of societies response and prejudice towards their “blackness” (a sociological term that no hereditarian would use). Bravo.

    What would you propose is the average IQ of Igbo and Yoruba, broad cross sections, in their native africa?

  154. Bliss says:
    @PB and J

    I’d like to see where you get this claim from, Bliss. Don’t quote Lynn, as others have mentioned he has been pretty thoroughly discredited.

    If Lynn is thoroughly discredited so must be all the HBD bloggers who have for years relied on his extensive work on comparative IQ to buttress their race fantasies. So who are you left with? I am just using Richard Lynn’s data to hoist the HBD cultists aka race “realists” with their own petards. Lynn’s most recent (2010) list of national IQs shows Syria with an IQ of 79:

    http://www.ttu.ee/public/m/mart-murdvee/EconPsy/2/Lynn_Meisenberg_2010_National_IQs_calculated_and_validated_for_108_nations.pdf

    The Levant has been a crossroads of trade from three continents for millennia. I have a very, very hard time believing that descendants of ancient Phoenicians, Arameans, Assyrians, Akkadians, etc. are less intelligent than the average among, say, Berber Algerians.

    Unfortunately for you Syria and Lebanon have lower IQ than all of North Africa. Check the above link.

    Btw, according to Lynn the IQ of african-americans outside the South is around 90.

    • Replies: @PB and J
  155. Maybe the Igbo have somewhat higher IQs than other Nigerians and there is more variation around the mean.

    That could explain the fairly large number of high IQ Igbos.

    -DR

    • Replies: @Phil
  156. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @David

    I’ll keep checking back here in case someone can identify for me a black man with a 156 IQ.

    You’re not making a salient point, you’re revealing an upper bound on your intelligence. I’d advise projecting ignorance in lieu of stupidity. It takes seconds.

  157. Bliss says:

    many black students are actively involved in athletics even when they have a strong academic focus. For example, a check on the Cambridge web site reveals that Chidera Ota, the UK’s best GCSE student in her cohort, was also the fastest runner in the girls 100 and 200 meters team for Cambridge (she qualified to Cambridge’s premed program after subsequently achieving straight A’s on her A-levels).

    This is interesting. Does this mean that african geniuses are less prone to nerdiness? Something similar has also been observed at the other end of the IQ spectrum. Whites with extremely low IQs (<70) look and act retarded while blacks with similar IQs tend to be more normal.

    Btw, I googled Chidera Ota and found that her younger sister is also a super-high achiever academically:

    http://www.kentonline.co.uk/sheerness/news/now-sister-has-great-grades-5287/

    An Eastchurch girl has achieved a star-studded set of GCSE results – almost matching her sister’s top grades three years ago. Chindi Ota, of Leet Close, found out she achieved 13 A*s and two As when she picked up her exam marks from Highsted Grammar School, Sittingbourne, last Thursday. The 16-year-old got the highest grade in English language, English literature, maths, statistics, French, history, biology, chemistry, physics, RE and an ICT qualification worth three GCSEs. The two As were in sociology and German. She is due to start at the King’s School, Canterbury, on Tuesday to study physics, biology, chemistry, maths and further maths A-levels.

    She doesn’t look nerdy either…

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  158. Bruce says:

    “However, whatever regression happens to the immigrant blacks, it should be more than the regression that happens, not just to whites, but even to elite native blacks (see paragraph above), assuming that Jensen was right.”
    I assume this refers to native blacks’ European ancestry.
    Elite native blacks are largely a creation of government bureaucracy, government job-creation and policies like Affirmative Action. Elite African immigrants are more likely to actually be, cognitively speaking, elite. I would expect the native, U.S. born black upper middle class to regress more.

  159. David says:

    The author says it takes a 1 in 10,000 IQ to be admitted to Davidson. A black kid tested in. I’m asking for another example. Just one. I suppose you googled it and came up empty.

  160. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Andrew E. Mathis

    Don’t speak German, but I’m assuming this is some sort of Hitler quote? Can we leave out the Hitler shlock?

    It’s getting old.

    • Replies: @Andrew E. Mathis
  161. PB and J says:
    @Bliss

    As I suspected — straight from Lynn.

    There’s a false dichotomy here. Either you (a) utterly repudiate the “HBD cult” or (b) accept Lynn’s numbers as holy writ.

    Unfortunately for you Syria and Lebanon have lower IQ than all of North Africa. Check the above link.

    I am not in the (b) camp. In fact, I am in the (-b) camp as Mr. Lynn strikes me as an untrustworthy person. But even if his numbers were omnisciently accurate, it would not be “unfortunate” for me. I have no ancestry there, no friends or relatives with ties to that region. Nor am I “rooting for them” (as I infer the accusation) simply because they are typically lighter-skinned than the average Egyptian.

    I get the impression that some readers here interpret HBD discussions as a convoluted way of saying, “If you’re brown, stick around; if you’re black, get back.” Yep, that kind of attitude is prevalent, but I think you’ll notice that the more intelligent comments (mostly) eschew that simplistic outlook.

    But back to Lynn. I’ve heard multiple accounts from travelers that the sophistication and cogency of the Lebanese is remarkable, especially in contrast to other Arabic-speaking countries. Lynn has its average IQ listed at 82, below Turkey, Palestine, Jordan, Kuwait, the UAE, Oman, Yemen, all the North African countries (excluding Libya, omitted), Venezuela, Indonesia, and yes, even Papua New Guinea. Hmmm.

    Setting that aside, Lynn’s latest has Ghana’s average at 71 and Nigeria’s at 69. So apparently Nigeria is outgunned intellectually by Botswana, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Uganda, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania; while barely beating out Swaziland and Lesotho. I would be amazed if both Ghanaians and Nigerians had lower average intelligence than Ugandans.

    • Replies: @Realist
  162. @AaronB

    What’s your point? I think that low average IQ scores in impoverished countries are an expected result. We wouldn’t expect high averages. I don’t think that much of anything can be inferred from this, except that improving the economic performance of these countries will require an IQ increase. The same is true of blacks in the U.S. Attempts to improve black IQs in the U.S. have not succeeded, with the possible exception of the Abecedarian attempt — but the reported improvement from that expensive and intensive project is not convincing. The primary cause of poor performance among blacks is the low average IQ. Future research in genetics may provide some answers and maybe even solutions. Let us hope.

    • Replies: @George123
  163. AshTon says:

    The Igbo have a class system where the Osu class are equivalent to the untouchables of India. Crossing the class barrier through marriage is not looked upon favourably. The elite Igbo’s higher IQ may be a result of generations of selective breeding, and the Osu class are like the Middle Ages Jews who couldn’t hack it in Talmud study and ended up being absorbed into the Gentiles.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7977734.stm

  164. fred says:

    In east London in the UK there are a small number of highly intelligent Nigerians. Taking GCSEs at six. A levels at 12. That sort of thing. I know. I have taught them. Only a few but far more than could be expected by chance or according to the normal probability law. I have never taught any other nationality that even came close except a couple of Chinese possibly.
    Not sure how they train on however. There subsequent careers have been a little disappointing.

  165. Kudos to Chanda Chisala for extracting detailed national and ethnic breakdown data from local authorities. No doubt, this must have been a time-consuming and expensive exercise.

    I have a few comments:

    (1) The number of Nigerians living in Britain is small enough for it to be largely – or even entirely – selected from the top 1% of the Nigerian population in terms of intellectual ability, so the mean IQ of the immigrant population might well be more than two standard deviations above the mean of the Nigerian population as a whole.

    (2) The mean IQ of Nigeria has been reported to be around 70 points, which we’ll assume to be accurate. If there’s a standard deviation of 15 points, the selectivity of immigration to the UK could indeed cause the immigrant population to have a mean IQ of 100 or higher, given a mean population IQ of 70. In fact, with the foregoing assumptions we should expect to see an average IQ higher than 104 – somewhere around 108, by my reckoning. We might also expect 1 in 400 to have IQs of 130 or higher.

    (3) Although mean IQ scores as low as 70 have been claimed for Nigeria, it has been suggested that the gap between Black African IQ and African American IQ might be all or nearly all due to environment, so the same population raised in an environment such as the UK provides might plausibly have a mean IQ of 85 or even higher.

    (4) Regression to the mean for Nigerians in the UK, assuming the immigrant Nigerians are drawn from the same gene pool as the average Nigerian, might therefore be less dramatic than the reported mean IQ of 70 would suggest. Say there’s a regression to a hypothetical mean of 85, and there’s a couple who between them have an average IQ of 108, and the heritability of IQ is .5, their offspring should have an average IQ of 96.5, which is higher than the mean IQ reported for African Americans, and slightly higher than the figures for Black Africans given in the Cognitive Ability Test data cited in your article. This means we have wiggle room – our assumptions could be slightly less stringent, and our results would still fit the data.

    (5) If mates are selected to any extent by cognitive ability, then the regression to the mean should be less. If there is a very strong tendency to select mates by cognitive ability (or educational achievement, which amounts to much the same thing), there could be very little regression to the mean, so the offspring and future descendants of Nigerian immigrants in the UK could continue to produce high educational achievement indefinitely, and it wouldn’t really tell us anything about the average IQ in Nigeria.

    (6) As for the suggestion that Igbos might by substantially more intelligent than other tribes – are they? Who knows? I don’t think there’s enough data. The numbers in the comparison table published by the London Borough of Lambeth swing so much from year to year (Yoruba, 39% in 2009, 75% in 2011; Igbo, 100% in 2009, 76% in 2011, Luganda 33% in 2010, 83% in 2011) that I’m inclined to think the numbers do not permit any strong inference.

    (7) However, if they are significantly more intelligent than their neighbours, here’s a possible explanation as to why: During the slave trade, they used to have a shrine at a place called Arochukwu, on the border of Ibibioland, where people were sent for trial. It was set up to make it look as if people condemned in the trial were killed by some sort of demon in a dark tunnel, but in fact the condemned were kept hidden, and later shipped by river to Calabar, to be sold as slaves. It’s likely that the stupid were subject to this fate alongside troublemakers. In other words, the Igbos may have discovered eugenics before Galton. If similar practices were widespread in West Africa, the IQ of West Africans as a whole might be, if raised with good health and nutrition, higher than that of American blacks.

    In conclusion, Chisala’s argument is interesting, but it doesn’t quite disprove the hereditarian thesis, which remains plausible. I expect it will be a while before we have any precise, definitive answer on sub-Saharan African IQ.

  166. So many interesting and thoughtful comments here; it’s hard to respond to them all (Thank you)!

    (But also plenty of unjustified overconfidence in a small number of the commentators: “it’s easy to understand…,” “there’s no mystery here…,” “you don’t understand Regression…” etc — while demonstrating a misunderstanding of the issues at stake! )

    I will respond very briefly to a few of the comments.

  167. @Chuck

    I will just comment on your GCSE-skepticism.

    It is unlikely you will find that the problem is with the GCSEs because it predicts quite accurately other phenotypic expectations. For example, the subgroups within the Nigerian group that are the best in Nigeria or even in the US etc are also the best on the GCSEs. Also, the Traveller white (or whatever precise race) groups are placed by the GCSEs exactly where you would expect to find them. And of course, there’s Chinese.

    Secondly, it is very accurately consistent with the correlation with socioeconomic status within each ethnicity (no matter which direction you believe that goes).

    Finally, if there was something seriously wrong with the test, the people who do well on it would not do well on the A-levels. As we see, that best student in the country also did exceptionally well on her A-levels.

    Perhaps most importantly, it correlates extremely highly with the CAT taken at 11.

    If you throw it out, you will have to throw out a lot of other tests or “tests” it seems to correlate well with.

    The Nigerian changes on the GCSE from 2003, whatever their causes, are therefore more likely to reflect environmental changes in the Nigerian group that are not constrained by their genotypic IQ, which suggests it cannot be that low.

  168. @Anonymous

    It’s not “shlock”; it’s entirely relevant. “BobbyBeGood” had posited that whites who mix with blacks have lower IQ offspring. I was merely pointing out that Hitler had the same point of view. Bobby admires Hitler, so I don’t imagine it bothers him much.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  169. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Intra-London and Intra-Ethnic group London vs Non-London differences, as likely between London-rUK differences drive some of the ethnic group differences

    Certainly, congitive differences don’t explain any of between region difference.

    GCSEs may not be actually a very good tool for indexing cognitive performance any more, except within a fairly similar regime. That might be slightly concerning.

    Whatever has happened is probably useful though.

  170. @AaronB

    Nobel prizes, even in Science and Technical fields, have definite inertia:
    unconditional right to nominate for prizes each year
    belongs to existing Nobel Laureates in any field; but not only them.
    Nobel Prize Committees also seek for nominations by other scientists,
    selected by Prize Committees. Nominations without “invitation” are not accepted.
    More “democratic” are the prizes by a Techno-Scientific Society, I have just spent some time to collect the data for a particular one.
    Here are altogether 22 different prizes, for which I took winners 2015 down to 2005. Reason was to cut off old scientific cohort. Each prize contained (median) 11 winners satisfying this criterion.
    Out of approximately 240 names of people I counted,

    12 awardees with Chinese last/first names,
    (one of them got 3 different awards, counted above 3 times, really very good scientist and technologist)

    8 with Japanese last names,

    7 with the names that sounded to me as from the Indian Subcontinent,

    1 with Korean name.

    Altogether
    12/240 = 0.05 for Chinese fraction,
    8/240 = 0.033 for Japanese fraction,
    7/240 = 0.03 for Indian fraction,
    1/240 = 0.004 Korean fraction,

    total fraction 28 / 240 = 0.117.

    I was surprised that a particular prize, which by statute may be awarded only to a person younger than 35 y.o., contained only 1 Chinese name (out of 11.)

    I.f.f.U.

  171. CCR says:
    @JayMan

    Jayman — are you 100% African or partially European or another race?

    • Replies: @JayMan
  172. CCR says:

    Does anyone seriously believe that if you gave IQ tests to all humans of 100% African ethnicity and selected those who tested 1 out of 100,000 or better that their children would have IQs significantly lower than their parents?

    I don’t think that’s what regression to the mean is all about.

  173. @JayMan

    Apparently, you did not just skip the comments but most of the article too. The assumption that the immigrants are not perfectly representative of their source populations is already granted in the analysis. And the fact that their children will still be higher in IQ than their home populations is also already assumed and it is not what is “a mystery”, which means you are fighting a dead straw man.

    Further, giving an example of yourself in that context confirms to me that you definitely didn’t read the article.

    • Replies: @JayMan
    , @boogerbently
  174. @Hepp

    “No one claims that there’s this magical quality called “blackness” that automatically makes any group that has that quality less intelligent than others.”

    There definitely are people who believe this, just as there are people who believe whites are demons created by a mad sorcerer. I think quite a lot of US whites believe this – they have terrible experiences with African-Americans and they assume A-As are fully representative of all blacks.
    Personally I remember visiting the USA for the first time in 1996 and being amazed and horrified by the open racist hatred and contempt the black female airport staff at I think Detroit airport showed to me. I’d never experienced anything like it in the UK. I’m hardly surprised some US whites get a bit racist too.

  175. @pumpkinperson

    In general, it’s very easy to explain the high IQs of African immigrant kids through selective migration & better nutrition

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/comment-page-1/

    Following the debate with you in the comments section of the link you provide, it is clearly not “very easy”!

    • Replies: @pumpkinperson
  176. @Bliss

    “Does this mean that african geniuses are less prone to nerdiness? ”

    My ancedotal experience is that high-achieving west African female students never show nerdy characteristics, but Ethiopian and South African/Zimbabwean often do, at similar frequency to south-Asian, Middle Eastern, and white-European. My gut instinct is that there is something unusual going on in Nigeria & surrounds, and that the intelligence produced there has a somewhat different genetic(?) source than the usual, a source that does not correlate positively with nerdiness. The upthread commenter who mentioned female merchants may be on to something.

    • Replies: @Bliss
    , @Anonymous
  177. Phil says:
    @Donald Richardson

    You all apparently missed Rindermann’ study of Nigerian elites. Their IQs average FAR lower than those for German elites.

  178. JayMan says: • Website
    @Chanda Chisala

    Further, giving an example of yourself in that context confirms to me that you definitely didn’t read the article.

    I read the entire article. My comment stands. If I’m missing something, please do let me know.

  179. CCR says:
    @JayMan

    So what percent African are you?

    • Replies: @JayMan
  180. George123 says:
    @Michael_L_Stewart

    My point is that you are inconsistent.

    You explain the poor performance of American blacks solely by IQ, yet the poor performance of Asians relative to their IQ you explain by introducing non-IQ factors, and the widely differing performance of similar IQ European populations is similarly explained by introducing non-IQ factors.

    This seems like an attempt to patch up an inadequate theory in a way that is unfortunately very common in science.

    If the IQ theory is inadequate to explain Asian performance and we must reach for environmental factors, then the IQ theory might well be inadequate to explain American black performance.

    An IQ test is a long, tiring, and effortful task whose relevance and value might only be readily accepted among certain groups, leading to a motivation differential of potentially vast magnitude. That motivation has not been controlled for probably makes comparisons among groups of far less value than IQ fundamentalists would like us to believe.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  181. @Chanda Chisala

    Following the debate with you in the comments section of the link you provide, it is clearly not “very easy”!

    Well maybe you didn’t follow closely so I’ll summarize:

    Black Africans who migrated to the UK during the last several generations are not only more educated than over 95-99.5% of their counterparts in Africa, but they enjoy a standard of living better than well over 99%.

    Both academic success & economic success are independently correlated with IQ, and these migrants became at the very very least, 2 SD higher in socioeconomic status than the average African.

    Since IQ correlates 0.7 with attained middle age SES, they would average at least 2 SD(0.7) = 1.4 SD more intelligent than the average African.

    Since the parent-child IQ correlation is about 0.6, their kids should be 1.4 SD(0.6) = 0.84 SD smarter than the average African

    Assuming black Africa has a mean IQ of 67 (SD = 15), their kids would have an expected IQ of:

    0.84(15) + 67 = 80

    But because first world nutrition is known to boost African IQ (and height) by about 0.87 SD, the expected IQ of the kids/grand kids of these African immigrants should be about 93

    And note, these are very conservative estimates because the standard of living difference between Africans in Africa & Africans in the UK is almost unmeasurable so they are likely way more than +2 SD more accomplished in SES than the average African.

    If I assume they are +3 SD & repeat those calculations, that brings their kids to about IQ 100

  182. rec1man says:

    @Chanda Chisala

    this is my 3rd post asking for an answer –

    In the California National Merit Semifinalist list for 2015, how many of these high IQ blacks, Igbo etc appear ?

    or in National Merit Semifinalist list for any state ?

  183. […] Sailor hosted a guest column with some very interesting points about academic achievement by certain groups of African […]

  184. dcite says:
    @Bliss

    Funny you of all people should bring up Serbs and Irish as low iq. This is reflective of a rural background. In the U.S., these nationalities are no different than other whites.
    btw, the actual inventors of the prosthetic tail for the injured dolphin were an Irishman and a Yugoslavian (Serb or Croat, I’m not sure which).
    In the movie, these two white men were rolled into one black actor named Morgan Freeman.

    I wish the blacks would find some genuinely smart inventors etc., that really are black, and stop appropriating whites in various films. There was also one about a black debating group that supposedly beat Harvard. As it turned out, this was fiction, but presented as fact. If they can find some smart, innovative Igbos, fine, please, make some movies about them and stop turning white achievers into black actors.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  185. Gene Su says:

    I bet some one reading this article is going to want to trade our black natives in America for the Igbo.

    This is why I think of myself as a culturalist as opposed to a racialist. Intelligence is a function not so much of genes or environment but values, attitudes, and culture.

  186. Dave says:

    so the writer says it’s hard to believe that Africans could be as smart as they are in Britain if their IQ is low?

    Isn’t it hard to believe that Africans could be as dumb as they are in America if their IQ is not low?

    Time to add a little more detail to the story of Black IQ, everybody!

    Regarding IQ’s – Numbers (math formulae) or it didn’t happen! The endless comments to this very unscientific article are EXACTLY why REAL scientists formalize their theories and compute the solutions to problems!

  187. @pumpkinperson

    Both academic success & economic success are independently correlated with IQ, and these migrants became at the very very least, 2 SD higher in socioeconomic status than the average African.

    This is just one of the too obvious mistakes in your analysis. “Economic success” (income) may indeed correlate with IQ, but not between individuals in different economies, especially very different economies.

    I won’t be able to do a long back and forth with you, but your analysis makes too many obvious errors. [Another example: if the immigrants are coming from the top 1 percent or so of IQ in Africa, and SES correlates highly with IQ, then those immigrants are nutritionally not that bad in Africa, which means they can't possibly gain 15 points after migrating to the UK -- especially that most Africans (like other immigrants) continue eating their own home-country food (especially Nigerians). And YOU, can't have your cake and eat it.]

    • Replies: @pumpkinperson
  188. rec1man says:

    Chanda wrote – Finally, browsing through some names of the competitive National Achievement scholars,

    These hi-IQ blacks seem to pass the National Achievement benchmark, a PSAT score of 190, which other black-Americans already do

    None of the these imported blacks seem to cross over into National Merit list, PSAT = 220
    which is filled with Whites, Jews, Asians and Indians

    • Replies: @Chanda Chisala
  189. @Chanda Chisala

    This is just one of the too obvious mistakes in your analysis. “Economic success” (income) may indeed correlate with IQ, but not between individuals in different economies, especially very different economies.

    It might. The same intelligence that allows you to make a good living within one country may allow you to make the leap to a much richer country. In fact part of the reason high IQ prople make more money is they’re smart enough to know where to go & figure out how to get there.

    I won’t be able to do a long back and forth with you,

    You don’t have to respond; these are just points to possibly consider in your future research

    but your analysis makes too many obvious errors. [Another example: if the immigrants are coming from the top 1 percent or so of IQ in Africa, and SES correlates highly with IQ, then those immigrants are nutritionally not that bad in Africa, which means they can't possibly gain 15 points after migrating to the UK -- especially that most Africans (like other immigrants) continue eating their own home-country food (especially Nigerians). And YOU, can't have your cake and eat it.]

    Nutrition doesn’t seem to differ much within populations; only between them, so in West Africa for example, not only are the average people short compared to average African Americans, but the elites are short compared to African American elites.

    We see the same thing in America. As nutrition improved over the 20th century, everyone got taller and smarter (the Flynn effect). Even elites as priveliged as U.S. presidents got taller. The same thing seems to happen when african elites migrate to the First World.

  190. Craken says:
    @Jack

    Jack:
    The cited paper does not provide any breakdown by race. There is no reason to assume that each race’s scores at 11 years of age correlate equally well with scores as adults. There is reason to assume that they do not correlate equally well. Average correlation of a population tells you very little in itself about the correlation of a small sub-population.

    There are more serious errors in the piece, but no one had mentioned this one.

  191. @pumpkinperson

    It might.

    You seriously do not understand that people who get an income of 20,000 US dollars per year in Nigeria have a higher IQ than people who get that same amount (or even 10,000 dollars more) in the United States or the UK?

    • Replies: @pumpkinperson
  192. LKM says:

    I’m sure I’m drastically oversimplifying here, but traditionally, haven’t the Igbo been seen as the Ashkenazi Jews/Ismaili Muslims/Overseas Chinese of West Africa? (ie. entrepreneurial, place high value on education and cognitively demanding jobs)

  193. @rec1man

    None of the these imported blacks seem to cross over into National Merit list, PSAT = 220
    which is filled with Whites, Jews, Asians and Indians

    You can not get monetary scholarships on both the National Merit and National Achievement. So, obviously the “imported blacks” will rationally apply where their chances are quite guaranteed. The only thing you can get from the National Merit if you decide to apply there too is a non-monetary honorary “scholarship” or mention (if you do qualify). For example, the profiled Nigerian in my article who received that National Achievement scholarship did also receive the honorary National Merit scholarship.

  194. Craken says:
    @hbd chick

    Chisala is refuting a claim that scholars do not make. Black Americans are obviously (excepting some recent immigrants) a population formed of multiple African and European subpopulations. Essentially, they are a new-made subpopulation. In Africa, the subpopulations are much older and were forged by very different selection pressures. It was never logical to claim that low black American intelligence proved equally low intelligence among all black African subpopulations–it suggests, however, that the subpopulations from which the original slaves were drawn had relatively low intelligence.

    Some differences observed between human populations were produced by genetic drift, ie randomness. It is these differences that geneticists analyze to determine genetic relatedness between different populations. The differences produced instead by selection pressure are not used to determine genetic relatedness. Most, perhaps all, who believe in some version of the hereditarian position argue that intelligence is a trait that has been selected for throughout human history. Therefore, intelligence is not to be considered a formal marker for genetic relatedness–though the intelligence trait may be expected to follow the contours of such relatedness insofar as selection pressures have been different for different populations. Since subpopulations exist within each major race, there are certain to be variations in selection pressures between subpopulations, resulting in phenotypic differences. Hereditarians have never presumed, nor found, equal intelligence levels throughout black African populations.

  195. @George123

    IQ is definitely not the whole story. Some West African groups seem to over-perform academically relative to measured IQ, east-Asians may under-perform economically relative to IQ.

    One thing I noticed is that most population groups’ measured IQ correlates closely with brain size, eg Africans (IQ 70) and north-east-Asians (IQ 105) brain size fits with IQ on the same line.
    But Europeans are an outlier – by brain size they should have IQ 90, like Turks and typical of non-European Caucasians, instead of the actual measured 100. I think this has not been noticed because Europeans are treated as the default which sets the norm, but actually Europeans are a weird outlier with IQ elevated well beyond the norm for their brain capacity.

  196. @pumpkinperson

    It seems certain that the average Nigerian in London is much smarter than the average Nigerian in Nigeria. But other populations have selective migration, too. Why do the Nigerians seem so much smarter than most other immigrant groups? In terms of academics it’s even more striking. Among my own students, over the past ten years the ranking at the top looks something like:

    1. Germans & Nordics
    2. (white) French
    3=. Italians
    3=. Nigerians & other west Africans
    5. Spanish
    6. Turkish (westernised elites)
    7. eastern Europeans

    Whereas North African & especially middle-Eastern come near the bottom, with Saudi Arabia generally worst – the data I’ve seen with the Saudi top 5% Smart Fraction starting at IQ 95 seems accurate. South Asia can also be poor, with a lot of variation. Central/South America and Central Asia are generally moderate.

    This is not something I would have expected in advance, and this is not Political Correctness talking. It’s definitely a real phenomenon.

    • Replies: @pumpkinperson
  197. I read this piece with some enthusiasm for the idea that the present rapid population growth in Africa did not necessarily portend disaster including the devastation of Africa’s fauna and flora. But doubt set in about any conclusion that depended on hereditarians being radically wrong.

    The evidence in the article leaves open the possibility that Africa is like India in having inbreeding groups whom one may sensibly assume have significantly different average IQs. It leaves open accordingly the possibility that most Africans and African-Americans are in inbreeding groups with much lower average IQs than Eurasians as a result of selection rather than environment.

    The possibility is supported by the history of Jews and of Parsees as well as Greg Clark’s evidence in “A Farewell to Alms” which points to Britain’s brighter people outbreeding the dim for several hundred years. It would hardly be surprising if something similar had happened within the Indian caste system. What is lacking is evidence of some such differentiation happening in Africa but it seems to be an open question.

    It may be worth having another attempt to make the question of regression to the mean clear despite many Comments which have corrected errors.

    If one wants to suggest that the IQs of children of high IQ African immigrants should be expected to regress towards 85 or less which may be an African average then you have to suppose the parents are just rare sports from within a low IQ population. If instead they have bred like Ashkenazi Jews, Parsees, educated upper middle class 19th century Brits etc the relevant population average toward which regression occurs may be much higher. How does this happen? It simply requires a group already segregated for breeding purposes in which, for generations, the relatively dim don’t get to reproduce as early or as prolifically as the smart, or a group created and separated over several generations of assortative mating. Has it happened in Africa? We don’t seem to know.

    What of the immigrants overtaking the whites in Britain? It could be as simple as increasingly dysgenic breeding habits amongst whites. First the smart Protestants limited their families and- almost equally important – started them later than the dim. Now Catholics behave the same way and so do Jews in America.

  198. @dcite

    Hollywood these days simply casts Africans and black-British as African-Americans.

  199. @rec1man

    You can’t use the US National Merit Scholarship Program semifinalist data as a measure, because blacks are encouraged to take a different test (for the National Achievement Scholarship Program) that’s only open to black candidates. We can make our guesses as to why a separate test exists, but it still means we don’t know how many black people could get onto the Merit semifinalist list if there weren’t a separate test.

    • Replies: @rec1man
  200. Chuck says: • Website
    @pumpkinperson

    @Chanda Chisala
    @pumpkinperson

    I went through the math and found similar results. Using Barro-Lee’s Data set, 1990 and 2000 Nigerian/African emigrants to the OECD were ~ 2.2 SD selected in educational attainment (years of schooling).

    Pumpkinperson makes a mistake when it comes to estimating offspring IQ, though. The kind of random variance that doesn’t pass along across generations also happens to be the kind of variance that doesn’t predict outcomes (references on request). Thus if you select for IQ by a proxy variable like EA, IQ differences will almost fully be passed on since you already mostly eliminated the noise component. Thus, given an IQ x EA correlation, the kids should be only a little less than 1.4 SD selected.

    I’m not sure that we can assume a Nigerian/African IQ x EA correlation of 0.7. But I think that it’s reasonable to posit that Black Africans are at least 1 SD selected in IQ. I just looked through the PIAAC and other assessment scores. Black African adults age 16 to 65 score not more that 1 SD below the UK white mean. It’s more like 0.8 — and this is on (cultural loaded) reading and math tests. (Wide confidence intervals, though.)

    If we assume that most of these adults are African born and if we grant that Black Africans have measured IQs ~ 1.66 to 2 SD below the white adult UK mean, there must be significant selection. Further, Rindermann et al.’s paper, “Cognitive ability and epistemic rationality”, put the educated Nigerian IQ at about 15 points above the national average. Granted the sample size was tiny. These educated Nigerians would be the type that migrated to the UK. Anyways, these three points taken together suggest that Nigerian/African emigrants fall around at least the 84% percentile in cognitive ability relative to the Nigerian/African mean.

    Of course, we don’t have Nigerian/African biometric variance component estimates, so we are kind of stuck, unless we are willing to make strong inferences.

    Now, Chanda, I looked through your data. The “Raising the Achievement of Black African Pupils: Good Practice in Schools” paper was rubbish. The Black African sample size appears to be 411. And the schools were selective. Whites at those very schools performed 13 “percent points” above the national average — and Black Caribbeans 16. Indeed, discussing the sample, the authors note:

    “Six secondary schools with a high number of Black African students that serve disadvantaged communities were selected for case studies. The case study schools’ GCSE results were exceptionally good.. Key criteria for the selection of schools were as follow:
    –an above‐average proportion of students who are eligible for free school meals
    –‘outstanding’ or ‘good with outstanding features’ grades overall in the most recent Ofsted inspection
    –exceptionally good results, high standards
    –sustained GCSE improvement over the last 10 years”

    Hmmm… When I made the appropriate adjustments only Igbo (N= 16?, d = 0.68), Ga (N= 8?, d = 0.10), and TwiFante (N=37?, d= 0.15) performed above UK Whites at the same (select) schools (where d = the standardized difference). Your whole case, in that regards, ends up resting on the performance of a tiny group of Igbo speaking kids at an unrepresentative set of schools. (Note: I computed sample sizes by multiplying 411 by the reported % who spoke the language– it’s not clear if the 411 is for each year or for all year or what; the authors just note:
    “Of the 411 Black African students who took GCSE, 21% spoke English at home, 22% Yoruba, 13% Somali, 9% Twi‐Fante, 5% French, 4% Igbo, 4% Krio…”

    To be fair, you do cited other results. You note “A 2007 report on “case study” model schools in Lambeth…” and then mention again the amazing results of Ibo. But this is by the same author as above using the same sample, one which ran from 2007 to 2011. The same problems for this subsample exist as they do for the full case study sample!

    Now the Nigerians scores are more interested. Scores by immigrant nations are problematic, in general, since many African immigrants are White European or Asian. See, for example, Table 5 in Easterly and Nyarko’s (2008) “Is the brain drain good for Africa?”. However the vast majority of Nigerian emigrants happen to be Black, so in this case the scores can be in this respect unproblematically used.

    The Nigerian scores are though problematic on other accounts. Firstly, the paper you cited along with others noted that only select schools adopted extended ethnic codes, thus nationally representative samples and scores are unavailable. Second, I was able to find papers which reported multi-school Nigerian GCSE scores for three years: 2003, 2005, 2010/2011. (The one you reported plus one with 2005 data.) The standardized differences relative to UK Whites (transforming percent into d-value based on some questionable assumptions which the GCSE reporting method forces us to make) were 0, 0, and 0.6.

    I appreciate that you feel that the 2010/2011 value is the “true” one, but it’s impossible to tell. All of the papers which discuss these extended ethnicity codes noted that across time scores are not comparable since at different times different schools adopt different extended codes.
    So where does this leave us? It leaves us with what I already wrote 3 1/2 years ago and some suggestive evidence that Nigerians may perform between 0 and 0.6 SD above the Black African ~
    White UK mean. So basically, no progression from the mean I set; you are not even close to a reasonably sound argument!

    To constructs a dispositive one, you would need:
    (a) the latent ability differences between the natives of the UK and of West Africa
    (b) the latent ability differences between natives and Black emigrants from West Africa
    (c) the latent ability differences between White natives and the children of Black emigrants from West Africa
    (d) the environmental and genetic variance components for all four groups.

    Of course, we can only hold you to Lynn’s standards — which aren’t particularly high. So we can’t expect you to move beyond manifest values.

    As for those I just checked the 2013 GCSE scores and they were roughly the same as in 2010. And in 2010 the Black African CAT3 FSIQ score would have been around 0.6 SD below the UK white mean. (The average subtlest score d-value was around 0.5 SD.) So Black African parity with UK Whites in GCSE seems to be consistent with a Black African – White cognitive d-value of around 0.6.

    Generally, assuming that emigrant Black Africans are at least 1 SD selected relative to the mean and assuming that the h2 (narrow heritability) + c2 (shared environment) in Africa is ~0.6, the data is consistent with a proposed African “genotypic IQ” — a confused concept, but one everyone seems to employ — of 85.

    This is precisely what I deduced 3.5 years ago! All you managed to do is show that for Nigerians the calculations might possibly be more complex.

    And this: “…even if hereditarians can somehow manage to convincingly argue that the Nigerian (or Igbo) children in the UK do in fact have a lower IQ than average white children, as their biological model predicts (despite our evidence), they also have to show that these West African children even have a lower IQ than average black American children”

    Get out of here. I came across this on Wikipedia:

    “Most Igbo slaves were not victims of slave-raiding wars or expeditions, but were sometimes debtors and people who committed what their communities considered to be abominations or crimes”

    Probably not the educational elite being sold off.

  201. rec1man says:
    @Hobbesian Meliorist

    They are both measured on the PSAT

    For National Achievement, the bar is 190
    for National Merit the bar is 220

    Roughly PSAT x 10 = SAT ( out of 2400 )

  202. @Chuck

    Pumpkinperson makes a mistake when it comes to estimating offspring IQ, though. The kind of random variance that doesn’t pass along across generations also happens to be the kind of variance that doesn’t predict outcomes (references on request). Thus if you select for IQ by a proxy variable like EA, IQ differences will almost fully be passed on since you already mostly eliminated the noise component. Thus, given an IQ x EA correlation, the kids should be only a little less than 1.4 SD selected.

    But you can think of second generation immigrants as themselves being selected by an IQ proxy (the SES of their parents) only it’s a much weaker correlate.

    IQ correlates much more strongly with one’s attained SES (0.7) then with one’s parents’ SES (0.42), because the former is something you achieved yourself while the latter is something you merely inherited, so the children of extremely high SES people are less intelligent than their parents on average (though in this case they get a nutrition boost their patents lacked)

    So people who are, for example +2 SD in attained SES will average +2 SD(0.7) = +1.4 SD in IQ

    People who are +2 SD in SES of origin will average +2 SD (0.42) = +0.84 SD

  203. @Chanda Chisala

    You seriously do not understand that people who get an income of 20,000 US dollars per year in Nigeria have a higher IQ than people who get that same amount (or even 10,000 dollars more) in the United States or the UK?

    I think it’s a debateable point. Someone who figured out how to get out of Nigeria & make $20,000 competing in a high IQ country like the UK might be much
    smarter, because they were smart enough to get to a country where they & their kids have access to a First World standard of living, nutrition, health care, infrastructure, culture (which is worth a heck of a lot more than $20,000!)

    • Replies: @Chanda Chisala
  204. @Simon in London

    It seems certain that the average Nigerian in London is much smarter than the average Nigerian in Nigeria. But other populations have selective migration, too. Why do the Nigerians seem so much smarter than most other immigrant groups

    Because they are much more selected because:

    1) Nigeria has a low standard of living so the smart thing to do is leave, causing immigrants from Nigeria to be disproportionately smart. By contrast if you live in a better country, smart people will stay, thus immigrants from good countries will be only average

    2) The UK immigration officials probably prefer immigrants from non-black countries while there are far more blacks who want to migrate there. The huge supply combined with low demand means immigration is a far more competetive game for blacks, with only the best & brightest typically getting to the UK.

    By contrast the UK may be so desperate for non-black immigrants that they’ll accept almost anyone.

  205. rec1man says:

    I have not seen any of these Super-Igbo on the Intel Talent Search Semifinalist list ( out of 300 each year ) ; Mathcounts semifinalists and in general semifinalists of any of the g loaded contests

    http://www.jbhe.com/features/53_SAT.html

    Almost No Blacks Among the Top Scorers on the SAT Test

    only 976 African-American college-bound students scored 700 or above on the math SAT and only 1,117 scored at least 700 on the verbal SAT – including the Igbo

    • Replies: @CCR
  206. Numinous says:
    @pumpkinperson

    In fact part of the reason high IQ prople make more money is they’re smart enough to know where to go & figure out how to get there.

    Is IQ positively correlated with the motivation to make lots of money? If you cannot prove that this is so, then your argument seems to fall apart.

    Is knowing where the money is to be made and playing the competition game a sign of truly high IQ or just moderate IQ? The competition to make boatloads of money is a zero-sum game, and those who make the most don’t have to be the smartest bulbs in their neck of the woods, just the smartest and most ruthless among those who have a similar motivation to make lots of money (which, as I stated above, need not be correlated with high IQ.)

    I am reminded of a couple of quotes by John Tuld, the CEO in the 2011 movie “Margin Call”, which he addresses to the genius quant Peter Sullivan:
    There are three ways to make a living in this business: be first, be smarter, or cheat.
    Maybe you could tell me what is going on. And please, speak as you might to a young child. Or a golden retriever. It wasn’t brains that brought me here; I assure you that.

    Now this is a movie, but these quotes aren’t purely the figment of the screenwriter’s imagination, but say something about real life.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @pumpkinperson
  207. Myxine says:
    @pumpkinperson

    1) Rubbish. The thousands of African refugees trying to flee crisis zones every month aren’t geniuses for figuring out that they’re going to starve or get killed if they stay where they are, and it doesn’t take a genius to imagine why they prefer emigrating to Western countries. Nigerian emigrants are usually economic opportunists rather than humanitarian refugees, but it’s not hard to choose between London and Lagos.
    If anything , it’s the Eastern Europeans, Turks etc who should be smarter, because they have a less pressing need to emigrate and the benefits of switching countries are much smaller, so it requires more calculation to realize that emigrating to a slightly richer country can be advantageous. Without some research and planning, it’s hard to decide whether moving to London is a better opportunity than staying in Krakow. Yet it seems moving to Western Europe is indeed a smarter choice than staying in Eastern Europe: most migrants are definitely better off.

    Despite this, Nigeria apparently provides higher-quality immigrants than Eastern Europe and Turkey. There are many possible explanations for this, but I doubt yours is the right one.

    2) Pure speculation.

    • Replies: @pumpkinperson
  208. iffen says:
    @Numinous

    It seems to me that there are many examples of really smart people who didn’t pay any attention at all to making money and it is obvious that making a lot of money did not enter into their motivations. Making a lot of money is just one criterion that can be used when evaluating people and when you use that measure it really tells everyone quite a bit about yourself. In the modern age it does seem to be crowding out other criteria. It is interesting that some individuals who make a lot of money then spent many years spending it in ways that tend to remake their image into something other than just a person who made a lot of money.

    • Replies: @Numinous
  209. The over-performance relative to home country IQ of some African countries is not restricted to the UK. In my studies of immigrants in Denmark and Norway, I found the same thing. It is very clear that there are strong selection effects for some countries, but not others, and that this is a large part of the reason why the home country IQ x performance in host country are not higher.

    See this post. http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/?p=5347 It has plots. :)

  210. @Numinous

    Is IQ positively correlated with the motivation to make lots of money?

    IQ is correlated with understanding the value of money, which almost can’t be overestimated. Low IQ people think money only buys material goods and are often motivated on that concrete level, but high IQ people understand money buys abstractions like time, freedom, political power (lobbying congress), cultural power (i.e. media platforms), convenience (private jets), beauty (mansions overlooking the oceans & mountains), scientific knowledge(funding research), health, good looks & even love.

    On the other hand, money isn’t free & you have to sacrafice a lot of your life to make huge amounts of it, so many high IQ people reject the rat race, but that’s because they already have access to a great standard of living just by living in a First World country.

    If you live in a Third World country & know that you can improve your standard of living for yourself & your descendants by orders if magnitude just by migrating, the highest IQ would see the wisdom in doing so


    Is knowing where the money is to be made and playing the competition game a sign of truly high IQ or just moderate IQ? The competition to make boatloads of money is a zero-sum game, and those who make the most don’t have to be the smartest bulbs in their neck of the woods, just the smartest and most ruthless among those who have a similar motivation to make lots of money (which, as I stated above, need not be correlated with high IQ.)

    We live in a World where virtually everything is for sale if you’re smart enough to know where to shop. The smartest would recognize that money is the ability to get almost anything you want whenever you want, but they would also recognize that the time & energy it takes to make money can rob you of the very the thing money buys: quality of life

    So i think high IQ people strongly pursue money whenever they don’t have to sacrafice too much to get it. High IQ people in the Third World have little to lose & everything to gain by moving to a rich country so they might be hyper-motivated to do so

    I am reminded of a couple of quotes by John Tuld, the CEO in the 2011 movie “Margin Call”, which he addresses to the genius quant Peter Sullivan:
    – There are three ways to make a living in this business: be first, be smarter, or cheat.

    Actually all three are correlated with IQ. Being first requires original thought & seeing opportunities others miss. Cheating is a sign of low IQ, but cheating smart people & getting away with it often requires high IQ.

    • Replies: @Numinous
  211. Chanda Chisala:
    “Using Jensen’s own empirical framework, the racial genetic hypothesis can be tested by comparing black African immigrants with native blacks, intellectually. If the genetic hypothesis is correct, children of elite African blacks will tend to have lower IQs than children of native black Americans, and perhaps even lower than children of low IQ blacks, the same phenomenon observed between American blacks and whites since native blacks are basically “more white” than African (or Caribbean) immigrants.”

    Clearly, Chisala has not read Jensen. He deals with the hybridization issue in great detail in “The g Factor”. This is from page 479:

    “An ideal study would require that the relative proportions of European and African genes in each hybrid individual be known precisely. This, in turn, would demand genealogical records extending back to each individual’s earliest ancestors of unmixed European and African origin. In addition, for the results to be generalizable to the present-day populations of interest, one would also need to know how representative of the white and black populations in each generation of interracial ancestors of the study probands (i.e., the present hybrid individuals whose level of g is measured) were. A high degree of assortative mating for g, for example, would mean that these ancestors were not representative and that cross-racial matings transmitted much the same g-related alleles from each racial line. Also, the results would be ambiguous if there were a marked systematic difference in the g levels of the black and white mates (e.g., in half of the matings the black [or hybrid] g > white g and vice versa in the other half). This situation would act to cancel any racial effect in the offspring’s level of g.”

    ie if black had historically mated with low IQ whites, the white admixture would have little or no systematic effect on black IQ. It is likely that for social and geographic reasons, people socialize primarily with those of similar IQ, so one would not expect high IQ whites to have sex with blacks.

  212. @Myxine

    1) Rubbish. The thousands of African refugees trying to flee crisis zones every month aren’t geniuses for figuring out that they’re going to starve or get killed if they stay where they are, and it doesn’t take a genius to imagine why they prefer emigrating to Western countries.

    Almost nothing takes a genius to do, but the odds of making smart decisions (even simple ones) go up with each extra IQ point.

    So a Nigerian with an average IQ (67) might have a 10% chance of making the right decision, while a Nigerian with an IQ of 100 might have a 50% chance of making the right decision while a Nigerian with an IQ of 133 might have a 90% chance of making the right decision.

    Having made the decision to migrate, the smartest will also have much better odds of competently jumping through the hoops to get the goal

    We even saw the same pattern with Ashkenazi Jews during WWII. The smartest ones left Europe for America early & then helped to create Israel for those who were stuck behind & I blogged about how Ashkenazi Americans score 7 points higher than Ashkenazis in Israel

    The IQ selection would be much larger among African refuges because the African IQ is low, so huge numbers of the population would not even think to leave or understand how to do so, & why they should

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  213. @pumpkinperson

    There could well be some truth in this – the UK authorities like economic immigrants with good academic credentials, the Nigerians we get certainly have good academic credentials! In fact the robustness & high quality of Nigerian degrees – higher quality than UK degrees at the equivalent grade point (1st/2.1/2.2/3rd) – is something I’ve often noticed. Often my Nigerian students’ references will say things like “came top in class of 50″, which supports high-selection argument, whereas for other countries it’s more likely to be “my father is a judge” or “my grandfather was the king” – socially elite, but perhaps not so cognitively elite.

    BUT I definitely don’t think this is the whole story. There are lots of terrible countries, much worse than Nigeria, where people desperately want to get to the UK, but I don’t see lots of high-ability applicants from them. My postgrad course does get a boost when the USA trashes some country (eg recently Ukraine) and the children of the Westernised elites decide a year in London sounds like a great idea… and some of these countries produce decently capable students, but rarely at Nigerian level.

    One issue: the Russians typically seem really bright, but quite often lazy/unwilling to work hard, so they often perform academically far below their apparent IQ. The Igbo might not be as bright as Russians, but if they work much harder they could do a lot better (and typically do). The Germans/NW Europeans tend to do best of all, my impression this is because they combine both brains and a strong work ethic.

    • Replies: @Numinous
  214. Realist says:
    @PB and J

    “But back to Lynn. I’ve heard multiple accounts from travelers that the sophistication and cogency of the Lebanese is remarkable, especially in contrast to other Arabic-speaking countries.”

    Well there you go. Sounds scientific to me.

  215. Realist says:

    To settle this once and for all see Are White Men Gods? (II) by Fred Reed on this blog.

  216. Numinous says:
    @pumpkinperson

    I get what you are saying but I think your explanations are far from conclusive. Getting rich, or wanting to escape to a rich country, seem to be highly correlated with opportunism and lack of impulse control. As others have mentioned, it does not need a rocket scientist to figure out that they and their families would be better off if they moved to rich countries. In your typically highly corrupt Third World country, high IQ people may rationally choose to opt out of the rat race because it is both a high-stakes game and a very risky one; it does not take a high IQ to figure out who to bribe but it does take “balls”. Consider a totally different example (sticking to males): asking a girl out in a public place (like a bar). More often than not, you will find lower IQ males far more willing to ask girls out, and as a result, get some dates. (Totally unscientific assertion, and I am willing to be contradicted by someone with better knowledge and data.)

  217. Numinous says:
    @iffen

    In the modern age it does seem to be crowding out other criteria.

    I think you have a point there. At least in developed countries with a properly working rule of law, wits might be the determining factor in one’s material success in life. In countries where the rule of law is broken or was never established, brute force might dominate over wits (IQ).

  218. Numinous says:
    @Simon in London

    the Russians typically seem really bright, but quite often lazy/unwilling to work hard,

    The smart ones probably all go to the US. Virtually every Russian (and Belarusian and Ukrainian) I met in grad school or in the software industry in that country was both smart and hard working. :)

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  219. @Chuck

    Generally, assuming that emigrant Black Africans are at least 1 SD selected relative to the mean and assuming that the h2 (narrow heritability) + c2 (shared environment) in Africa is ~0.6, the data is consistent with a proposed African “genotypic IQ” — a confused concept, but one everyone seems to employ — of 85.

    If through all that sophistry in your post, you arrived at an African genotypic IQ of 85 , then clearly you have confused yourself somewhere. It “should” be 80.

    • Replies: @Chuck
  220. @pumpkinperson

    I think it’s a debateable point. Someone who figured out how to get out of Nigeria & make $20,000 competing in a high IQ country like the UK might be much
    smarter

    Pumpkin, that $20,000 in Africa is the annual salary of professionals like top medical doctors, engineers, etc. African immigrants (or even Europeans) getting that same amount in Europe or the US are definitely not smarter than the people who get that amount in Africa. You should have familiarized yourself with the phenotypic aspects of the assumptions you made in your calculations before making your ridiculous estimates.

    Again, your fallacy lies in assuming nominal individual income correlations with IQ between different economies. That can’t even be done even within the same economy between people from different times/years (due to inflation etc); it is unforgivable that you can’t see why it’s obviously fallacious to do that between developed and poor countries.

    • Replies: @pumpkinperson
  221. @Numinous

    Well I’m in Law… The Ukraineans aren’t lazy, I think neither are the Russian men (but haven’t had a huge number); too few Bylorussiams to say. It has been a bit of an issue with some Russian female students; a minority of them, but enough to notice. Possibly with a few of the Turks also. The only student body we’ve had serious problems with are the Gulf Arabs, mostly Saudi.

    In any case the eastern Europeans & Turks are pretty good students, but on average not as good as Nigerian I think.

  222. Chuck says: • Website
    @Chanda Chisala

    Sophistry? Let’s let readers judge.

    I noted that, regarding UK scores, I made, across a series of posts, a rather similar argument over three years ago. At that time, I deduced that Lynn’s estimates were untenable. And I suggested, instead, some of Jensen’s. (If you wish, I will be happy to link to the relevant discussions.) You responded that I failed to grasp your argument, which, you said, provided even stronger evidence against a hereditarian hypothesis.

    I have since pointed out that your ethnolingual analyses are rubbish. Let me quote again from the paper you cited:

    “Six secondary schools with a high number of Black African students that serve disadvantaged communities were selected for case studies… Key criteria for the selection of schools were as follow:

    –an above‐average proportion of students who are eligible for free school meals
    –‘outstanding’ or ‘good with outstanding features’ grades overall in the most recent Ofsted inspection
    –exceptionally good results, high standards
    –sustained GCSE improvement over the last 10 years

    …Of the 411 Black African students who took GCSE, 21% spoke English at home, 22% Yoruba, 13% Somali, 9% Twi‐Fante, 5% French, 4% Igbo, 4% Krio…”

    Tiny and unrepresentative samples. Even Ron Unz wouldn’t try to pass that off as serious evidence!

    And then I pointed out that your Nigerian immigrant scores were also problematic. So there we are. You have added little to nothing to what I previously wrote.

    I am not saying that the immigration data is uninteresting — if it was, I wouldn’t have extensively written about it. I am claiming that you did not add much, empirically, to what I already said and that the data is still consistent with what hereditarians like Jensen have argued.

    • Replies: @Chanda Chisala
  223. @Big Bill

    staying with their people and making their homelands better?

    Their dumber neighbors hate them for being so smart, like the Chinese in Southeast Asia or the Jews everywhere, and would prefer that they leave — or die.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Civil_War

  224. @Drake

    The Black Caribbean children are descended from commoners from the West Indies, who themselves came as slaves from Africa. That seems fairly random.
    Even the BC children perform only about a third of a SD below the White British mean, which is impressive.

  225. @Numinous

    Getting rich, or wanting to escape to a rich country, seem to be highly correlated with opportunism and lack of impulse control.

    I’m trying to think of a real-life group for whom this observation seems to hold true. Jewish immigrants as a group, for example, have gotten richer than most groups and Jews have a reputation in certain quarters for being opportunistic, but I’ve never heard even antisemites describe them as lacking impulse control. Likewise with Chinese. Commenters on sites like this one often describe Hispanic immigrants as opportunistic and lacking impulse control but Hispanics as a group haven’t gotten rich yet.

  226. […] The IQ Gap is No Longer a Black and White Issue – The Unz Review […]

  227. Bliss says:
    @Simon in London

    My ancedotal experience is that high-achieving west African female students never show nerdy characteristics

    This could be important and deserves further exploration. The 100+ million denizens of the American Continent with visible african ancestry are overwhelmingly from West Africa. Here is a north american example of genius-jock:

    http://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/football/nfl-lineman-lives-double-life-math-genius

    As an offensive guard for the Baltimore Ravens, John Urschel already has a lot on his plate. He regularly goes head to head with the top defensive players in the NFL and does his best to keep quarterback Joe Flacco out of harm’s way. But besides his endeavors on the field, Urschel also keeps up another demanding pursuit that is rarely associated with NFL players: mathematical research. Not content with the respect of the locker room, he also seeks the esteem of top mathematicians around the globe. “I have a Bachelor’s and Master’s in mathematics, all with a 4.0, and numerous published papers in major mathematical journals,” Urschel wrote in a recent article for The Players’ Tribune. His latest contribution to the mathematical realm was a paper for the Journal of Computational Mathematics with the impressively esoteric title, “A Cascadic Multigrid Algorithm for Computing the Fiedler Vector of Graph Laplacians.”</i>

    And here is an example from 18th century France: the haitian-french Chevalier de Saint Georges who must be one of the greatest all- rounders of all time:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevalier_de_Saint-Georges

    Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges (French: [sɛ̃.ʒɔʁʒ]; also Saint-George; December 25, 1745 – June 10, 1799)[1] was a champion fencer, a virtuoso violinist and conductor of the leading symphony orchestra in Paris. Born in Guadeloupe, he was the son of George Bologne de Saint-Georges, a wealthy planter, and Nanon, his African slave.[2] During the French Revolution, Saint-Georges was colonel of the ‘Légion St.-Georges,‘[3] the first all-black regiment in Europe, fighting on the side of the Republic. Today the Chevalier de Saint-Georges is best remembered as the first classical composer of African ancestry…….. “… admired for his fencing and riding prowess, he served as a model to young sportsmen … who formed a court around him.”[13] A fine dancer, Saint-Georges was also invited to balls and welcomed in the salons (and boudoirs) of highborn ladies. “Partial for the music of liaisons where amour had real meaning… he loved and was loved.”[14]

    • Replies: @annamaria
  228. geokat62 says:
    @sund

    A quick google search suggests that the author is male, not female!

  229. @Chuck

    This will be my last post in the comments.

    OK, firstly I retract the word “sophistry” just to tone this down a bit.

    But you’re the one who reported that your working is consistent with the (genotypic) answer of 85. If your answer is wrong, I think it is reasonable to assume that your working is wrong.

    85 is not the genetic IQ of black Africans, according to the hereditarian-HBD world that I am arguing with here. According to them, it can not be more than 80 (or maybe even 70, depending on who you’re talking to). They believe that the black American IQ is the one that is genetically 85 (or maybe even 90, according to some) – because American blacks get some bonus points from the genetic generosity of white admixture.

    Whatever the exact numbers, it is that bit of their model that I am logically contending with in order to bring the edifice down. If evidence is pointing to a higher (or even just equal) genotypic IQ for black Africans (compared to native black Americans), as your “wrong” answer in fact suggests, then everything else (particularly about the genetic intelligence of the black race as a whole) is brought into serious doubt, even without proving directly that blacks are intellectually equal to whites (which is probably what you think I am doing).

    It is not only Lynn who has said that the white admixture in black Americans makes them genetically smarter than black Africans; it is pretty much everyone (perhaps with the notable exception of Eysenck at some point).

    You say:

    I am claiming that you did not add much, empirically, to what I already said and that the data is still consistent with what hereditarians like Jensen have argued.

    You seem fixated on insisting that I have not added “much” to the empirical data, even after I twice acknowledged as much, both in the article and in the comments (to you). I explicitly noted that the trends had already largely been noticed in the hereditarian world. So yes, I’ve not added that “much”. The glory belongs to you and others.

    As for your insistence on the smallness of one of the samples I cite, I find your argument strange.

    Again, in the article I do mention that this particular (“tribal”) data is consistent with what we know about the Igbo and others within Nigeria (Is a sample size of 174 million people good enough for you?); and that was the same argument I gave you above on why the GCSE data is sufficiently reliable, whatever weaknesses it may have. Adding within-Africa relative performance data would have made a long article even longer. So, the GCSE data in that sample only confirms what we already expect on that sub-ethnic level, and that makes it informative.

    [Note that even in your last post, which I regrettably called "sophistry," you did the exact same thing you're taking issue with: you cited a study with a sample that you admitted was "tiny", but that did not stop you from using it to buttress your final conclusion, because (presumably) it was consistent with other hopefully stronger data you already have or know.]

  230. annamaria says:
    @Bliss

    What a story about Chevalier de Saint-Georges!

  231. jmaie says:
    @Stonehands

    Africa as a whole is about half Muslim. Igbo people are largely Christian.

  232. Dave says:

    Two considerations for HBDers:

    1)Is it possible that evolution has been taking place in Africa since the past few hundred years? Is the mating situation such that rapid evolution is possible there? Monogamous families with two kids each tends to not be too good for evolution, but maybe the Africans have practices that could allow for more evolution (I am not an expert on their cultures, though).

    2) How important is IQ, REALLY, for academic success? Most people claim that males are a few points above females, which implies that there are many more smart males than females, but white and black females in America leave their respective males in the dust academically in my part of America, both in graduation rates and rates of high acheivement. Furthermore, the salutatorian of my school, a very capable student, seemed to be average IQ and got a ~70th percentile score on the SAT. But gawd, was she a perfect student. My SAT/GRE scores were basically perfect, but I suck at school. I understand IQ, do not beat a dead horse with me, but doesn’t IQ give a measure of how good one is at solving problems generally, or rather, measure ability to recognize abstract patterns or whatever? Can a low IQ person not get really good at a few particular things, even with a smaller brain? So is IQ even relevant with regards to academics, if low IQ people can just learn to be good students through diligence? Perhaps attitude is really the most important thing! A theoretical chemistry professor told me the same. I bet that the commenters here are far less successful in life than many lower-IQ airheads who get 4.0 GPA’s and went to medschool.

    I promise I understand the HBDers, and I understand that IQ and success will be correlated…sort of. But these scatterplots of grades and SAT scores are extremely wild to the naked eye, and I cannot help but think that maybe certain intangible personality traits are better for academic success than IQ.

  233. MarkinLA says:
    @Dave

    In my opinion IQ is a measure of how fast you can absorb the material. The problem then is how much time and energy can you spend on something to master it. This is why people with higher IQs tend to do better academically. They can master the material in the time allotted that is considered normal. This is especially true in heavily g loaded subjects like math and the hard sciences. More effort can overcome a deficiency in IQ but at what cost to the other aspects of your life?

    You don’t just read college level textbooks for math. You read them over and over again and try to do the exercises with differing values and twists to the problem. Only then can you really say you understand it. I have gone into classes thinking I was prepared only to have the professor throw a curve into the questions I thought I studied and found that I really did not have a thorough understanding of the topic. I walked out of final exams not knowing if I had flunked only to find out later I got a B in the class (probably everybody else was just as bad).

    If you are not bright and cannot teach yourself in a timely manner you will soon exhaust the good graces of people who are willing to help you (they have limited time as well). I used to work with somebody who was supposed to be a senior engineer. He was a nice guy but could never remember what he was told from one day to the next. I suggested he write things down if he couldn’t remember. Eventually he couldn’t get any work done because all the other engineers were sick and tired of repeatedly showing him how to use the equipment in the lab. Was the reason he couldn’t get any work done because he was stupid and couldn’t do it no matter what or was it because he forgot everything or was it because nobody would help him anymore? It didn’t matter he was fired.

  234. jr says:

    British GCSE’s or O’levels, exams taken for a letter grade at age 16 usually are not very g-loaded, imho. I got 8 A’s and one C with an IQ on a good day maybe of 120.

  235. @Chanda Chisala

    Again, your fallacy lies in assuming nominal individual income correlations with IQ between different economies. That can’t even be done even within the same economy between people from different times/years (due to inflation etc); it is unforgivable that you can’t see why it’s obviously fallacious to do that between developed and poor countries.

    But the point you’re missing is we’re talking about people who all started in the same place, and largely through intelligence, did some acquire better jobs and locations.

    Imagine you have a class of African kids in 1980. In 2015, you track them down as adults to ask them how much money they are making. You then create a scatter plot with income on the Y axis and IQ on the X axis, giving you a regression line of best fit predicting childhood IQ from adult income.

    Would the tiny percentage of kids who grew up to migrate to the UK fall on the same regression line when predicting IQ from income as their peers who stayed in Africa?

    We don’t know. I would argue that their IQs would be well above the regression line because their incomes in the UK under predict their true economic success because it doesn’t include the incalculable financial benefits of living in a First World country (i.e. paved roads, infrastructure, good schools for their kids, clean water, health care, nutrition) so it showed great wisdom and adaptability to migrate.

    On the other hand, one could argue their IQs would fall way below the regression line because it’s much easier to make money in a rich country than a poor one.

    We don’t know, but it’s wise to be open minded to both possibilities. Capiche?

  236. J1234 says:

    The real question is, does the article with it’s research and evidence – even if legitimate – truly support the very broad claim made in the title: “The IQ Gap Is No Longer a Black and White Issue”? I think not.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  237. @J1234

    It supports it in the limited sense that there appear to be some black African population groups of superior cognitive ability to some white/Caucasian population groups. It definitely does not support an argument that there is no population-genetic (racial/subracial) component to IQ.

    In general, there seems to be a lot more structure to population IQ distribution than is apparent from the traditional US black/white IQ gap, with ca black IQ 85 and white IQ 102. European-white populations have a surprisingly homogenous IQ mostly in the 98-102 range (possibly lower in the Balkans), probably I suspect due to a founder event, the same thing that got us all speaking Indo-European languages…. But Caucasoid populations as a whole have a large IQ spread from around 78 in the Persian/Arab Gulf and Arabian peninsula to maybe 102 or 104 in Germany, norming at UK=100. African populations may have at least as large a spread. Even excluding the minor races such as Khoi-San and Pygmies there may well be a 30-point spread in African population median IQs, 65-95 say, perhaps even higher if we look at African sub-groups of similar size to the Caucasian Ashkenazi with their ca 110 IQ.

    • Replies: @J1234
  238. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Simon in London

    “Here is a north american example of genius-jock: As an offensive guard for the Baltimore Ravens, John Urschel already has a lot on his plate…………….”

    I’m too lazy to google it but I believe John Urschel’s father is a Canadian surgeon of German (Jewish?) ancestry and his mother is an elite black Canadian. Derbyshire mentioned Urschel as an exception to the tropical people – temperate people HDB rule but I think he is a poor example for this purpose. It seems to me his example provides (one-data-point) support for the hereditarian hypothesis. A rare, exceptional “black” isn’t very black. He’s a mulatto with a white genius for a father and an atypical mother.

  239. Bruce says:

    “85 is not the genetic IQ of black Africans, according to the hereditarian-HBD world that I am arguing with here. According to them, it can not be more than 80 (or maybe even 70, depending on who you’re talking to). They believe that the black American IQ is the one that is genetically 85 (or maybe even 90, according to some) – because American blacks get some bonus points from the genetic generosity of white admixture.”

    It’s a common claim among HDB’rs that the discrepancy between the commonly-cited 85 figure and the lower 80 figure is due to poor testing access to lowest performing inner city black children.

  240. Bruce says:

    “Here is a north american example of genius-jock: As an offensive guard for the Baltimore Ravens, John Urschel already has a lot on his plate……”

    Derbyshire cited Urschel as an exception to the HDBr’s “sun-people/ice-people” rule. I’m too lazy to google it, but from memory Urschel’s father is a Canadian surgeon of German (Jewish?) ancestry and his mother is an elite black-Canadian. I don’t think Derbyshire was right. It seems to me, Urschel provides (one data-point) support for the hereditarian hypothesis. An exceptional “black” genius isn’t very black. He’s the son of a German (Jewish?) genius and an elite Canadian black.

  241. CCR says:
    @rec1man

    “only 976 African-American college-bound students scored 700 or above on the math SAT and only 1,117 scored at least 700 on the verbal SAT – including the Igbo”

    And of that number, how many were 100% African?

    • Replies: @rec1man
  242. rec1man says:
    @CCR

    The article did not mention African immigrants, meaning likely minimal impact of African immigrants including Igbo

  243. anon • Disclaimer says:

    they have effectively nullified any arguments for a racial evolutionary explanation of the well-known IQ test score gap between blacks and whites.

    I just think it simply points at what was always a more likely explanation.

    Is a tiger dumb? No it’s exactly as smart as it needs to be, same as hunter-gatherers. The more complex a society the more scope there is for competition based solely or mostly on cognitive ability and thus eventually higher average IQ. For example a trader sub-population are likely to get smarter than the base population over time.

    (long time trader sub populations are also likely to be less impulsive, violent etc)

    Whatever racial level differences there are as a baseline need to have added the civilization IQ bonus that will accrue over time in a more complex society so it doesn’t surprise me at all that there are smart sub-populations in Africa.

  244. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Even more fatal for the racial hereditarian side of the debate has been the corroborating data of school children performance in the UK

    However using what has happened in London as data in this argument is a sick joke.

    London over the last 30 years has become minority white. This process hasn’t been even. The white white collar population mostly still remains while the white blue collar population has been ethnically cleansed by gang violence.

    The working class children left behind are those whose parents were incapable of escape.

    • Replies: @Bruce
  245. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    regression to the mean only happens if it’s all random

    in reality people form caste like social structures to counter act it and try and make sure their smarter kids don’t hang out with the dumber kids

    (so each caste would end up having their own mean as long as they stuck to it)

  246. Bruce says:

    “they have effectively nullified any arguments for a racial evolutionary explanation of the well-known IQ test score gap between blacks and whites.”
    “Even more fatal for the racial hereditarian side of the debate has been the corroborating data of school children performance in the UK”
    What’s interesting is the triumphalist assertions given that the issue being discussed is quite complex and far from settled. The triumphalist tone makes this article look like a propaganda piece, as someone above noted. Unz’s pieces criticizing the Lynn & Vanhanen data had a similar triumphalist tone which made me wonder at first if Ron ghost-wrote the article.

  247. Bruce says:
    @anon

    You seem to be suggesting that what the author has shown is that highly selected African immigrants have managed to achieve parity with or outperform London chavs, cockney’s, wal-mart whites, whatever they’re called now.

    • Replies: @anon
  248. NYC says:

    Whether or not the thesis of this article is true, it is far from compelling as presented here. Aside from its anecdotal nature—there are almost no relevant studies—several distinctions are jumbled together and concepts confused:

    1. Characteristics of populations v. characteristics of those populations found in the West (i.e. Igbo Nigerians v. Igbo immigrants)—just look at the educations and wealth for example, of immigrants v. those who remain in their native countries (not that one can improve IQ with education or money, but that those things, broadly, tend to correlate with intelligence).

    2. In-group v. between-group differences, as well as the definitions of those groups (i.e. Igbo Nigerians may, for a variety of reasons, have different characteristics than other African groups).

    3. Subject specific achievement exams v. g-loaded IQ tests (while there is often broad correlation, obviously performance on a Geology or foreign-language test is not directly hereditable).

    4. Regression to the mean is a useful tool as Reston proposed, but it does not mean that two people with high-IQ children will have children with the average IQ of their group, only that their offspring will (and over multiple generations), regress towards that IQ—on average. Indeed, high-IQ couples will have children with average IQ’s lower than their own, but higher than the average for their group. If immigrant black couples have substantially higher average IQs than native-born blacks, so will their children, even if over multiple generations they all regress to the same mean.

    • Replies: @Emil O. W. Kirkegaard
  249. Ryan says:

    I am dumbfounded trying to wrap my head around this argument. People from the Igbo tribe are more intelligent and more successful relative to their peers regardless of whether they reside in England or Nigeria. This is evidence *against* the heritability of those traits, not in support of it?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  250. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Bruce

    Not really. I think there are racial differences (on average) but I also have no doubt that there are sub-populations all over the world that are smarter than their background population (particularly trader or artisan castes).

    I don’t even see why that would be controversial except for people who have a particular need for racial differences > all other differences. Some people do seem to believe this so the OP is a valid argument against that belief however endogamous castes with higher average mean IQs supports the hereditarian argument (but a more sensible version of it).

    I am saying separately that UK data specifically, especially over the last 16 years is a crock for numerous reasons as shown by the continuing slide in all international comparisons. According to UK data everything is getting better but in all international comparisons it is getting worse.

    Believe the international comparisons.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  251. Bruce says:

    I retract or at least qualify the above comment since I was writing from memory and don’t have the time to go back and reread the articles on Lynn and Vanhanen.

  252. @anon

    “I am saying separately that UK data specifically, especially over the last 16 years is a crock for numerous reasons as shown by the continuing slide in all international comparisons. According to UK data everything is getting better but in all international comparisons it is getting worse.”

    Grade inflation makes cross-temporal comparison difficult. It doesn’t stop comparison between groups at a particular moment in time.

    “London over the last 30 years has become minority white. This process hasn’t been even. The white white collar population mostly still remains while the white blue collar population has been ethnically cleansed by gang violence.”

    London is minority white-British, it's majority white – but lots of those whites are not from Britain. 'ethnically cleansed by gang violence' makes it sound like a US city like Detroit in the 1960s, it's a lot more low-grade than that (it would be some pretty weird ethnic cleansing that spared the wealthy middle class). Working-class whites' decisions to leave London may well include (eg) Essex being safer for their children, but in most of London gang violence is within gangs, generally not a huge lot of lethal attacks on non-gang members. The usual worry is more that white kids get **drawn into** the mixed-race gangs, with the usual dangers – girls get sexually exploited, boys get stabbed by rival gangs.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @anon
    , @DataExplorer
  253. JayMan says: • Website
    @CCR

    So what percent African are you?

    I’ll let you know as soon as someone hooks me up with a 23andMe kit.

  254. @pumpkinperson

    I don’t know that your critics have it right but I don’t think your point 2 recognises that UK immigration selectivity is limited by whatever EU treaties provide for free movement within the EU and immigration for e.g. Australians who are not students, depends on their employability and the jobs they would accept would tend to be high paid or career enhancing.
    As to 1. I agree with a critic who said you don’t have to be very bright to know that emigration should make you better off but I would refime your point to say that those who are at least semi educated English speaking and don’t have to use people smugglers or walk across deserts or hide in trucks are probably the smarter ones.

  255. […] the wake of chanda chisala’s post over at unz.com, several people asked me so what about the igbo? are they inbreeders or […]

  256. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Simon in London

    1) The working class parts of London have become minority white in the space of twenty years while the middle class parts have remained majority white.

    As you accept yourself elsewhere there are now scores of different ethnicity based youth gangs who now live in those ex working class areas all over London.

    How come?

    That is the context.

    But it’s getting off topic as the main point is

    2) in all the international educational comparisons the UK is going down and yet the data from within the UK is all going up.

    Take your pick over who’s right.

    I think the international comparisons show that the UK data is being rigged to hide collapsing standards – partly due to language issues – from the massive sudden influx over the last 20 years.

    Schools in the poorer parts of London went from 95%+ speaking English to a hundred different languages in the space of a few years. You don’t actually need any more than that to explain it.

    The UK data is a crock.

    (That doesn’t disprove the main thrust of the OP that there can be endogamous sub-populations with a higher mean average IQ which would be a “duh!” by now if arguments in this area weren’t so restricted.)

  257. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Simon in London

    but in most of London gang violence is within gangs, generally not a huge lot of lethal attacks on non-gang members. The usual worry is more that white kids get **drawn into** the mixed-race gangs, with the usual dangers – girls get sexually exploited, boys get stabbed by rival gangs.

    I grew up in an area like that so don’t give me the **** teachers tell themselves so they feel better for letting it happen.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  258. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Ryan

    Yes it supports heritability of those traits, but with one additional piece of data. The Igbo would have also beat the British whites if they were living in Nigeria. Their success is not just relative to their “peers”.

  259. @anon

    You mean you’re white & were bullied/threatened by ethnic gang members? It definitely does happen, of course. I guess I reacted to ‘ethnically cleansed’ – it made me think of fire bombings in Northern Ireland where I come from, or the large scale murders & rapes that drove whites out of Detroit.

    My son goes to a mostly working class school, but Church of England; today he was the only white in the after-school club, all the other kids there were black. But there is no racial division at the school, and I haven’t seen a lot of racial strife in London generally, unlike eg Birmingham. But high crime rates & violence from non-white immigrants can create an unpleasant environment even without intentional ethnic cleansing.

  260. J1234 says:
    @Simon in London

    I said:

    The real question is, does the article with it’s research and evidence – even if legitimate – truly support the very broad claim made in the title: “The IQ Gap Is No Longer a Black and White Issue”? I think not.

    Simon in London said:

    It supports it in the limited sense that there appear to be some black African population groups of superior cognitive ability to some white/Caucasian population groups.

    But that’s not a broad claim.

    The title of the article seems to represent the author’s wish or goal, while the content of the article represents an attempt to achieve that goal with evidence that’s more exceptional than typical. He wants his very specific scenario involving very specific populations to prove a very broad idea that he apparently believes to be true.

    I know there are very intelligent people of sub-Saharan origin – I’ve been privileged to know several of them – but my anecdotal realities have little bearing on broader realities. Flying squirrels fly better than kiwis, but that reality says little about the flying abilities of birds vs. squirrels.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
  261. JI says:

    At least in America, immigrants from all over the world do better than the native born. This is self-selecting because it takes ambition, drive, and smarts to get to America from places where it is difficult to get to America. For example, Africa. Note that I’m not including hopping a bus for the border from Mexico or Central America.

  262. @JI

    When you wrote “At least in America, immigrants from all over the world do better than the native born”, whom did you mean by “native born”?

    “Native born” in general, averaged over the whole population of the USA,
    or “native born” of the same ethnicity /race / caste, as the immigrants in question?

    Results of PISA studies show,
    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/12/overall-pisa-rankings-include-america.html ,
    that USA educates students of the given ethnic / racial group better
    than the country of their origin does.

  263. @Anonymous

    I don’t have an explanation that is consistent with both this and the GCSE results, so I don’t know what’s going on.

    It’s blindingly obvious isn’t it? When government reports contradict everything your eyes and ears tell you, contradict every shred of non-government evidence, and contradict the entirety of human history, shouldn’t you question those government reports? GCSE is a politically correct (and politically corrupt) tool. Just search “GCSE flawed” for a small sampling. These are not objective measurements like you’d find in properly controlled IQ studies. You noted that Britain’s top universities’ admissions are closer to what you’d expect based on existing IQ studies and meta-studies – this is because those universities know the game being played.

    In America we have seen this movie over and over and over again. This writer cites some school in Nevada that admits only the top 1 in 10,000 based on IQ. Then he says they have admitted one African. I’m not sure that proves what he thinks it proves. Nor am I convinced the admission of that African was without political motivation. Consider that this single African was subsequently used for media/propaganda purposes. In America it seems that every few years some miracle in education is proclaimed – African students are doing as well as or better than white or northeast Asian students! Then later, just as predictable as the miracle although with an order of magnitude less fanfare, we learn the miracle was a fraud and that those students did no better than any other Africans in any other school at any other time in history.

    The bottom line here is that this article makes some wild fantastical leaps unsupported by any objective research. He observes an expected phenomenon, better performance by a highly selected African cognitive elite versus the population selected primarily for failure, and extrapolates wildly. Are we surprised that Nigerian PhD’s have smarter kids than illiterate Somalis who fled Somalia because everyone back home hated them? Or that these children of Nigerian PhD’s are brighter than the descendants of Africans selected by their peers for slavery and ultimately sold to traders for export to the Americas? Does this remotely contradict anything we’ve known for a century or more? And then trying to confound the issue he discusses African-Caucasian hybrids? This suggests a level of understanding more suitable for street corner debate in Detroit than publication here.

    Let me know when we begin seeing evidence this writer is correct from sources like SAT & ASVAB or properly administered and controlled IQ tests.

    • Replies: @Dipwill
  264. @J1234

    “I know there are very intelligent people of sub-Saharan origin – I’ve been privileged to know several of them ”

    Me too – but if Lynn’s IQ data told the whole story, with a single African population with median IQ of 68, we wouldn’t know any. I don’t meet any super-intelligent Saudi Arabians (I’ve never even heard of any super-intelligent Saudis), and I’ve known more Saudis than Africans, yet Saudi mean IQ is supposed to be considerably higher.

  265. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    @Chanda

    Good article! I’ve discussed this topic at length (as you have seen). The UK data undermines hard heredetarianism. Heredetarianism in the context of behavioral trait differences between “races” suffers from several other problems.

    1. “Races” as socially defined are not monophyletic, ruining any attempt at cladistics (but heredetarians love passing around nonsensical cladograms for human races). The allele frequencies captured by the definitions exist but at the same time are arbitrary. And there’s nothing indicating the different frequencies captured aren’t alleles linked to simple, superficial traits. For example, sickle-cell anemia is a large-effect mutation of a single allele, which is exactly the type of mutation that could easily increase in frequency within a population and produce large differences in frequency between populations over a relatively short evolutionary time period. Complex traits with pleiotropic and polygenic inheritence are much different.

    The favored comparison is always “dog breeds.” Dog breeds are severely inbred; human “races” are not. Dog breeds have been produced through artificial selection, whereas human races were produced by either (weak) natural selection or simple geographic isolation. Most importantly, the degree of genetic similarity between dog breeds is far higher than it is within human races. “However, the variation between dog breeds is much greater than the variation between human populations (27.5% versus 5.4%). Conversely, the degree of genetic homogeneity is much greater within individual dog breeds than within distinct human populations (94.6% versus 72.5%).” http://genome.cshlp.org/content/15/12/1706.full.

    Recently, people took Rachel Dolezal seriously as a black woman. And the only reason people stopped believing she was black is that Dolezal’s parents informed everyone otherwise. So, IRL the “real salient” facts about race are historical and cultural: no one cares about what a 23andme document says or doesn’t say. That’s why “race,” for all intents and purposes and what people actually mean when they discuss black, white, and Asian populations, is a social construct. This latest PC attempt to redefine “race” to match geographical clinial variation is just squid ink.

    2. Adoption studies are removing environmental variation. The adoptive homes could have uniformly added 10 points to each adoptive sibling’s IQ and the correlation between them would still be low and the variation between them better explained by variation in biological parent IQ. High SES home and compulsory education = removing environmental variation, even if they uniformly add or increase IQ or do so within a fairly narrow band. Which means that the “narrow band” could both account for a small percentage of IQ variance and explain group mean differences.

    The transracial adoption studies were even worse; they removed environmental variation after adoption but a lot of environmental variation remained regarding age of adoption and placement between white and black adoptees. One group, once again, suffers uniformly worse environmental quality during a critical period of mental development.

    The twins reared apart study is garbage; they weren’t reared far “apart” at all. And all twin studies rest on EEA, which is a tenuous assumption. There are plenty of adoption studies heredetarians neglect to mention; what about (Duyme et al. 1999) that showed a link between SES of adoptive home and eventual (age 16) IQ of the children, with an average difference of 1 SD and a range of about 20 points? Usually nowhere to be found.

    3. Misunderstanding of “shared environment.” First, shared environment is estimated using the EEA and assuming nonsense like ‘parents treat their children equally,’ sure. Shared environment is a fiction. No one shares their environment with anyone else. It’s likely that much of the “non-shared environment” boils down to differential treatment by friends, parents, family, and peers, meaning that those variables do contribute a lot to variation in IQ.

    But…systematic differences between parents would be uncovered if a study were done with representative variation of intracountry or intercountry parenting environments. It hasn’t been done. That said…

    Haworth et al. (2010) found, in a study with 11,000 twins from four different countries that shared environmental effects accounted for 16% of IQ variance. McGue et al. (1993) reviewed several twin studies and found that shared environment accounted for 30% of variation in IQ up until age 20, after which it dropped off to 0. But the studies he analyzed with twins over 20 years old had a weighted average shared environmental effect of negative 6% (that’s a model problem).

    4. The evolutionary explanations are often contradictory. For example, if IQ is an adaptation…generally that would remove variation from the selected population. So the heritability of a population selected for a certain trait should be close to zero. High heritability is prima facie evidence against an adaptation narrative. Now, several mechanisms may preserve variation, but if those mechanisms have been operating, then it makes it less likely the populations have any real genetic difference between them.

    I say heredetarianism rather than HBD, but for the most part, HBD = strong heredetarianism.

  266. Dan says:

    The patent output of the entire continent of Africa is virtually nil. What proportion of Africa participates in the world of technological innovation?

    0%.

    This is an age of the Internet so information is available. Nigerian internet scams have been going on for a very long time, so they certainly could access whatever information they want and then contribute, if they can.

    Plenty of Indians, Chinese, Eastern Europeans etc. make their way from their native countries to Silicon Valley to contribute. What proportion make it to Silicon Valley from Subsaharan Africa?

    0%.

  267. Dan says:

    Extraordinary claims should require extraordinary proof. The claims seen here seem to contradict most of what is known so the burden is especially high, and clearly not met.

    Chandia Chisala, a native African, could make a much better argument through actual achievement, such as by being the first person of African descent ever to win a Nobel Science prize.

    It is depressing that so many blacks use their education to try to advance equalist arguments through debate, rather than quietly getting to work making important contributions to science or technology. The latter would be more persuasive.

  268. I haven’t bothered to read all the comments, but has anyone else noticed that there is some massive data fraud going on. Chanda Chisala’s data points do not corroborate one another and in fact conflicts heavily. More damningly, he didn’t even bother to even convincingly fake some of the so-called “data”. For example Figure 6 has the Luganda’s passing at 75% in 2009, only to drop to 33% in 2010 and then rise back to 83% in 2011. Or the laughable 100% Igbo pass rate in 2009. Or the 0% for the Lingala in 2009 only to dramatically rise to 50% in 2010.

    Table 7 prepared by another black African has purported national averages that do not even match up with the Grauniad.

    Instead of posting questionable snippets of even more questionable data, you might as well go direct to the source.

    http://www.ukcat.ac.uk/App_Media/uploads/pdf/UKCAT%20Annual%20Report%20Final%20Low%20Res.pdf

    Standardized cognitive test administered annually to all medical students (not some dodgy power point put together in 5 minutes).

    Page 13

    UK White mean – 2737.96 with a standard deviation of 268.15
    UK Black mean – 2430.79

    Slightly more than a full standard deviation in cognitive means with a sufficiently representative national sample size.

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
    , @FirstPerson
  269. anon • Disclaimer says:

    IQ is overly overrated and intelligence itself is never fully understood. It’s alway interpreted in simple and narrow narratives.

    Essentially an IQ of 100 or 50 is meaningless. After all, human’s worth in their manners, ethics and behavior regardless of IQ.

    Take Tony Blair, for instance, he is very intelligent man and successful as well, but he’s not exactly a role model material.

  270. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @pumpkinperson

    Creation of “israel” was never smart, even for the fraudulent ashkanazi “intelligence”….

  271. Dipwill says:
    @Stan D Mute

    It’s really hard to take you seriously when you contrast this with comments you’ve made elsewhere, such as this one: http://www.unz.com/freed/are-white-men-gods-ii/#comment-991943

    Underneath the supposedly well-rounded criticism you present is a belief that basically amounts to “They’re retarded monkeys who never went beyond the stone age. Their greatest achievement, which they literally boast about all the time, is the supersoaker- AND THEY NEVER INVENTED THE WHEEL!!! Because that’s the ultimate barometer for the achivement of an early civilization, and isn’t ultimately a pop culture measure of development that even learned academics repeat mindlessly.”

    I’m sure you also forgot to throw in things like they never had agriculture, or built roads, or had textiles, or multi-storied buildings, or any number of ultimately absurd, baseless claims about african history that get parroted endlessly with virtually no examination in these circles, from run of the mill morons to PhD’s.

    I don’t think it’s at all out of bounds to claim that africans are inherently less intelligent on average, but things like there being sizable variation among africans, or that their average IQ is nowhere near the retarded range (and likely above african americans), or that their history isn’t remotely like what you believe. You’re relatively extreme, but even beyond that, it does contradict much of what you see in these circles, and it’s really ironic you’ll admit to the existence of nigerian PhD’s when they should be virtually non-existent under this scenario. But I’m sure that ONE black Igbo student is in there due to “PC.”

    On that note, there is a disturbing, and in ways comical Christian Identity site known as “The Father’s Manifesto” (http://fathersmanifesto.net/) that has reams of pages on bizarre interpretations of standardized test scores and IQ scores, and really, truly seem to treat Richard Lynn’s work (and other figures, like the TIMSS and PISA) as gospel, and that every one of his scores is a perfect, genotypic measure of national IQ. In particular is a page on Obama that assumes Obama has an IQ of 132 (likely too high, but that’s besides the point) and since Kenya’s IQ is 71 beyond any doubt whatsoever, someone with an IQ from a population of functional retards is essentially a statistical impossibility. And to that end, Obama must be mentally retarded: https://israeliteknight.wordpress.com/obamas-iq-is-71-max/

    “It simply boggles the imagination for us to be expected to believe that Obama was the ONE Kenyan in the entire world who scored not just one but TWO standard deviations higher than a place where NO Ghanan, Botswanan, nor South African ever ventured. To claim that his IQ is 132 IQ points, yet another standard deviation higher than the impossible, is the height of absurdity. It would make Obama more valuable as a Wringly Brothers’ Circus freak than a six legged elephant. Yet that’s exactly the claim that his presidential campaign made, and you should be embarrassed to the hilt to see so many of your fellow countrymen fall for this vicious circus act.”

    “By what process did Obama achieve something that NO African of either race has ever achieved, an IQ between 127 and 132 IQ points as his ads claimed? Where could his White mother possibly have come from to produce such an offspring? Even worse, if she’s a Russian jew or an Israeli as the rumors indicate, then she’s from a race which scores even lower than Whites, and much lower than Whites from the Netherlands. Israel (where the vast majority of the population of her race are) scored only 442 in PISA Math, a whopping 107 points lower than Hong Kong and only 36 points higher than Mexico whose average IQ is only 87. Even IF we would expect Obama’s IQ to be an average of the IQ’s of his Black father and jewish mother, the very BEST we could expect using this logic is that his IQ is only 82, not 127 nor 133.”

    It’s worth noting that the person behind this also believes ashkenazi jews have IQ’s comparable to african-americans, and apparently, Obama’s mother is jewish.

    I’m familiar with adages for when reality becomes indistinguishable from parody, but I believe there’s a term for when you see things that under normal regards are only used for highlighting the absurdity of an extreme argument, yet you will have someone make these exact arguments, with all measures of what are normally seen as statistical improbability, completely seriously and without any hint of irony. This is what you’re seeing here, someone highlighting how unlikely an intelligent person from a population where the average is retarded could exist, and actually believing that the only conclusion to be made is that the person in question (Obama, and by extension his father, and even his mother) is mentally retarded, and it’s all just a massive PR fraud, and it’s so embarrassing for anybody to believe he isn’t a drooling retard.

    This is the reality of what you must take into account if you are to believe african IQ scores as literal, and who better to highlight this than a mentally ill cult member? The reality is that the african IQ scores that put them as 80 or less are simply insane, and the people who are largely responsible for them are ultimately charlatans. It’s also worth noting that Jensen, that paragon of objectivity, couldn’t help but embrace these figures himself, and later on with Rushton argued that the africa-american average really could be 78, because there’s an ultra-retarded subset in inner cities that has gone unnoticed for decades. Somehow.

  272. @NYC

    You have misunderstood regression towards the mean with regards to the breeder’s equation. It only happens in the first generation. This is because for a given pair of parents higher in a trait than their population of origin, some of this is due to non-additive heritable factors. The effect of these factors ‘do not breed true’. However, in the next generation, the new population has a different mean and there can be no regression to any mean below this.

    E.g. imagine a total population of individuals with IQ 100. Then we select all of those with IQ = 120. We take this somewhere and start a colony. They breed with each other and produce some children. Let’s say narrow heritability for IQ in this environment is 50%. Their children will thus regress 50% towards their parents’ population of origin mean, which is 100. I.e. they will have a mean of 110 IQ.

    Then all the parents die and the next generation breeds. They breed with each other, so the mean parental IQ is 110. The mean population IQ of the parents is also 110. So there will be no regression in the children whose mean will also be 110.

    Here here. https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/the-breeders-equation/ I used the same numbers by accident. :p

    • Replies: @Dipwill
  273. Dipwill says:
    @Pseudonymic Handle

    I’m certain you don’t have any idea of how regression to the mean works- remarkably few people in these circles do, and you exhibit a particularly bad one. Unless the offspring keep engaging assortive mating, they’ll keep regressing over the generations- I think you’re confusing the phenomenon of lower IQ offspring (who are bound to happen to some degree in average or above average couples) moving down the social ladder with the immediate offspring of outlier parents having lower IQ’s. I haven’t made it far in this comment thread, but I can imagine people argue similar sentiments. People in these discussions frequently allude to the phenomenon of the offspring of upper-class blacks doing poorly on standardized tests, but what this assumes is that the black upper-class operates on a cyclical dynamic of social mobility wherein high IQ childen are born to low IQ parents, manage to get out of poverty by the time they can marry and have kids, and then their children are like their parents and subsequently become poor again. The black upper class does not function like this at all, and this becomes even more absurd if you think this applies to immigrants- it’s even harder to make it out of those countries and achieve any degree of prosperity, so do you think we’re just getting that tiny sliver that somehow managed to?

    Jensen, I can’t help but feel is contradicting his own work, and likely is referring to what supposedly turns up in SAT scores. Here is where he contradicts his own work, and a case where the regression arguments look really ridiculous: https://web.archive.org/web/20071116111607/http://www.vdare.com/taylor/071113_stumped.htm

    “Among blacks, IQ regresses to a mean of 85 rather than 100. So a black who has a high enough IQ to be comfortably middle class—say 120—is much further out toward the IQ extreme for his group than a white with an IQ of 120. Which means the pull towards the mean is much more powerful for the children of smart blacks than it is for the children of equally smart whites. ”

    Taylor is being disingenuous here, in that an IQ of 120 should be enough to make one comfortably upper class, but here this is just a starter- here is where he basically shoots himself in the foot:

    ” In his book, The g Factor, [Page 471] Arthur Jensen gives a striking example of regression to the mean. He collected the IQ scores of all the elementary school students in one California school district. He then picked out all the students—both black and white—with IQs of 120, a score well above the white mean but even further above the black mean. He found that the average IQ scores for the brothers and sisters of these children was 113 for the white children and 99 for the blacks.

    It was to be expected that siblings have lower IQs than the hotshots. But these figures show just how much more freakish it is for black than white children to have IQs of 120. These very smart blacks were, on average, 21 points ahead of their brothers and sisters; the whites were only seven points ahead.”

    Taylor bothers to cite an actual, documented case of regression, and it turns out they didn’t regress to 85- it was 99. That should be enough to make one more like comfortably middle class, and the picture of regression would look more like this- if the offspring of 120 IQ white parents score 7 points lower on average, then regression 20 points out from an average should be about 7 points. That means the offspring of 105 IQ blacks should score on average at 98, and 100 IQ blacks, regression should be virtually non-existent. Regression at 115 should be even higher than 99.

    So where does the idea that the offspring of smart blacks are scoring so close to the average of 85? Why is Jensen claiming, in contradiction to his own research, that the offspring of upper class blacks have lower IQ’s than lower class whites? Most of these ideas are based upon SAT scores, and to be honest, I don’t know why they look the way they do. But the SAT has for some time not been an accurate gauge of achievement, and it stands in contrast to direct, verifiable measurements of familial IQ in these regards or many other measurements of social mobility. Here is a good example of this thinking, expanding on Taylor’s piece: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009231.html

    ” I think it means that, though exceptional blacks can make it to the middle and upper middle class, their offspring will tend to sink to lower SES levels, so that, though we will always have a (relatively small) black middle class, blacks who move into the higher SES levels will not be able to establish middle class lineages. The establishment of an enduring, hereditary black middle class was the great hope of the sixties, and an early justification for affirmative action. The argument went as follows: “AA is morally problematic, but once the pump is primed, we won’t need it any more.” What we may be witnessing here is the last gasp of the Sixties egalitarian fantasy, at least as far as black academic performance is concerned. As can be seen from the Wikipedia graph, all of the above applies also to Hispanics.

    This is the reality of regression arguments, that upper class lineages among blacks should be rarities. But they aren’t. And if you want to be accurate, the same issues going purely by SAT scores are much the same for hispanics, and even whites have issues with “regression”:

    This SAT chart groups all asians together too. If it was only east asians, the gap would be even greater. But do whites have any difficulties establishing upper class lineages?

    On the other hand, Jensen, as I mentioned in a prior comment, was more than willing to argue with Rushton that african-americans are actually 78 on average, so maybe he wasn’t as honest of a researcher as many people like to make out.

  274. Dipwill says:
    @Emil O. W. Kirkegaard

    I probably should have replied to NYC’s comment with my regression post, since it was even more relevant with what I was addressing. People in these circles have some absolutely bizarre understandings of regression- in the most extreme cases, I’ve seen it used to justify the idea “good” blacks (not just in terms of IQ) are anomalies and their offspring are bound to regress, so we shouldn’t take any chances with them.

  275. Dipwill says:
    @Joe Davis

    All of them excluding the khoisan, pygmies, and hadza had iron smelting before colonialism, and iron smelting goes back a long time in SS africa and was possibly developed indigenously. He also couldn’t help making a dig about polygamy even though that is intractable with the form of agriculture practiced in SS africa, which is intractable with it’s widespread use of iron smelting, and the millions of people shipped across the atlantic, which would be impossible without some urbanization (of which there actually was a lot).

    The proof is in the pudding that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and instead likes to trot out the same pathetic memes about african history that people like him never bother to reexamine- especially there being “no discernible civilization” even today, which he’d find to be incorrect if he bothered to look up african cities on Flickr, skyscraper city, google images etc. or looked at Botswana on google maps.

    • Replies: @Deduction
  276. Deduction says:
    @Dipwill

    Maybe if the topic were not so taboo it would be easier to educate the crazies.

  277. Deduction says:
    @Dipwill

    The Nigerians I know in London mostly come from upper class lineages and have smart brothers and smart sisters. They do not regress to a Nigerian range because their genes are nothing like the Nigerian mean.

    How is this hard for anyone to understand?

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
  278. Deduction says:
    @Dipwill

    The term Ancient Civilization is a bit relative. SS Africa was not Rome, Persia or the Middle Kingdom, that is for sure.

  279. @IA

    Greek art was hugely influenced by other earlier cultures (e.g. the Kouros statues, but there are other examples). It was not by any means an independent development.

    In any case, the art mentioned by Svenson has been hugely praised by Europeans ever since they first laid eyes on it for a number of other impressive qualities of that art that you conveniently ignored and did not mention (or are simply ignorant of). In any case, there are bodies in their art shown with “weight shift” though not in the exact pose of some Greek sculptures, because unlike Greek sculptures, these ones do not derive from Egyptian and West Asian models.

    And while we don’t have examples of their painting to show anymore, the written evidence suggests they actually did have painting, though it has not survived the ravages of their environment, nor the wars and foreign conquest that happened in that region.

  280. IA says:

    Greek art and western culture in general has had far greater influence on other cultures, to this very day, than vice versa.

    Who said Ancient Greek art was independent? I merely pointed out the error of the other commenter.

    African Art was considered crude and primitive until around 1907 when Picasso painted Les Demoiselles d’Avignon. Picasso, like many other communists and nihilists, rejected traditional western culture unlike, say, the Pre-Raphaelites. So, the Euros who began to value African Art did so out of hatred of their own traditions.

    There is no example of weight shift, i.e., gravity, in African, or any other culture, outside of Greek/western influence. Africans were far too primitive to make easel paintings until exposure through European colonial burden even though the Greeks invented this art in the 3rd or 4th century BC. But, thank you for your reply.

    • Replies: @FirstPerson
  281. @IA

    “Greek art and western culture in general has had far greater influence on other cultures, to this very day, than vice versa.”

    This was mostly achieved through imperialism. But even while imperialism was going on in the 19th century some authors were willing to admit the huge influence of other cultures on early European cultures. As just one example:

    http://www.digital.library.upenn.edu/women/edwards/pharaohs/pharaohs-5.html

    “Who said Ancient Greek art was independent? I merely pointed out the error of the other commenter.”

    He said that this art was “perhaps” more sophisticated than European art of the same time. First, he was clearly giving his opinion and he included a “perhaps.” Second, it is obvious from the context that he was referring to medieval Europe since he said “of the same time.”

    “African Art was considered crude and primitive until around 1907 when Picasso painted Les Demoiselles d’Avignon. Picasso, like many other communists and nihilists, rejected traditional western culture unlike, say, the Pre-Raphaelites. So, the Euros who began to value African Art did so out of hatred of their own traditions.”

    This is completely false. The Benin Bronzes were praised immediately after more Europeans became aware of them after they were taken from Benin, before 1907. Same thing with the Ife art, the Igbo-Ukwu art except that awareness of these came later. And Europeans were aware of the Benin art even before 1907. In fact, some European visitors to Benin centuries earlier had praised the art that they had seen. I only brought this up because it is quite ironic in the light of your post.

    “There is no example of weight shift, i.e., gravity, in African, or any other culture, outside of Greek/western influence.”

    Laughable. But I think you’ve shown that you know little about African art, and probably even art in general, so there is no point even going back and forth with you on this.

    “Africans were far too primitive to make easel paintings until exposure through European colonial burden even though the Greeks invented this art in the 3rd or 4th century BC. But, thank you for your reply.”

    Funny. There are Nubian paintings older than the 4th century BC anyway, so this point makes no sense. And I doubt you know anything about Africa to be judging what Africans were or were not capable of in art.

    • Replies: @IA
  282. IA says:
    @FirstPerson

    I suppose this is what they teach in public schools and universities these days.

  283. @Dipwill

    You are misinterpreting Jensen and Taylor here I think.

    What Taylor is talking about is that AAs, as a group, regress towards 85 (their population mean). This does not mean that if we take a specific sample of AAs, they will regress to exactly 85. Indeed, the value they regress to is determined by their population mean, narrow heritability and how select the group is.

    In the case with the 120 IQ group and their siblings. For AAs, using standard numbers, they are 120 – 85 = 35 IQ above their mean, i.e. 2.33 d. The EAs are 120 – 100 = 20 IQ above their mean, i.e. 1.33 d.

    Then we take half of these values since we are assuming a narrow heritability of 50%, which gives us 2.33 / 2 = 1.165 d and .665 d respectively. Then we convert to the IQ scale and add the mean, i.e. 1.165 * 15 = 17.5 IQ and 10 IQ, which gives expected means after regression of 103 and 110 respectively. These are reasonably close to the values Jensen reports of 99 and 113. AAs regressed a bit more, EAs a bit less than expected. I don’t know what the sample sizes are, but if these are real differences, it implies that the narrow heritability of AA IQ was a bit lower and that for EAs a bit higher. One can algebraically solve for these values if necessary. I’ll take a guess at about 45% and 55%.

    No noticeable (broad) heritability difference was found in a recent meta-analysis tho. http://openpsych.net/OBG/2014/09/genetic-and-environmental-determinants-of-iq-in-black-white-and-hispanic-americans-a-meta-analysis-and-new-analysis/

    By the way, an IQ of 120 does not mean the same for AAs as for EAs with regards to occupation. The centiles follow the same distribution for occupations within the groups, not the values. So, e.g. if we say that doctors are on average 1.67 SD above, then EA doctors will be at 125 and AA doctors at 110.

    • Replies: @Dipwill
    , @No_0ne
  284. It may be a little late now, but I have had a longer look at the supportive data regarding African scholastic attainment in the UK, and I find it hard to track down many of the details required for a proper evaluation, including things like sample sizes, inclusion criteria and the like. Until more detail can be provided, it would be unwise to rely on the reported findings.
    Read it all here:

    http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/chanda-chisala-african-hereditarian.html#comment-form

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
  285. @Dipwill

    I encountered that Father’s Manifesto website years ago. I remember he used to comment on various old, defunct HBD websites. The guy that runs that site is definitely a total lunatic who is incapable of basic statistical analysis, so he just makes up numbers that fit his worldview and runs with them. He in no way represents the vast majority of HBDers or IQ researchers.

    • Replies: @Deduction
  286. Dipwill says:
    @Emil O. W. Kirkegaard

    I don’t think I am at all. If we’re to take Jensen’s study as a case of documented regression, then regression at any noticeable degree occurs at over one SD away from the population average. At 35 points out from the AA average, the average score their offspring are expected to regress to is 99. There is little room for regression to the average of 85, meaning that few offspring with IQ’s of 120 are born to parents with IQ’s of 85. It isn’t worthwhile to speak of their overall average in this case. This is even further underscored when you take into consideration Taylor’s entire article, that the main reason for the children of middle-class AA’s falling into poverty is because they’re regressing in IQ. Even putting aside the ridiculous cyclical model that implies, this isn’t about upper-class or high IQ AA’s, these are middle class ones, who should generally be around 100, and should see very, very little regression, and even regression with the offspring of high IQ/upper-class ones shouldn’t be falling so much into poverty. This is where Taylor is also distinctively disingenuous when he remarks about an IQ of 120 being enough to make one comfortably middle class.

    Jensen is doing much the same here, as his study Taylor cites does not support the idea the offspring of wealthy blacks have lower IQ’s than lower-class white children, making them likely in the high 80′s- not 99. He is likely basing this purely on SAT scores.

    I think it might be fair to say Jensen and Taylor are being dishonest.

    I also don’t know where you get the idea AA doctors should have IQ’s of 110, a full 115 points lower than whites, or why that is relevant.

    • Replies: @Dipwill
    , @swank
  287. @Dave

    Outside of hardcore STEM (mathematics, physics, maybe engineering majors), the correlation between IQ and grade point average is probably pretty low– maybe in the .2-.4 range depending on the major (I’m speculating somewhat). And if you restrict the IQ range to people who can attend and graduate from 4 year colleges– basically, people above the 100-105 IQ threshold– the correlation is even lower.

    Of course, the ability to attain a high GPA is still highly genetic in nature like IQ, it’s just based on other qualities like conscientiousness and work ethic rather than IQ.

  288. Dipwill says:
    @Dipwill

    If I could clarify a bit further, IQ going by the SAT is seeing the offspring high IQ/SES blacks regressing to the high 80′s, about 10 points lower than Jensen’s California study. In neither case are they regressing to 85, but really, I think a regression of about 99 is more realistic.

    I don’t know why the SAT scores look the way they do, and I’m aware of stories of the children of upper-class blacks doing poorly academically with measurements beyond the SAT (this was a major focus of John Ogbu’s work). But regression only occurs in the first generation, and it implies an almost entirely cyclical dynamic of the black upper class, as noted in the Amnation post. That is not born out by virtually any other measurement of social mobility, and even beyond Jensen’s California study, I have never gotten the impression of any familial study of IQ implying regression being that dramatic. I mean, wouldn’t the offspring of high IQ whites (30-35 points above average) on average dramatically regress like that? It just doesn’t make much sense.

  289. Deduction says:
    @Lion of the Judah-sphere

    One might as well take one of those black people were flying around in spaceships 10,000 years ago nuts and tar Chisala with that. It would make as little sense.

  290. @Duke of Qin

    Agreed.

    I also mentioned that the UK data is notoriously unreliable due to grade inflations and other abnormal sampling methods that have been going on for the last decade. Chandla Chisala just takes those for granted.

    I’ve skipped most of the comments here as I suspects it is just another nonsensical argument relying on some garbage-in-garbage-out data.

  291. @Deduction

    But what you said is just so against common sense.

    The same Nigerians in London example you gave – if choose the 2rd gen 130 IQ Nigerians breed together, their offspring would have IQ mean ” nothing like” the mean of the 1st gen Nigerians, right?… and so do to the 3th gen, 4th gen… if what you claimed were true, then within not too many generations, any race or sub-race could breed in this way some “super-race” with avg IQ of 300+ ROFL.

    • Replies: @swank
  292. @Duke of Qin

    http://www.ukcat.ac.uk/App_Media/uploads/pdf/UKCAT%20Annual%20Report%20Final%20Low%20Res.pdf

    Standardized cognitive test administered annually to all medical students (not some dodgy power point put together in 5 minutes).

    Page 13

    UK White mean – 2737.96 with a standard deviation of 268.15
    UK Black mean – 2430.79

    Slightly more than a full standard deviation in cognitive means with a sufficiently representative national sample size.”

    You seem to have completely misunderstood the argument in the article by Chisala. This is not pertinent because it does not separate “Black” into groups based on national origin. Most blacks in the UK are not Nigerian or Ghanaian in origin but from other populations that do no not exhibit the same level of educational achievement and most prospective black medical students and black students in general are not at all likely to be Ghanaian or Nigerian in origin.

    • Replies: @Chad Smith
  293. Immigrant from former USSR [AKA "Florida Resident"] says:
    @Dipwill

    Dear Dipwill:
    Where did you get the statement
    “But regression only occurs in the first generation” ?
    Can you cite
    a) some studies supporting it, or
    b) biological reasons for it ?

    I am holding myself from citing anecdotal evidence for or against that statement.
    A friend likes to express the idea of regression in this phrase:
    “Nature takes a rest on the children”,
    meaning that Mother Nature spent great efforts creating an outstanding individual.

    Only the absence of Oedipus complex and the love of probability theory
    allows me not to take it personally in both directions
    from the dear (and very well wishing) friend of our family.

    Your F.r.

    • Replies: @swank
  294. swank says:
    @Immigrant from former USSR

    ““But regression only occurs in the first generation” ?”

    The general idea is that if one trait (IQ) is not completed correlated with another trait (“genetic IQ”), the higher (or lower) the value you select for IQ will involve both a “genetic IQ” that deviates from the mean and an “environmental IQ” that deviates from the mean.

    If some portion of that EIQ is random, (to make it easy, just assume all of it) then an individual with a high overall IQ probably had a high genotypic IQ -and- got lucky with a high environmental IQ. If h^2 is .64 then someone 2 SDs + on overall IQ will have + 1.6 SDs genotypic IQ and + 1.2 SDs environmental IQ. If that entire 1.2 SDs is random, then that fellow’s progeny will only be +1.6 genotypic IQ points above the mean. But they won’t regress past this point, because that represents their “true genotypic IQ.”

    In reality, though…regression does occur over multiple generations because an individual who regressed in this generation will find someone else who “got lucky” in this generation. So the actual genotypic IQ of the progeny will decrease. Our 1.6SD genotypic IQ fellow, if he randomly chooses a 1.6SD “phenotypic IQ” gal, will find that his children regress to a lower genotypic mean.

  295. swank says:
    @Dave

    ” seemed to be average IQ and got a ~70th percentile score on the SAT.”

    Then she wouldn’t be “average IQ.”

    “How important is IQ, REALLY, for academic success?”

    It’s not particularly important. In pretty much all majors, the correlation between IQ and GPA is .4. However, the majors tend to self-sort by test scores. So, theoretically, math majors should have much higher SATs/IQs on average, and so on down the line, which restricts range. If you corrected the correlations, they would rise, and the more range restricted a major is, the higher the correlation would be.

    Some people say it supports a “threshold” theory, where, once you reach a certain level (i.e. minimum competence threshold in a certain field), it doesn’t matter as much — incidentally, that’s consistent with your story about the girl with an ‘average’ IQ/70th tile score being a perfect score and you having ‘perfect scores’ but not being that great of a student.

    I don’t think it supports that. I just think it supports the fact that if you are roughly similar to your colleagues in one skill, then other skills are going to account more for the variation in performance. So it really doesn’t tell us about what is necessary to grok the material itself.

  296. swank says:
    @Dipwill

    ” also don’t know where you get the idea AA doctors should have IQ’s of 110, a full 115 points lower than whites, or why that is relevant.”

    He assumes it because he assumes that the “gap” exists in every occupation, probably because the gap exists at different SES levels. But when dealing with doctors and lawyers, you are also dealing with anonymously graded licensure tests (and in many cases anonymous grades), so those differentials are likely much less…if they exist at all.

    But the data regarding SES is misleading as Nisbett pointed out: a white in the top quintile of income is likely twice as wealthy as a black in the top quintile. Whites and blacks who make similar amounts of money also live in much different neighborhoods. Including more of this information — neighborhood and family quality, etc. does eliminate the gap.

  297. swank says:
    @PandaAtWar

    It’s slightly more subtle than that. The key point is that immigration in the UK has become less selective over time. So, to the extent that wave 1 was super-selected, wave 2 was less selected. And if wave 2 was less selected (but still above their means), then wave 2 had a lower genotypic iq. If wave 1′s children (who already regressed) and wave 2 mated, that should produce further regression to the mean. And the mean is phenotypic iq, which regardless of genotypic IQ, they would regress too…because of the non-genotypic portion of phenotypic IQ.

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
  298. @swank

    What I raised was just an extreme case of counter examples for @deduction. If what you say is true, then shall we say no matter how, the avg IQ (both genotypic and phenotypic) tends to regress in some generations time towards the indigenous population mean, as long as they marry within? Whether the 1st gen is highly selected or not doesn’t really affect this conclusion actually.

  299. Panda didn’t finish reading the article except the 1st paragraph and the conclusion before starting commenting. Panda’s bad – didn’t notice this chart by CHANDA CHISALA until now:

    What? Ibo African 88% Vs Chinese-national 84% in 2007 GCSE?

    Mission impossible, Mr Chisala, give it up now. LoL

    You may argue that Ibo are amongst the best of Africans, but up against the Chinese in UK? Not only impossible, but also not even close!

    2007′s Chinese average in the UK was still average Cantonese (from HK) mainly, with the rest being some overseas Chinese (e.g. Taiwan, China mainland and SE Asia – many of them were highly selected). They were smarter than you on avg and they studied MUCH harder than you on avg – guaranteed, hence there was no chance whatsoever for Ibo, sorry.

    If this chart of 2007 GCSE data shows something special after all, it shows the following:

    A. there was a massive fraud going on with 2007 GCSE test, or

    B. there were abnormal sampling acitivities going on in 2007 GCSE, big time! or

    C. both 1 and 2, or

    D. Chinese-national in UK collectively, or on average, had diarrhea on 2007 GCSE test dates.

    Panda would recommend choosing B, or C. ROFL.

  300. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    @[email protected], your last comments are illogical, unscientific, and purely bigoted.
    chisala tried using results of samples that were available over s period of time. the outcome of his findings may change over s period of time. by the way, what efforts have you made in addressing this IQ puzzle? punching your keyboard criticising seems the easiest and only thing you have done so far.

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
  301. It’s an interesting post, with some good data, but you’ve greatly exaggerated how new this is or how threatening it is to hereditarianism. Your strong anti-hereditarian case is based almost entirely on GCSE evidence, but the GCSE is not strongly g-loaded. When you directly present what seems to be IQ data, we see the same old pattern: Chinese at the top, followed by whites and non-muslim [i.e. non-inbred] Indians, followed by muslim [i.e. inbred] Indians, followed by blacks. It’s exactly the same hierarchy as in the United States, with the only exception being that Indians just match whites rather than beat them.

    Now what is interesting is that in the UK the gap is much smaller. Looking at the quant and non-verbal scores to eliminate bias against non-native English speakers, it’s only about 5 points for the worst performing groups, vs 15 points in the US. The most likely explanation is that modern immigration policy, and the requirement that all immigrants pay their own fare, has filtered for IQ better than chattel slave importation.

    If you disagree, how do you explain Indians doing worse in the UK than in the US? Does the UK environment somehow make Indians dumber, in the same way it apparently makes blacks smarter? Or was the UK just less selective with citizens from its former empire than the US which essentially only admits Indians under H1B?

    Still, it’s good news for the UK. It is unlikely that the UK will develop as poisonous a race culture as the US, precisely because the underlying hereditary differences aren’t all that big.

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
    , @Jm8
  302. @Anonymous

    @[email protected], your last comments are illogical, unscientific, and purely bigoted.
    chisala tried using results of samples that were available over s period of time. the outcome of his findings may change over s period of time. by the way, what efforts have you made in addressing this IQ puzzle? punching your keyboard criticising seems the easiest and only thing you have done so far.

    Allow Panda explain:

    The outcome of Panda’s findings can stand the test of time much longer than his findings. If Panda’s findings are “illogical, unscientific and purely bigoted”, then what you say about his findings supported by obviously doggy 2007 GCSE data? Say, amateurish chalantan trying to muddle through the day taking every dumb and fool here for a ride? What sheer contempt for people!

    The outcome of Panda’s findings is based on empirical knowledge ( or at least direct anecdotal experiences and intutitions of countless people from different parts of the wrold across time), which by definition is neither “illogical” nor outright “unscientific”.

    And you have no idea how much Panda loves being “pure bigoted”! Present Panda with good untempered data, otherwise you’ll find Panda is very purely bigoted indeed. ROFL

    Nevertheless, the efforts that Panda put in this IQ “puzzle” are precisely like what you called out – “critising” (the sample data he used). That’s right, are you aware , btw, that critique is an integral part of science? LoL.

  303. @Oliver Cromwell

    Still, it’s good news for the UK. It is unlikely that the UK will develop as poisonous a race culture as the US, precisely because the underlying hereditary differences aren’t all that big.

    Panda does hope you were tougue in cheek when you said that. LoL. Just wait until the self-claimed Indian “high” castes such as Brahmin goddess land on the UK soil en masse (there’re still 100s millions of them waiting in India), then you’ll see how fast they’ll bulldoze every “low” castes and “middle” caste, ethnic Indians or not, in their sight.

    • Replies: @Oliver Cromwell
  304. Jm8 says:
    @Oliver Cromwell

    “It’s an interesting post, with some good data, but you’ve greatly exaggerated how new this is or how threatening it is to hereditarianism. Your strong anti-hereditarian case is based almost entirely on GCSE evidence, but the GCSE is not strongly g-loaded.”

    The Maths and English GCSE is has a fairly high correlation to “g” at about .7-.8 (.67 English, .77 Math; page: 16, table: 2) similar to the SAT.

    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Intelligence-and-educational-achievement.pdf

    Intelligence and Educational Achievement
    Deary, Ian J.; Strand, Steve; Smith, Pauline; Fernandes, Cres
    Intelligence, v35 n1 p13-21 Jan-Feb 2007

  305. @Jm8

    Intelligence and Educational Achievement
    Deary, Ian J.; Strand, Steve; Smith, Pauline; Fernandes, Cres
    Intelligence, v35 n1 p13-21 Jan-Feb 2007

    Again 2007? ROFL.

    There gotta be something very wrong in year 2007 UK GCSE, either deliberate massive grade inflations, or deliberate blurring of terminologies involved, or deliberate mis-management of sampling process or the abusing of terminologies of the final representation of samplings,… or any combination/s of above. Dunno which, but Panda tells ya. Dig them out! Give the Chinee-National pupils of 2007 GCSE test the result they truly desearved. Otehrwise, this 2007 Igbo “proof” will become the solid iron proof to prove anything they want for the years to come.

  306. one must remember that indigenous american negroes were bred from erstwhile captive slaves; said slaves were either too stupid, or inept, to avoid capture, confinement, sale, and enslavement by superior african negroes.
    as stupidity is apparently a dominant gene in the negro population, it is therefore to be expected that american negroes would be dumber than their african counterparts; the fact that caribbean negroes are smarter than american negroes i attribute to caribbean negroes centuries-long habitation amongst the french.

  307. @Jm8

    Yet lower than actual IQ tests direct results from which (with huge sample size) are presented.

    So on what grounds is the author asking me to throw out higher quality data in favour of lower quality, more politicised data?

  308. @PandaAtWar

    In the first place I don’t think that high IQ elites are very threatening. But why do you expect there to be a Brahmin invasion? There have been no restrictions on Brahmins coming to the UK up to now, and the income gap between India and the UK is actually reducing at the present time.

    I would guess that the supply of ultra high IQ Brahmins is actually pretty small and mostly they choose to go to the US instead.

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
  309. Evolution, heritability: Intelligence vs Height
    +Africa/North Eurasia comparative

    Please pardon my English, I am a French speaker from France and I haven’t wrote such a long piece in English for a while.

    As shown from twin studies and empirical observation, height is a highly heritable polygenic trait. We can all see that there are taller families and shorter families, yet when it comes to race, Nigerians have an average height similar to the Chinese, both are shorter than the Korean and the Senegalese who are much shorter than the Dutch but taller than the Portuguese. Not only are height averages overlapping between racial groups but they are also greatly instable over time and subjected to strong environemental influences, mainly nutrition and general health.

    The fact that racial groups may overlap in height or intelligence means that this traits have not been under the same environemental evolutionary pressures as visible racial characteristics. If Europeans had evolved into an intellectualy superior race in adaptation to their environement, then the most intelligent African could not be as intelligent as the less intelligent European, much as the lightest skinned non-albino African is always darker than the darkest skinned European. In addition, all individuals within a race should have very similar intellectual levels and intelligent Africans should be as rare as albinos.

    If the IQ gap does not come from evolution, then its genetic component is very speculative because apart from traits selected under environemental pressure, genetic variation greatly ignores racial categories (blood types are randomly distributed among races for instance) and most of it occures within a group, especially Subsaharan Africans who concentrate the vast majority of human genetic diversity.

    The only alleles suspected to be associated with intelligence that have been identified so far only give minimal advantage to their carriers and were found in quite small percentages of the studied populations. +3 IQ points for 10% of a group is only +0.3% for the whole group and the proportion is too small to argue for an evolutionary selective process.

    The hereditarians say that North Eurasians have developped a superior intelligence in order to survive in a colder and supposedly harsher climate. That only makes sense to them because they experience winter and know it as the tougher season in the latitudes wher they and their readers live. What they seem to ignore is that tropical and equatorial climates are harsh and hostile environements quite far from the postcard image that they have in mind.

    Endemic malaria, extreme heat combined with high humidity, low fertility of soils without chemicals…

    They believe that prehistoric African hunter gatherers lived in a kind of Eden Garden where everything was there for them to pick while actually, in the extreme biodiversity of the rainforest there are as many deadly plants as there are nutritive ones and all have to be found within countless of valueless plants or flora with ambivalent properties that can be beneficial or harmful depending on the quantity or the preparation. Hunting and orientation are also complicated by the low visibility in the dense rainforest, hunters most often chase game that they don’t see and must grab information from secondary sources to track their prey and then be able to find their way back to their camp. As a whole, a rainforest is one of the most complex and hostile environement that exists and that explains why most of the uncontacted tribes currently existing are in Amazonia, Borneo or Papua New Guinea. This is also from this environement that came the last evolution of the hominid family (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) that has remplaced archaic varieties that had been living under cold and temperate climates for millenas before. It is also there that the most intelligent non-human primates live

    In comparaison, Europe, even during ice ages presented less challenges: clear forests or open terrains, low diversity of wild foods, high availability of animals to hunt like mammoth, deers, hog… In the winter, there is still enough fungi, berries or insects to feed and sustain a hunter-gatherer population. During the ice ages when Europeans had to survive in the tundra or the taïga (the environments of the Inuits who are not really noticed for their achievments), Africans were subjected to severe drought that caused the desertification of most of the continent. I do belive that the absence of water is more problematic than low temperatures.

    So during the hunter-gatherer stage of human evolution, I see nothing that could have selected North Eurasians on the basis of intelligence whereas this is when evolution by natural selection had the most time to occure. The reason why intelligence can’t have been a naturally selected trait is that natural selection causes the potentially genetically gifted to die in infancy or shortly after puberty because they are phisically too weak to survive while mere brutes who are just smart enough to take part in hunting and gathering can thrive and reproduce. Remember that in these times, life expectancy was not over 30 years, infant mortality was terrific, the time for knowledge accumulation and transmission was short and individuals had little opportunity to express their individual IQ related skills, individuallity as a whole is actually meaningless in this type of societies.

    During agriculturalist stage, Europe and Noth-East Asia had fertile soils, moderate precipitations and a long growing season (winter is only 3 month) that give serious advantages for agricultural productivity. Moreover, these areas are shaped by narrow valleys and peninsulas that create the ideal conditions for high concentrations of populations that lead to more complex societies, all of this in a largely malaria-free environement. With such conditions for population growth (high availability and concentration of human capital) It is not surprising that Europe and East Asia ended up surpassing the Middle East in terms of civilizational development eventhough East Asia’s developpement appears quite inferior when we take its larger population and the much earlier begining of its civilization into account. In fact the most troubling with East Asia is the extreme staticity of its history.

    At the same time Subsaharan Africa has naturally oxyded low fertility soils, its seasons are extreme with 6 months of heavy rainfall and 6 months of drought when crops can’t grow, the only thing constant is heat, not the heat of a pleasant mediterranean summer but oven-like heat in the order of the fridge-like polar cold. Africa is a huge flat continental mass and that causes human dispersal instead of the concentration needed for social complexification. Have you ever noticed that large flat continental masses like pre-colonial Brazil,USA, Australia, Argentina or Siberia had limited civilizational development while the overcrowded Nile Valley, Honshu Island, Italy or Andine Altiplano had more complex societies ?

    But the worst of all I think is malaria, it even has altered the African genome giving better restistance but not immunity. Malaria is endemic, highly incapacitating and relapsing and Africa was almost under the constant conditions of a pandemic. While human concentration is crucial to civilization, human concentration also increases the incidence of malaria and the same goes for water : water from rivers and the even more dangerous static irrigation water. Europeans knew of Africa long before the Americas and yet could not colonize it, even India fell under their control before Africa and they had to wait until the developpement of anti-malarials to penetrate the interior of the continent. The Arabs have been in regular contact with Subsaharan Africa for centuries but could not establish themselves there either. To a lesser extent, tse-tse flies also impeded Africa’s development by the impossibility of keeping chattel in infested areas. Besides all of this, the slave trade contributed to maintaining very low population densities.

    Inspite of all of this, Africa, especially West Africa has made some appreciable achievements, the arts of the Ashanti, Igbos or Yorubas are quite remarkable, the Sahel had literate societies and exemples of monumental architecture. All those peoples have attained the iron age, manufactured textiles, created calendars, a lot have developped organized states and are absolutely not cavemen as you seem to believe. In contrast, pre-colonial Brazil or North America have remained very backward and took nothing from the Aztecs or the Incas, Neither did Siberian peoples who could have had contacts with China.

    Now Africa has great pains entering in the industrial age and its not suprising when we consider that before colonial rule became truly effective in the early 20th century african peoples only had on average reached the developement of the ancient Celtic peoples. Africa is experiencing the only one real big leap forwards that has ever happened in human history. You must realize that a country like Botswana came from a totally illiterate tribal society to a middle-income economy enjoying standards of living similar to Moldavia or Thaïland, all that in less that 100 years, and this happened in the context of an exceptional demographic boom that economic growth could not follow in many countries of this continent especially when 40-50% of the population is under age 15.

    But a country like Botswana is not just lucky for its diamonds, it is also endowed with a strong ethnic majority – the Setswana people – while most other African nations are mostly fictional, created by foreign powers ignoring ethnicities that are the strongest bases for common identification and stable government. Ethnic politics (tribalism), like racial politics consist in ruling by divide and prevent a development-focused leadership. What you must also aknowledge is that Africans don’t carry their lives like a burden, they know that people in other places have more material wealth but they are relatively contented with what they have and are not dedicating their lives to catching up with the west but failing because of inherent inferiority. They have just their own conceptions of what matters in life and deal resiliently with its hardships. If you only went to any country in Africa or met Africans overseas you would immediatly forget about the pretended mentally-retarded 70 average IQ or you would conclude that IQ has no meaning. Common folks there cope with life ingeniously and with great wisdom and I often wish the west could be a little more African-minded sometimes.

    Now it’s time to say a bit about the numbers, the average national IQs that the Pioneer Fund clique creates by selecting studies that fit their objectives and by producing estimations out of nowhere. First of all, serious researchers generally prefer first-hand data, this is not mandatory but when a real non-ideologic practical goal is pursued, this is better. When using second-hand data, scientists rather use studies from the same years and do not take data from various decades and then apply approximative statistical adjustments. More importantly, data selection must follow systematic methods and no double standard is acceptable, and this is the most criticizable aspect of the Pioneer Fund Clique’s pseudoscientifical efforts to demonstrate the undemonstrable. Examples of unsystematic selection are numerous and always intended to lower African or black Caribbean countries’ averages IQs while China’s well known unrepresentative PISA scores are found unquestionably relevant.

    It also seems like the Rushton, Jensen, Lynn and cie have magical powers since they have been able to find average IQs for impenetrable countries like North Korea or Somalia. Their argument is that IQ scores corelate so much between neighboring countries that it is possible to safely estimate the average IQ of a country by averaging that of its neighbors, but there are apparently exceptions to this rule like Haïti that without any data is given an IQ like it is million miles away from the Dominican Republic. Corelations between neighboring countries are various, GDP per capita, Climate, life expectancy, language family are relatively similar between neighboring countries, but since serious scientists are never trying to demonstrate the GDP of a race, the life expectancy of a race or the birth rate of a race, they do not create data for North Korea by averaging that of China and South Korea, they do not either create Mexican statistics with information from Indios and Metizos supplemented by Argentines to account for the white Mexican population.

    When data does not exist, it just does not exist and countries are put in the « no available data » category. Now I do not pretend that IQs should be equal around the world, it even makes no sense to me that Africans given their general health status and lower acces to education or many other first-world life improvements should magically be able to perform as well on IQ test as well fed Swedes, Chinese only-child cram schoolers or malaria-free Argentines. But I don’t trust Pioneer Fund’s IQ scores, and I do believe that the most intelligent people in the world are those who know that life is more than IQ and that humanity is more than races.

    So in the end, intelligence may be partly heritable, and I think we inherit it from parenting styles and by the adults who shape our future more than from our genes which in any case like for height can account for variability within a group but certainly not for variability between groups that we indentify by their adaptive traits. What the hereditarians really do not understand is that races are not million people large families that descend each one from distinct ancestors whose 160000xgrandchildren have evolved to become subspicies organizing their lives following their specific instincts.

    • Replies: @Jm8
    , @Deduction
    , @johan
  310. lol says:

    Lol that Panda guy is having a mental breakdown.

    The Sri Lankan Tamils though. They beasting. Arent they mostly Dalits?

  311. @Oliver Cromwell

    What I meant was that when more Indians come to the UK (they’re the biggest immigrant group in the UK right now), inevitablelly they’ll implement their caste system in the UK at a larger scale one way or another, to both British Indians and other British ethnities as well. The irony is that what do you think, for instance, a so-called Brahmin “high” caste with 88 IQ coming to the UK will treat a “low” caste British Indian who happens to have 95 IQ, or a Black British with 92 IQ? or a White British with 85 IQ, etc? He will most likely treat them as slaves, some quite literally, just like how he has been treating all the non-Brahmin “low” castes in India all his life.

    “Ultra high IQ Brahmins”? Don’t swallow this simple MSM scam if I were you. Several hundred millions of Brahmins in India have average IQ of probably 90 at best. The scam is that only the top end x% IQ of them (with abg IQ of >110) come to the US, which gives an false propaganda value that the whole Brahmin group somehow have “ultra high” IQ, comparing to the US average IQ 100 .

    In reality, the US Indians, as you said being the bigget intake of Brahmins, only have avg IQ of arguablely 110. If Brahmins as a group were anywhere close to having high IQ say 100, let alone “ultra high”, their US average would shoot up to 130 at least because they’re a highly selective bunch being the top end of their 100s of million-strong group in India. Simples, isn’t it? Alterantively think this way: France has avg IQ of 100, right? If the top x% of all French come to the US, the avg IQ of them I’d guess would be at least in the ballpark of 130.

    • Replies: @Oliver Cromwell
  312. Bill B. says:

    Hi,

    the piece was interesting, even if it wheeled out an “all blacks are dull” straw man.

    Can I say that British school leaving exams are a poor test of g given the softening down they have notoriously undergone in recent decades. The state education industry swings strongly to the left and tries ensure that every pupil is above average.

    The across-the-board leadership by girls over boys in the exams would suggest that it rewards the diligent, no?

    But, sure, there is a connection and – even allowing for many migrants being at the cleverer end of their home countries – the white school performance appears surprisingly bad.

    I have not seen anyone in the comments point out that Thomas Sowell reckons a great swath of white Britain has fallen into a whybother?/welfare/easy thrills mentality not unlike that of so many American ghetto blacks.

    I would add that mass immigration has clearly been a disaster for the white working class from whom education resources have been diverted and any signs of ethnic or even national pride stamped on very hard by the liberal teaching establishment.

    As someone pointed out above many of the smarter white Brits have left leaving the left-side of the bell curve people to wallow in the approved quasi-marxist cultural values that effectively discourages ambition whilst winking at the one percent.

    British society’s twisted values can be illustrated by noting the fake working-class accents affected by so many members of the hyper-educated elite in politics, the media and in academia. It says: We are earthy and raw and honest; but in reality throwing the now inconvenient white working class under the bus. (This partly explains Labour’s disastrous general election results.)

    All this fakery and it’s-hardly-worth-the-bother nonsense is of course mostly ignored by the “new Britons”.

    Bill

  313. @PandaAtWar

    The UK’s biggest immigrant group are subcontinental muslims who are outside the hindu caste system and generally have low IQs. I won’t make any comment on your estimates of Brahmin IQ, which I don’t have enough information to either contradict or agree with, but I think it is very unlikely that immigration of high caste hindus is going to be a big problem for the UK.

    Aside from the basic rarity of these brahmins and their lack of political power, the easy way out for a 95 IQ Indian is to marry a white.

  314. […] much discussed post The IQ Gap Is No Longer a Black and White Issue – from chanda chisala. see also Chanda Chisala: An African Hereditarian? – “If […]

  315. Jm8 says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    “Inspite of all of this, Africa, especially West Africa has made some appreciable achievements, the arts of the Ashanti, Igbos or Yorubas are quite remarkable,…”

    Don’t forget the Nok culture of central Nigeria (Jos Plateau) ca. 1,000 bc-200d, which smelted iron ca. 1,000 bc-200 ad ( one of the earliest iron metallurgy dates in West Af. after the Igbo and also thought now to be indigenous) also known for its hollow terracotta sculptures.

    http://archive.archaeology.org/1107/features/nok_nigeria_africa_terracotta.html

    https://www.google.com/search?q=nok+terracotta&biw=1212&bih=898&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMIiLG6yOPZxgIVi1weCh3tFQvu#tbm=isch&q=nok+culture+art

    • Replies: @Jm8
    , @Anti-Hereditarian
  316. Jm8 says:
    @Jm8

    correction: Nok iron metallurgy thought likely indigenous by some; including in the most recent opinion of excavator Peter Breunig

    http://newafricanmagazine.com/nigeria-nok-has-more-wonders-yet-for-the-world/

    • Replies: @Anti-Hereditarian
  317. Deduction says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    That was very well written and quite persuasive on many points.

    It does not address two, however.

    The relative lack of attainment by the African diaspora.

    The fact that genetic selection can occur in a very short period of time.

    In the UK, US, Brazil, Carribean, France, Canada and others people of Black African descent achieve less at school, less in the workplace and committ more crimes than the average. One can object to me grouping these people together but it is a clearly observable phenomenon and clearly observable phenomena need explaining. Racism and the legacy of imperialism does not cut it – the Chinese diaspora is the African’s negative image.

    As for rapid genetic selection. Take the example of the Russian man who domesticated foxes in just 7 generations. Or the fact that Germany’s prevalence of Ashkenazi genes dropped severely during WW2. It is not a hard to observe these events, is it?

  318. @Jm8

    @Jm8

    I actually know West Africa very well and I’m aware of what it really is, lots of ingenious people coping with adverse pressures (tough natural environment, political issues…). This region has an underrated history and amazing culture.

    As I searched for information about IQ studies from Africa, I came across Wicherts et al. and it told a totally different story from that of the Pioneer Fund Clique’s.

    For instance if you only take Nigeria where more than 1/2 West African and 1/5 African live you find this figures.

    Based on international standardized achievement tests in 2006 and 2007, the predicted mean IQ is 88.1 in Nigeria, if IQ correlates with test results as it does in non Sub-Saharan African countries.

    8 studies from 1998, 1978, 1972, 1975, 1965, 1981, 1980 and 1971 give a weighted average of 83.5 according to their respective authors but Richard Lynn has found a way to lower the estimate to 69…

    Using rigorous and systematic selection methods, Wicherts et al. found an average of 83.8 from 9 studies but the problem was still the same, why using so out dated data. I mean, if I needed to know the average height in Nigeria to sell clothes there, I wouldn’t do a mix of information from 1998, 1978, 1972, 1975, 1965, 1981, and 1980 . The country has changed since then, the middle class has grown, a new generation of urban people has developped a modern culture… Well, you just can’t do serious science with old data like this, unless you only do it to support a theory.

    To everyone who has set foot in Africa, a 70 mean IQ makes no sense and tells more about the cognitive abilities of those who make this claim than about the African’s. It is now clear that HDB is a pseudoscience.

  319. @Deduction

    I’m French and I can tell you that there is a wide diversity between African or diaspora decended communities in France. We have the Muslims from West Africa who tend to have way more children than they can afford or supervize, the Cameroonians who deserve the model minority label, the Caribbeans who are practically invisible and some more black groups that are not especially noticed for doing well or doing bad.

    Blacks of the Americas are not Africans, they don’t have an African culture, they have the culture of the decendents of forced labor prisonners who were never supposed to achieve anything in their societies and who could not create their own norms of social mobility and social control. See, marriage is the most important event in the life of a West African person, illegitimacy is almost unthinkable and West Africans tend to be well aware of their bloodline sometimes linking their lineage to an mythic ancestor. Blacks in the Americas have none of this, they are just a caste, even in Haïti where light makes right.

    In Africa, the situations are diverse, West Africa is greatly similar to South Asia, it has issues but you must also understand that people there are not trying to catch up with the west, they are for the majority farmers who grow their own food, trade some of it for a few manufactured items and enjoy a communautary life that doesn’t make them ask for more.

    The Chinese diaspora is 1) completely unrepresentative of the 1.3 billion large Chinese people 2) No theories were ever eleborated to justify the enslavement and segregation of the Chinese and they have been given the benefit of the doubt that their difference did not make them inherently inferior beings while for the blacks, it was all said from the start 3) The Chinese have a superiority complex, effort optimism 4) They have a culture of education that comes from a long and unique history of state examinations.

    “Or the fact that Germany’s prevalence of Ashkenazi genes dropped severely during WW2″

    Is it seriously a question you can’t answer ?

    “Take the example of the Russian man who domesticated foxes in just 7 generations”

    I can’t answer this question because it is really not my field of knowledge, mine is history and we don’t need genetics to explain things.

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
    , @Deduction
  320. @Deduction

    Pseudoscience is something that presents itself as science but is not true science. Examples: astrology, creationism, alchemy, ancient astronauts, scientific racism.

    The big difference between science and pseudoscience lies not in what they say or how true it is – after all, science is not always right and pseudoscience can be right by accident – but in how they grow and change as a body of knowledge. It is like the difference between a living person and a doll.

    Science is what your science teacher at school said it was:

    Gather facts.
    Come up with a hypothesis to make sense of them.
    Test the hypothesis.
    The important thing is that the hypothesis can be tested and can fail. That gives science a way to root out its own errors.

    Pseudoscience is the opposite:

    Come up with the desired conclusion.
    Gather (or create) facts that support (or seem to support) the conclusion.
    Find excuses for the facts that do not fit.
    This is called confirmation bias. Ideas are never put to a do-or-die test. Errors remain.

    Science makes progress though discovery and disproof. It tries to knock down its own ideas because disproof is way easier than proof. It loves facts that do not fit because they point to new ideas and discoveries.

    Pseudoscience never makes new discoveries that go against its claims. It makes excuses to discount facts that do not fit. Far from knocking down its own ideas, it sticks to them long after mainstream science has left them behind. (HBD debates consist in debating on how niggerish niggers are)

    Some telltale signs of a pseudoscience:

    It acts as if science is divided over its main claims – when in fact nearly all scientists who work in the particular field in question believe them to be false. Example: Few geneticists support scientific racism. This leads to:

    The top experts come from other fields. Example: None of the top experts of scientific racism are biologists, much less geneticists.

    Lack of many peer-reviewed articles. There are none or the same few keep coming up over and over again. Example: present-day scientific racists depend too much on Richard Lynn. Why is that?

    Never a dull moment. Most true science is dull as dust to outsiders. Not so pseudoscience, which always seems to be promising to change our understanding of the world. Yet despite that:

    The field has changed little in the past 30 years or more. Example: Scientific racism is still saying the same thing it said 200 years ago. Biology, meanwhile, has made huge advances: evolution, genetics, molecular biology, etc.

    It makes appealing claims – stuff ordinary people would like to believe is true. Example: Scientific racism appeals to people’s prejudices.

    Serious errors in reasoning. Example: Scientific racism heavily depends on the confusion between correlation and cause. Most pseudosciences make this mistake.

    A note on peer-reviewed articles: Just like with statistics and Bible verses, you can prove almost anything if you pick the right ones and present them a certain way. It gives you an air of knowing what you are talking about that few can or will challenge.

    Source: https://abagond.wordpress.com/2011/04/02/pseudoscience/

    • Replies: @Deduction
  321. @Anti-Hereditarian

    The Chinese diaspora is 1) completely unrepresentative of the 1.3 billion large Chinese people 2) No theories were ever eleborated to justify the enslavement and segregation of the Chinese and they have been given the benefit of the doubt that their difference did not make them inherently inferior beings while for the blacks, it was all said from the start 3) The Chinese have a superiority complex, effort optimism 4) They have a culture of education that comes from a long and unique history of state examinations.

    The Black African diaspora is 1) completely representative of the 1 billion or so African people 2) there are good theories to justify the enslavement and segregation amonst the Black Africans themselves till this day 3)The Black Africans have a inferiority complex – no prize for guessing why 4) The Black Africans don’t have a culture whatsoever of education that comes from a long and unique history of state examinations. Instead, they have culture of machetes, yay!

    • Replies: @Anti-Hereditarian
  322. @PandaAtWar

    The African Diaspora has:

    1) a great degree of non African admixture that does not seem to make it better, speaks no African language and follows no African traditions

    2) they have their own theories on each one’s place in society and none of these is based on race

    3) African born migrants have no inferiority complex, they are rather race naïve and consider themselves among the top of their own kind, it explains why they try and do keep good standards when they get the opportunity to make it in the west. Slave descendants feel held down by forces they can’t control, you call it genes, they call it fate or society. Anyway, they have little confidence in their ability to do better for themselves, much like you are confident in their inherent incapacity to change their situation

    4) the Black Africans don’t have a deeply rooted culture of education but some groups are successfull in catching up to western educational standards while some others are not or do not percieve that it can help them meeting their most urgent necessities. But they don’t have a culture of suicide (failing your own life) and are always able to find ways to make their life worth living.

    The only reason why you guys are so admirative of Asian values is that they represent the dream of every totalitarian regime: conformism, self inflicted slavery, unconditional obedience to the master… the result: South Korea’s suicide rate equals African American’s homicide rate.

    • Replies: @TheHill
  323. South Korea’s suicide rate equals African American’s homicide rate.

    Oh my… Koreans suicide rate must be very very high! For the 1st time, Panda agrees with you. It shows that you’re capable of making a factual statement after all. ROFL

    • Replies: @Anti-Hereditarian
  324. @Jm8

    I’ve found something even more questionable but I’m not either sure that I’ve really understood what is implied.

    When they have a study from 1965 and they correct for the Flynn effect, aren’t they trying to translate the 1965 value into a 2015 IQ ? If this is what they do, this is complete nonsense.

    Wicherts et al. have found 8 studies from Nigeria, none were actually selected by Lynn who made his massaged estimates from studies made in other African countries, mostly South Africa.

    Study 1

    year: 1998
    test takers characteristics: Aggressive and pro-social school boys from Lagos
    number of test takers: 94
    measured IQ: 81.8
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 73.2

    Study 2

    year: 1978
    test takers characteristics: Urban and rural normally and undernourished children
    number of test takers: 128
    measured IQ: 92.6
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 88.8

    Study 3

    year: 1972
    test takers characteristics: Upper-class and lower-class children
    number of test takers: 393
    measured IQ: 87.2
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 83.1

    Study 4

    year: 1965
    test takers characteristics: Primary school children
    number of test takers: 1633
    measured IQ: 77
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 77

    Study 5
    year: 1981
    test takers characteristics: Secondary school students
    number of test takers: 803
    measured IQ: 97.2
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 95.2

    Study 6

    year: 1980
    test-takers characteristics: Children with reading problems
    number of test takers: 13
    measured IQ: 98.6
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 95.2

    Study 7

    year: 1971
    test-takers characteristics: Secondary school boys in
    Idaban (I believe Ibadan instead, but it was written like this)
    number of test takers: 516
    measured IQ: 88
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 86

    Study 8

    year: 152
    test-takers characteristics: Schooled and unschooled children
    number of test takers: 152
    measured IQ: 77.6
    IQ at UK norms+Flynn Effect: 72.3

    Source: Wicherts, J. M., et al., A systematic literature review of the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans,
    Intelligence (2009), doi:10.1016/j.intell.2009.05.002

    The most neutral conclusion must be:

    8 studies performed in Nigeria between 1965 and 1998 on 3732 test takers have measured an average IQ of 84.7 . Applying the UK norms and correcting for the Flynn effect gives a 2015 equivalent IQ of 83.5 .

    But if my name is Richard Lynn (or any HBDer), such a conclusion is unacceptable because 84.7 or 83.5 are too close to the 85 mean IQ of African Americans who are supposed to be intellectually halfway between the dull 70 African mean and the bright 100 white American standard due to european admixture and an environment that can’t be made better after everything that has been tried in this direction.

    Nigeria’s population is virtually 100% black.
    Nigeria is home to 50% of West Africa’s population, the region where African Americans have most of their non-white ancestry.
    How can they achieve a 84.7 or 83.5 score without european admixture and with such very poor living standards ?
    What’s gonna happen when they find their pathway to developpment ?
    Has Nigeria a sleeping 120 genotypic IQ ?
    We all know that IQ is not 100% genetic but is it possible that the environment of African Americans give them the same intellectual disadvantage as Nigerians ?
    Does it mean that African American’s ancestors were the worst of the worst of Africa ?
    What’s the reliability of these figures ?

    • Replies: @Jm8
  325. @PandaAtWar

    Is factual your word for racially charged ?

  326. Jm8 says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    Disease burden (esp in certain tropical areas) can artificially suppress iq about 15, and possibly up to 20 points.

    “Nigeria is home to 50% of West Africa’s population, the region where African Americans have most of their non-white ancestry.”

    Much of African American ancestry also comes from the Senegambia/Sahel, and the western Congo, and to some extent Sierra Leone/Liberia, Though some places/peoples therein have their historical accomplishments too(as you likely know), especially those of the Sahel/Niger valley and Chad basin.

    • Replies: @Anti-Hereditarian
  327. @Jm8

    According to Lynn, malaria and other deseases only lower IQs by 2 points in Africa and South Asia. But a genetic bonus due to the ice age explains a pretended 30 point gap between Subsaharan Africa and Europe… It perfectly makes sense.

    Analyzing the data that Lynn used to create his Subsaharan mean IQ, I’ve made these interesting findings.

    -1 sample was from the 1920s, 2 were from the 1930s, 1 from the 1950s, 5 from the 1960s, 3 from the 1980s, 4 were from the 1990s, 5 were from the 2000s.

    -2 were from the DR. Congo, 1 from Ghana, 1 from Guinea, 2 from Kenya, 9 from South Africa, 3 from Sudan, 1 from Tanzania, 1 from Uganda and 1 from Zimbabwe. He took no study from the most populated country of the continent (Nigeria) neither the second most (Ethiopia) and made estimates for a 20 million square kilometers large subregion out of only 9 countries. Almost like estimating the Americas’ IQ without information from the USA and Brazil.

    -4 studies were made on selected unhealthy subjects (malaria, intestinal parasites), one was performed by Lynn himself and is almost the only one whose results remain unmodified. It is also the only recent study to give a measured IQ under 70 to healthy subjects.

    -The mean IQ of the studies selected by Lynn is 67.4, the mean IQ of the 27 unselected samples is 80.4 none of them can be called “elite samples” and they are much more normal than the unhealthy test takers or the study that Lynn made up alone.

    Lynn’s data are completely fake, unreliable and worthless. It is scandalous to have these values on the internet and elsewhere exposed to unaware audiences, especially in medias that call themselves serious or that pretend to deal with taboo topics.

    When I’ve discovered this pseudoscientific field (recently thanks to dylan roof) I knew that the methods used by Lynn were criticized but I had no idea of how criticizable they were. Now I do.

    Regarding the transatlantic diasopora, do you know that slave traders were not very fond of Sahelian captives because they had a dangerous tendancy of being litterate ?

    • Replies: @Jm8
  328. Jm8 says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    “According to Lynn, malaria and other deseases only lower IQs by 2 points in Africa and South Asia.”
    I think even Lynn even claimed that up to 15 points might be artificially suppressed by disease, of course many of his African (and some of Caribbean and South Asian) averages are unrepresentatively low.

    “Regarding the transatlantic diasopora, do you know that slave traders were not very fond of Sahelian captives because they had a dangerous tendancy of being literate ?”

    Only Muslim ones (many Hausa, Soninke, some Mandinkas…), though they often took them anyway (They were said by some to be better house servants than Congos.) and not predominantly non Muslim groups like the Bambara, Serer, Wolof ( Wolofs are now mostly muslim, but not then), far Northern Ghana tribes, and others. In slavery, Igbo were known for suicide, and Ashantis, Angolans and Housas tended to rebel, but slave owners (and traders) often took whatever they could get.

  329. Jm8 says:

    “According to Lynn, malaria and other deseases only lower IQs by 2 points in Africa and South Asia.”
    I think even Lynn even claimed that up to 15 points might be artificially suppressed by disease, of course many of his African (and some Caribbean and South Asian) averages are unrepresentatively/inaccurately low.

    • Replies: @Anti-Hereditarian
  330. @Jm8

    “but slave owners (and traders) often took whatever they could get.”

    Whomever/whoever fits better don’t you think ?

    Checking the data for Nigeria only, the most accurate average IQ estimates are in the mid 80s.

    Nigeria matters since there is no country that is more representative of the “negroid” race.

    But it doesn’t even matter, commenters on this kind of blog are not here to change their mind. The only thing that should be done is exposing the HBD cult’s lies and frauds to prevent curious and unaware visitors to be tempted by their attractive and simplistic theories.

    • Replies: @Jm8
  331. Jm8 says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    “Whomever/whoever fits better don’t you think ?”

    true

  332. johan says:

    Why would hereditarians want to argue that the Nigerian (or Igbo) children in the UK do in fact have a lower IQ than average white children? (seemingly ignoring or subverting the evidence)

    hereditarian shouldn´t be used as proxy name for white supremacist.

    In fact his whole article is hereditarian. Just more fine grained than the old fashion hediterian conclusions that came from lumping people together on the basis of their continental racial affiliation.

  333. johan says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    “So in the end, intelligence may be partly heritable”

    Monkeys aren’t designing spaceships.

    The capacities of a human brain are a 100% determined
    by genes, which are heritable. There are variations in those
    genes. Not all people have the same genes so different people have
    different capacities. There are differences in the distribution
    of those genes between different populations. Those differences in
    distribution are caused by the relative frequency in which those different
    brain capacities where rewarded with reproduction in the
    respective ancestral environment of the different populations.

    The above are just facts, not opinions. You might have bad health, lack of food or no access to an education at all, but that doesn’t lower your capacities but just the actualization of their full potential. Conversely no environmental stimulus can alter your capacity above what was given to you by nature ever.

    Now, if a certain group historically has always lived under environmental conditions that don’t allow for the full actualization of potential than it is impossible that there ever has been an evolutionary pressure for that fictional potential because an unfulfilled potential cannot confer reproductive success. It would simply be a random don’t care trait weeded out by change.

    “The fact that racial groups may overlap in height or intelligence means
    that this traits have not been under the same environmental
    evolutionary pressures as visible racial characteristics”

    Evolutionary pressures on different traits are obviously different for every trait
    (you don’t grow taller to block sunlight) and whether or not the distribution of
    a trait overlaps (given equal environmental influences like nutrition and health)
    only gives an indication about the magnitude of the difference in ancestral
    evolutionary pressure that has selected for the trait. An overlap doesn’t ‘proof’ that
    there hasn’t been a differentiating evolutionary pressure of the different populations.

    “As a whole, a rain forest is one of the most complex and hostile environment that exists”

    This is just not true. The most complex and hostile environment is one which is
    densely populated with competing human tribes. Human intelligence can be expected to be the highest were there is a evolutionary bonus on being smarter than your competitors. Since animals are no match for human intelligence the best catalyst for higher human intelligence is competition for scarce resources among humans themselves.

    Some other remarks:

    Absence of water is not an evolutionary pressure since people then just die instead of adapt.

    Short lifespan actually puts a bonus on high IQ because high intelligence means you learn stuff quicker. When life is short you can thus achieve a higher skill level than a duller person who would be dead before he understood enough.

    • Replies: @Lol
    , @Anti-Hereditarian
  334. Lol says:
    @johan

    Lol.

    “The capacities of a human brain are a 100% determined
    by genes, which are heritable.”

    Wrong.

    “There are variations in those
    genes. Not all people have the same genes so different people have
    different capacities. ”

    Everyone actually has the same genes. A genetic variant isn’t a whole gene, its the same gene with a tiny chemical base thats in a different position. Its not really justified saying people have different genes.

    “Those differences in
    distribution are caused by the relative frequency in which those different
    brain capacities where rewarded with reproduction in the
    respective ancestral environment of the different populations. ”

    Some of them might be, none have been proven so. None of the Gwas variants have even been confirmed as being functional.

    “The above are just facts, not opinions.”

    Again, totally false and not even an opinion, its actually a lie.

    “Conversely no environmental stimulus can alter your capacity above what was given to you by nature ever.”

    Also totally unproven. However environment has been proven to alter genes and can dramatically change their expression its called epigenetics.

    “The most complex and hostile environment is one which is
    densely populated with competing human tribes. ”

    Africa has plenty of places with dense and very diverse amount of tribes Most African countries have an immense amount of tribes like NIGERIA!. So does India and plenty of places in the middle east. The middle east and jungles in South America had the earliest complex civilizations too.

    A jungle also has many different animals to compete with. Animals that have abilities humans do not, animals that can hear, smell, kill survive in ways humans cant.
    The smartest and most dangerous animals on earth are from jungles and savannahs aka Africa.

    African tribes would compete with other tribes and all those animals + disease + unpredictable climate.

    Lol. You lose.

    • Replies: @Johan
  335. @johan

    White supremacy? You make it sound it’s like a bad thing. Any positive contribution blacks made to society is seen as exceptions and celebrated, for everyone else it’s practically taken for granted. I mean, FFS, America has “Black History Month”. I’ll fully admit books like “The Bell Curve” and these genetic studies linking race and IQ confirm my world view of Africans, African-Americans, and blacks in general as lower orders of humans. Historically, despite all accommodations made to avert it, they have acted as such.

  336. Johan says:
    @Lol

    “The capacities of a human brain are a 100% determined
    by genes, which are heritable.”

    ‘Wrong’

    Euh…which part of ‘Monkeys aren’t designing spaceships’ didn’t you understand?

    • Replies: @Lol
    , @Deduction
  337. Deduction says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    To everyone who has set foot in Africa, a 70 mean IQ makes no sense and tells more about the cognitive abilities of those who make this claim than about the African’s. It is now clear that HDB is a pseudoscience.

    So because African IQ is not 70 but 80 something HBD is pseudoscience? Come on, no-one believes that silly an argument!

    he Cameroonians who deserve the model minority label

    According to the wiki page ‘Cameroonians in France’ they have achieved quite a bit in football and pop music, and nothing else notable…it’s all quite predictable.

    , the Caribbeans who are practically invisible and some more black groups that are not especially noticed for doing well or doing bad.

    Yes, yes in France you keep Blacks in ghettos, cut transport links to them and avoid noticing them in official figures. It’s only over the channel, I’ve visited many times. Still in Marseille all of the banks are outfitted with security like in Rio and in Rennes they are as relaxed as in Japan. It’s not hard to see when you open your eyes.

    The Chinese diaspora is 1) completely unrepresentative of the 1.3 billion large

    So you agree? Groups of people can vary widely in their genes and therefore in their potential abilities and characteristics.

    • Replies: @Anti-Hereditarian
  338. Deduction says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    The top experts come from other fields. Example: None of the top experts of scientific racism are biologists, much less geneticists.

    Maybe because they are scared of what happened to the greatest living geneticist when he made a pretty reasonable suggestion…

    The fact that HBD has been made taboo has scared many intelligent, clear-minded people away just as it has attracted many deranged nutcases.

    Your argument that it is pseudoscience and that there is no significant and ability-determining genetic variation between groups is almost wholly rested on this ad hominem.

    When of course different groups often do have quite different genes and of course genes are very important. HBD is just the acknowledgement of this and the recognition that it has explanatory power.

    No matter how many times two women rub up against each other they will never produce a baby, but what is the difference between a man and a woman? A chromosome.

    Genes matter. Different groups have different genes. This is a valid area for study and discussion.

  339. Deduction says:

    Does it mean that African American’s ancestors were the worst of the worst of Africa ?

    This seems pretty likely. Being enslaved is something you want to avoid and being intelligent helps you avoid bad things.

    Africans have brighter personalities than other groups, but duller minds. Is this so offensive? Especially as there are loads of outliers.

    Is it more or less offensive than saying that Asians have duller personalities and brighter minds?

  340. Deduction says:
    @Johan

    Monkeys aren’t designing spaceships.

    The capacities of a human brain are a 100% determined
    by genes, which are heritable.

    This should be obvious to everyone. Thank you for putting it so well.

  341. @johan

    “The capacities of a human brain are a 100% determined
    by genes, which are heritable.”

    The real science of cognitive ability which is not psychology (which is barely considered a science) but neuroscience has found that the brain is an extremly plastic organ that adapts to the use we make of it. Individuals generally never reach their full genetic potential in any of their mental abilities.

    Regarding heritability, there is one thing that you seem to ignore. Random mutations occure in every person and no one is genetetically 50% of their mother, 50% of their father and 100% of their monozygotic twin. We all have a small fraction of our genetic framework that is unique to us and so is a fraction of our genetic potential for intelligence.

    “Not all people have the same genes so different people have
    different capacities. There are differences in the distribution
    of those genes between different populations.”

    like someone said before, we all have the same genes and a small fraction of these genes show minimal variation between individuals and this variation is even smaller between groups (around 6%). The reason why specialists say that race has a really weak genetic basis is because racially informative genetic variants were only found after a clustering effort with pre-established racial categories and did not appear after an exploration of the genome that led to the discovery of genetic variants that were common and restricted to all members of a race or any other group.

    “An overlap doesn’t ‘proof’ that
    there hasn’t been a differentiating evolutionary pressure of the different populations.”

    Yes it does. If intelligence evolves in adaptation to a specific environment, then a “tropical intelligence” must be part of the general tropical phenotype shared by those who were selected to survive in a tropical environment. Since tropical environments have very little in common with temperate ones, tropical intelligence should show very little overlapping with temperate intelligence.

    The reason why the distribution of IQs between groups overlaps is because group differences are caused by culture (including lifestyle, peer pressures, attitudes toward institutions, social aspirations…) which is the mysterious environmental factor that hereditarians never investigate. A culture is not a source of unchangeable determinisms but it creates strong tendencies that affect people differently within a group with the bulk of its members being close to their group’s mean and minorities to be found at both extreme ends.

    For instance, if we compare cheese consumption among the French and the British, the gap favors the French by large but there is overlaping too and the individual distribution of cheese consumption has the shape of a bell curve for both groups. This is due to the fact that many French people do not like cheese while some British eat more cheese than the average French who likes cheese more than the average British.

    Cheese consumption is partly heritable too, if you grow up in a household that is not fond of cheese, your consumption will initially be lower than your group’s average. But as you get older, more independant and influenced by the wider society, your cheese consumption will come somewhere between your parent’s extreme consumption pattern and your group’s average, a phenomenon called “regression/progression to the mean”.

    Now replace cheese consumption by intellectual stimulation and you have the most reasonable explanation for IQ gaps between groups. And don’t come and tell me that there is a genetic component in culture because we all know it is not true. A culture is shaped by the past and current experiences of its members, it evolves faster than any genetic selection process and more importantly: individuals in a culture are much more similar in their lifestyle than in their genes.

    “The most complex and hostile environment is one which is
    densely populated with competing human tribes. Human intelligence can be expected to be the highest were there is a evolutionary bonus on being smarter than your competitors.”

    I’m pleased to see that you do not agree with the traditionnal hereditarian theories about the evolutionary causes of the pretended genetic-based differences in intelligence between human groups. You know, I’m talking about their myths about the ice age or the r-k reproductive strategy…

    What you say here is true, competition is a source of progress and selection, it explains why Europe with its multitude of rivaling states has made greater achievments than the big monolithic and unified Chinese Empire.

    But there is no indication whatsoever that competition has resulted in genetic selection for intelligence. None of Rome’s soldiers actually had the genius of Caesar or at least had the opportunity to show it. They were just as dull as the enemies they defeated and Roman generals would have been just as victorious with African mercenaries.

    In peace time, there are no more signs of better reproductive success of intelligent people. The most fertile classes have always been the lowest classes and their fecundity always surpassed their mortality. There is nothing in any culture or in basic reproductive instincts that comes close to eugenics, on the contrary it seems like humans have a tendency for dysgenic sexual behaviors.

    “Absence of water is not an evolutionary pressure since people then just die instead of adapt.”

    Deserts are (scarcely) populated place and their inhabitants have adapted and developped ways to find and manage water. Continental ice sheets are unpopulated and no bigger brain can help there.

    “Short lifespan actually puts a bonus on high IQ because high intelligence means you learn stuff quicker.”

    OK, so the next Nobel prizes must be expected from Zimbabwe. No seriously, if you live less, you simply learn less and that’s all. Wisdom is not a virtue of childhood or teenage but of old age.

    • Replies: @Math
  342. lol says:

    Africa has been improving pretty well for the past 30 years. Some African countries are almost in the high development category.

    http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-2-human-development-index-trends-1980-2013

    If you go down to the rate of improvement by region, you will see that Africa is way above the world average in the last decade. So they are improving much more rapidly now.

    Ethiopia of all places is one of the best improving countries recently.

    http://www.cctv-america.com/2015/07/22/the-heat-ethiopias-economy-booms-to-conquer-poverty

    This isn’t 1990s anymore racists. Better hold on to those “average differences” tight, because you are losing them too slowly but surely.

    • Replies: @Deduction
    , @Deduction
  343. @Deduction

    “So because African IQ is not 70 but 80 something HBD is pseudoscience? Come on, no-one believes that silly an argument!”

    Manipulating numbers for them to fit in your theory is not something you expect from serious scientists.

    “According to the wiki page ‘Cameroonians in France’ they have achieved quite a bit in football and pop music, and nothing else notable…it’s all quite predictable.”

    We’re talking about a group of some 100 000 anonymous persons who came to France in the 70s and have a high representation among professionals, college graduates and show multiple signs of achievment in our society. Now if you are looking for outstanding historical figures, you will find them among the 65 millions of other Frenchmen and their ancestors. If your source of knowledge is wikipedia, I’m not sure you can have an accurate representation of French society.

    “Yes, yes in France you keep Blacks in ghettos, cut transport links to them and avoid noticing them in official figures.”

    France has no racial ghettos, there are poor neighborhoods where Arabs, Blacks, Whites and others live in the same conditions. Actually, the Arabs (and other muslims) are the most marginalized community in France and it is mostly due to theunwillingness of many of them to adjust to some of the basic rules of our society.

    Good you talk about Marseille which is not a black city at all but the second largest Algerian city in the world after Algiers.

    Ethnic statistics are forbidden in France because we recognize only one category of persons: humans.

    “So you agree? Groups of people can vary widely in their genes and therefore in their potential abilities and characteristics.”

    I’ve never mentionned genes when pointing the unrepresentativeness of overseas Chinese. I was reffering to social background. If overseas Chinese were good representatives of China either China would be the most advanced country in the world or overseas Chinese would have a large part of illiterate peasants among them.

    “The fact that HBD has been made taboo has scared many intelligent, clear-minded people away just as it has attracted many deranged nutcases.”

    I guess you count yourself among the “many deranged nutcases”.

    The truth is that population genetics is not taboo at all, it has crucial medical implications and research is not confined to the west. The Chinese are investigating the genetic basis of intelligence and others would do the same without any ideological restraint.

    “HBD is just the acknowledgement of this and the recognition that it has explanatory power.”

    replace recognition by belief and add “if we ignore the many flaws in HBD theories” after your statement about the explanatory power of HBD which is much weaker than the knowledge we get from sociology, economics, politics, anthropology, ethnology, history, environmental sciences and demographics. All of these fields give enough objective answers for the understanding of group differences in social advancement to people who are able and willing to understand those answers.

    Of course, it is not as intellectually affordable as a simplistic and grossly flawed ideologically oriented theory but it is a solid and universally usefull body of knowledge that genetics and psychometrics would destroy if they accidentally ever happened to bear some truth. In this case, most of the basis of human sciences (hundreds of years of objective scientific work) would suddenly become invalid and we’d be forced to burn (or throw away) entire segments of college libraries, close departments, cancel awarded degrees simply because HBD contradicts many universally accepted and verified scientific rules and principles.

    “but what is the difference between a man and a woman? A chromosome.”

    You’re being extremely ridicule. A chromosome is a HUGE difference, it contains hundreds to thousands of genes and a difference in chromosomes is the closest thing to a fundamental difference in nature. But there are no race chromosomes, there are not even genes that are common and restricted to all members of a race. Population genetics are just a matter of varying allele frequencies in a limited set of genes so that we can define genetic profiles for each pre-established group though individuals never exactly fit the typical genetic profile of their own group.

    “This seems pretty likely. Being enslaved is something you want to avoid and being intelligent helps you avoid bad things.”

    Do you consider that the same principle applies to the victims of the holocaust ? That only the dumbest jews ended up exterminated ?

    The current situation of the descendants of African slaves in America has nothing to do with who their ancestors were in Africa. All of their culture and social issues come from the centuries they have spent in foreign and hostile societies that disconnected them from their ancestral roots without assimilating them to the dominant culture and institutions.

    “Africans have brighter personalities than other groups, but duller minds. Is this so offensive? Especially as there are loads of outliers.

    Is it more or less offensive than saying that Asians have duller personalities and brighter minds?”

    Both are potentially offensive and assuredly inaccurate generalizations made by someone who is not at all legitimate to put labels on billions of human beings when he really knows nothing about the concepts and realities he tries to handle and make sense of.

  344. Deduction says:

    Is it more or less offensive than saying that Asians have duller personalities and brighter minds?”

    Both are potentially offensive and assuredly inaccurate generalizations made by someone who is not at all legitimate to put labels on billions of human beings when he really knows nothing about the concepts and realities he tries to handle and make sense of.

    Nonsense. Both points are easily observable. I get that the real world does not jibe with your ideology, but can you not see this pattern? Have you not travelled, or even met signficant numbers of people belonging to these groups? Forgot the aspergery, arcane argumentation and actually go and meet people.

    We’re talking about a group of some 100 000 anonymous persons who came to France in the 70s and have a high representation among professionals, college graduates and show multiple signs of achievment in our society. Now if you are looking for outstanding historical figures, you will find them among the 65 millions of other Frenchmen and their ancestors. If your source of knowledge is wikipedia, I’m not sure you can have an accurate representation of French society.

    Yet the only wiki-famous ones either sing or play sports…who would have guessed that? Not you with your dogmatic tabula rasa fantasy.

    You’re being extremely ridicule. A chromosome is a HUGE difference, it contains hundreds to thousands of genes and a difference in chromosomes is the closest thing to a fundamental difference in nature. But there are no race chromosomes, there are not even genes that are common and restricted to all members of a race. Population genetics are just a matter of varying allele frequencies in a limited set of genes so that we can define genetic profiles for each pre-established group though individuals never exactly fit the typical genetic profile of their own group.

    A chromosome is a huge difference, because genes matter and there are a lot of genes on a chromosome. This means that because there a big averaged difference in genes between races there will also be big averaged differences in characteristics. Before you construct another strawman please remember that an average is an average and does not preclude outliers.

    Do you consider that the same principle applies to the victims of the holocaust ? That only the dumbest jews ended up exterminated ?

    Yes, but because of the percentages killed it would be better phrased as only the smartest survived. Whether it is true or not, I cannot guarantee, but it makes a lot of sense and is an interesting and valid question regardless.

    The current situation of the descendants of African slaves in America has nothing to do with who their ancestors were in Africa. All of their culture and social issues come from the centuries they have spent in foreign and hostile societies that disconnected them from their ancestral roots without assimilating them to the dominant culture and institutions

    You mean like the Jews? It is interesting also quite how sociologically similar African-Americans and West Africans are; despite having entirely different environments. If you had spent time with both groups you would have seen how striking the overlap is.

    Amongst both groups, for example, I am struck by how the women are always working and quite how central music and dance is to everyday life. The same can be said of Black Brazillians or Cameroonians in France…

    The truth is that population genetics is not taboo at all, it has crucial medical implications and research is not confined to the west. The Chinese are investigating the genetic basis of intelligence and others would do the same without any ideological restraint.

    Yes, its not taboo at all…that’s why the discoverer of DNA is a shunned for talking about them…maybe this time you won’t ignore this point and go off on a tangent about the Chinese (a seperate culture with different taboos – obviously) or medical research (a somewhat controversial field that is protected by the fact that it is only used to save lives.)

    Ethnic statistics are forbidden in France because we recognize only one category of persons: humans.

    Which is why you understand nothing. You have chosen ignorance. You are literally admitting to privileging your ideological blinders over observation…willfull ignorance = a great starting point for public policy?!?!?

    France has no racial ghettos, there are poor neighborhoods where Arabs, Blacks, Whites and others live in the same conditions. Actually, the Arabs (and other muslims) are the most marginalized community in France and it is mostly due to theunwillingness of many of them to adjust to some of the basic rules of our society.

    I’ll second your point about French Muslims but the truth is a lot more extreme than you are putting it.

    France’s prison population is 70% Muslim. An astounding fact! 10% of the population commits 70% of the crime…and there aren’t any ghettos?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11352268/What-is-going-wrong-in-Frances-prisons.html

  345. Deduction says:
    @lol

    I imagine that everyone would like you to be right, but the truth is that ‘almost’ being as developed as Turkmenistan (utterly insane dictator), Palestine (invaded every few years) and Colombia (40 year long civil war) is not a success story.

    Also, don’t get me wrong, I think Botswana is great, but when half of a country’s exports are diamonds I am not sure it is a great example of anything. Nor is ’80% of exports are oil’ Gabon.

    The only other country above Iraq(!!) and Syria(!!!) is South Africa (a Black African success story???)…

    Who knows what will happen? Still, the prognosis is hardly heart-warming. Especially since every intelligent African, of which there are many, seems to be leaving…

  346. Deduction says:
    @lol

    I still can’t believe how blindered you must be to use that link to further your point. Of the bottom 28 countries, 26 are SS African, the other two are Haiti and Afghanistan.

    Another interesting point from your own link is that in 1980 (when there was still Euro colonialism in Africa) SS Africa’s development was equal to South Asia’s. Now it is gone, SS Africa has been left far behind.

    Really, I am more hopeful than my analysis of your link makes out, I don’t believe that it tells the whole story but it flabbergasts me that you would try to use it to sound an optimistic note!

  347. @Deduction

    “Have you not travelled, or even met signficant numbers of people belonging to these groups?”

    About my own experience I will first admit to the fact that I only have a (strong) book-knowledge of African-Americans and other New World Blacks. For West Africans, I have an everyday life personal relationship with many members of this group in West Africa where I used to live and where I spend holidays (Ivory Coast, Senegal, Cameroon) and in France which is my homeland. Regarding people from central, eastern, and southern Africa, I have no personal experience with them and I’m little interested in their culture or history.

    For White people, I’m a native Gallo-Roman Frenchman with an upper middle class upbringing. I’ve experienced other white cultures while traveling to the UK, English and French Speaking Canada, the USA, Spain, Italy and Germany. And as far as East Asians are concerned, I’ve only had weak friendships with Korean students when I lived in Toronto, ON. Except from this, I’ve only seen many Chinese international students at the universities I went to without ever establishing contacts with them.

    I haven’t yet had the opportunity to meet many Muslims in France but that’s only due to mere social background reasons and not because I reject people in this religion. For South Asians and other groups not mentionned before, I don’t know any of them and this is mostly because of their very small presence in France.

    So to answer your question, I think I have a sufficient empirical experience with many groups and places I’m talking about. But even with that, I will never rely on my subjective observations to support or dismiss theories. The first reason why I can’t do it is because I’ve seen so many individual and group difference within a single race that I can’t say Asians are like this and Whites I like that. The second reason is that my subjective observations are no way objective universal truths.

    If I use my experience to contradict your statement about differences in personality between Asians and Africans, I can tell you that a country like Senegal has a quite austere and morally rigid culture while on the other hand, the times I’ve spent among Korean students were marked by heavy drinking and other college years silly things. But this is just my life, I won’t make an evolutionary theory out of it.

    Concerning the “bright personalities and dull minds” of Africans, this is not the dominant feeling I get from my experience in West Africa. For the personality aspect, the most notable and prevalant trait in this region is serenity, the weather is just too warm for pointless agitation.

    Then I would say that I’ve observed a great load of conformism and reverence toward older and higher social status person, everyone seems to understand their place in society and act accordingly. Are West Africans boastful or extraverted ? Not really, they seem to have well developped social skills and solitude is an unknown thing among them but they are actually quite difficult to approach in my opinion, especially if they see you as a foreigner. I would say they are greatly clanish and this is the most negative generalization I can make about them.

    Are West Africans dull minded ? Not at all. It is sure that ignorance and superstition have a stronghold in this part of the world but it has nothing to do with an unablity to learn and use rational concepts, they just have societies of peasants and freshly urbanized slum dwellers who are just starting to discover modernity. As a whole, I would say that everything that happens there absolutely make sense in this context and I’ve never seen behaviors, cultural trends or particular events that appeared stupid and senseless to me.

    For East Asians, I’ve never been to any of their countries but if i decided to rely solely on Japanese TV entertainment to make comments about the intellectual level of this race, I would clearly rank them well below any West African slum dweller. But I won’t do that, because I just don’t need to make intelligence rankings to understand the world.

    “A chromosome is a huge difference, because genes matter and there are a lot of genes on a chromosome.”

    The reason why a chromosome is a huge difference is because men miss one copy of every X chromosome gene and because the genes we have on our Y chromosome are not variants of X chromosome genes but completely different genes. This not what happens with allelic variations which are multiple versions of the same genes whose expression depends on interactions with other genes and environement. This is the reason why you will never (and I’m very confident) find genes that explain group differences better than cultural and environmental factors.

    Genetic variation and expression is just too complex to be understood by HBDers or to give simple conclusive explanations for vague behavioral traits. You guys are just doomed to rely on pre-modern twin studies and other unscientific empirical associations interpreted as causalities while blaming serious geneticists, neurologistis and biologistis for hiding the pretended truth at the same time.

    “Yet the only wiki-famous ones either sing or play sports…who would have guessed that? Not you with your dogmatic tabula rasa fantasy.”

    Now search for the wiki famous East Asian French and tell me what kind of super-surgeon you came across.

    “Yes, but because of the percentages killed it would be better phrased as only the smartest survived.”

    The jews who were murdered in the death camps were non-rebellious, law-abiding, compliant and low risk taking persons who just followed the instructions that led them to die inspite of expressing attitudes you associate with high intelligence. The adventurous, distrustful and risk taking persons who forsaw a fate that was thought to be irrational at that time managed to escape and survived helped by personality traits you associate with low intelligence.

    “You mean like the Jews”

    No, the exact opposite. The Jews have retaind great similarities inspite of their historical dispersal in West Eurasia and North and East Africa. And contrary to the Africans, the Jews are one people or see themselves as such. Blacks of the Americas originate from a multitude of African ethnic groups that see themselves as unrelated and today, New World blacks have no consciousness of the ethnicity of their African ancestors, their only identity is their race and the experience that comes along.

    Must I remind you that there is no world for Africa in any language of Subsaharan Africa except Dutch-derived Afrikaans and that West Africans in West Africa wether in their own languages or in colonial languages never (or seldom) refer to themselves as Black people ? This is not due to race-blindness but to the meaninglessness of the notion of race in their societal context.

    “It is interesting also quite how sociologically similar African-Americans and West Africans are; despite having entirely different environments.”

    I could not disagree more with that statement. You can argue that I only have book knowledge of African Americans but I know West Africans enough to tell you that they are culturally profoundly different from any western population including Blacks of the Americas. You seem to ignore it but West African cultures are extremely conservative and morally rigid. Black Africa is nothing like the huge African-American ghetto you seem to have in mind, it is predominantly rural region to begin with.

    I can assure you that West Africans have little time to sing and dance in their everyday life, they still don’t know the principle of welfare or paid holidays and people there have to work from a very early age to sustain themselves and their community. Of course there are no stay-at-home moms in West Africa but most of the work is obviously done by men, the only idle ones are the elderly patriarchs.

    “The same can be said of Black Brazillians or Cameroonians in France…”

    Funny how you draw anthropological conclusion from a tiny wikipedia article without knowing more about any of the subjects you deal with. I’m sure you now consider that you have deep knowledge of the Cameroonian diaspora in France.

    “that’s why the discoverer of DNA is a shunned for talking about them”

    Watson’s comments about African intelligence were not at all based on his genetic research. They were stupid and provocative statements based on IQ testing and what he calls his professional experience with black persons. None of his genetic insight was mobilized and he was ostracized for using his scientific authority while being obnoxious at the same time, that’s it.

    “Which is why you understand nothing. You have chosen ignorance.”

    Ethnic statistics are useless since we can’t design laws for the Arabs, laws for whites, laws for blacks… The other side of it is that we can’t implement affirmative action policies and this is a good thing too. Ethinc statistics only serve those who want to make them tell their bigoted truth.

    “France’s prison population is 70% Muslim. An astounding fact! 10% of the population commits 70% of the crime…and there aren’t any ghettos?”

    I wrote no racial ghetto. Muslim is not a race but yes many Muslims clearly have integration issues in France and so what ? Is a crime worse if commited by a Muslim person ? I don’t think so.

    Crime existed before Muslims went to France and it would exist with or without them. It’s the responsibility of law enforcement to provide equal security to every citizen and it starts by showing equal respect and consideration to everyone regardless of their race, religion or any other factor. As far as I’m concerned, the type of criminality that bothers me the most is white-collar crime, the fact that those who already have enough use their position to take even more in great impunity.

    Eventhough I consider myself being in the top quarter of the French income distribution I know I have more common interests to defend with any homeless or welfare queen than with those in the top 1%. I’m too smart to be sensitive to divisive discourses that are only there to keep masses in check.

  348. @Deduction

    Let me correct that part:

    “Of course there are no stay-at-home moms in West Africa but most of the work is obviously done by men, the only idle ones are the elderly patriarchs.”

    West African men do most of the income generating work and own the economic capital, then when it comes to household chores and domestic economy, women, especially poor women bear much of the burden. This is not specific to West Africa and it is true in every patriachal society.

    I live in a Latin culture country and there women have two workdays too, one at home and one in the formal economy. There will always be feminist complainers but at the same time, many women feel that men lose a part of their virility when taking part in household chores.

  349. @Deduction

    If you bother answering my last comments, I would like you to tell me what you actually know about the genetics of race and the genetics of intelligence. I ask you this favor because it is obvious that you are completely ignorant about human sciences like history, ethnology, sociology, economics especially when it comes to Africa and its diasporas.

    Anyway, your ignorance of this fields has little importance since you consider that group differences are only or mostly caused by genetic factors. So I believe that our conversation should now be focused on genetics.

    To give you a starting point for your explanation, I will write about my non-specialist knowledge of genetics.

    As I told you before, I agree with the mainstream assertion that observable races have no clear genetic borders. When trying to improve my understanding of race and genetics, I found that even alleles that are strongly associated with lighter or darker skin color were still found all over the globe and were never shared by all members of a race. It made me realize that a quite simple observable trait that I thought to be controlled by one single gene had a more complex genetic basis. Ironically, debating with HBDers has only led me to read studies that reinforced my comprehension of the genetic invalidity of race.

    Both of us seem to agree that inspite of the absence of clear racial genetic borders, variations in allele frequency allow to establish population genetic profiles from wich we can make safe predictions about an individual’s racial background even though we all carry many alleles that are rather uncommon within our race.

    However, I think you won’t agree with Lewontin’s statement that only around 6% of human genetic variation is useful in establishing population genetic profiles that fit observable racial categories. It means that 94% of genetic variation happens within a race and so does genetic influences for traits that have not been put under the selective pressures that caused observable physical differences between groups. But it is also possible that the 6% of genetic variation that is racially informative accidentaly influence traits like height, weight or behavior. Without knowing more, I can’t reject the idea that 6% of genetic influences for a particular trait may be found to be linked to observable races or to have racially informative frequency.

    We must also keep in mind that we have two copies of each gene (except for X chromosome genes in males) and that an individual potentially carries different alleles for a single gene that experiences variation between populations. Many gene variants are known to be neutral, others are inhibited by other genes or need an environmental activator. This is why I strongly doubt that highly polygenic traits like intelligence can show significant between group variation unless they have been put under strong evolutionary pressure, what I doubt even more since HBD theories in that matter make no sense whatsoever.

    What I’ve understood about genetic distances between populations is that Non-Africans are closer to each other than they are to Africans while at the same time Africans tend to be as distant to each others as they are to Non-Africans. This is due to the fact that subsaharan Africa is home to most of human genetic diversity which cause allele frequencies to be lower there whereas Non-Africans tend to show greater genetic uniformity and higher allele frequencies due to founder effect. This fact teaches us that most of human genetic diversity is concentrated in the relatively uniform black african population whereas the more geneticaly similar populations of North Africa, Eurasia, Oceania and the Americas also show the largest diversity in visible phenotype. That confirms the weak validity of the concept of race.

    I’m obviously not a geneticist but I wonder if research is not missing a lot of information about genetic variation by always trying to take samples from various continents when taking only African samples would lead to the discovery of many more gene variants.

    My disbelief in the hereditarian arguments for group differences in intelligence and personality comes from the following facts:

    -Race only correlates with 6% of genetic variation between individuals

    -While race is only 6% of heredity, heredity is said to explain only between 40% and 80% of variation in intelligence between individuals. Since I don’t believe in the ice age theory or the r-k reproductive strategy, I have no reason to believe that race correlates with more than 2.4% to 4.8% of the genetic component of intelligence.

    -But I have a huge reason to believe that the genetic association between race and intelligence is somewhere around 0%: the total absence of evidence that some groups have higher frequencies of alleles that increase or decrease intelligence.

    -In addition to this absent proof, nothing is known about the environmental sensitivity of the unknown genes that are involved in intelligence neither do we know what kind of interaction they have with other genes.

    -Though I’m not opposed to the idea of genetic predispositions for intelligence, I’m not fully convinced by the validity of twin studies and their ability to clearly distinguish genetic influences from environmental ones.

    -I’m even more distrustful toward IQ and other psychometric constructs. There are way too many different tests and a .95 correlation between test scores made by the same person tested twice is way too weak to give them a biological reality. In fact, testing is not measuring.

    -I’m very curious about intelligence and brain function but when I look for information on this topic, psychology is never a discipline that I seriously consider as having authority in that matter. Neuroscience is the science of the brain, it uses stable biologic notions, it has real life applications and it is largely immune to ideological pollution.

  350. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Deduction

    lol. Aww you panicking?

    There are even more countries that are majority black like Jamaica, Bahamas, Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago etc. They are all in the high development category. Go look.

    Bahamas and Barbados are basically knocking on the door of first world countries.

    The main point about that HDI trend line is that Africa has improved and is improving at its fastest rate since measurement and it does not matter about the resources as seen by Ethiopia. Countries like Gabon and Botswana are also diversifying their economies. So soon you won’t even have the oil/diamond argument left.

    They are improving the fastest at the furthest point since colonization.

    Also this:
    “Another interesting point from your own link is that in 1980 (when there was still Euro colonialism in Africa) SS Africa’s development was equal to South Asia’s. Now it is gone, SS Africa has been left far behind.”

    Yeah lol: SSA = 0.502 and South Asia = 0.588. WOW left far behind ey?!?!? LOL!!!!!!!

    Hahahaha

    I am living in Africa with Africans. I grew up with Africans, went to school with Africans. So don’t try your horseshit.

    and now on top of everything you have, as Chanda Chisala has reported Sub Saharan Africans beating Europeans in educational on average attainment in Northern Europe. Multiple groups of them and overall.

    Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

  351. LOLITA says:

    The alleles they have “correlated” are not even proven to be functional. The effect size is assumed to be so small that they actually imagine it lol.

    Even if they had an effect, they then have to prove that it is immutable via environment like epigenetics.

    Basically for over 100 years they have been trying but have not proven even 1% of the “genetic difference” not even 1%. IE they have proven nothing, zero %.

    They correlate MAOA allele for example with violence in African Americans, but the violence rate has seen massive changes and recently its been constantly decreasing in all groups since the 90s. Blacks have been closing the gap, and its the lowest its been so far.

    Blacks are even being arrested less now… also closed a large chunk of the gap.

    Tick tock racists… tick tock.

    Just remember that an average difference even if its genetic is easily changeable for liberals and egalitarians if they really want to or need to, but if the gap is too small for you, it means you totally lose. It means bye bye for good.

    • Replies: @Anti-Hereditarian
  352. @LOLITA

    “There are even more countries that are majority black like Jamaica, Bahamas, Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago etc. They are all in the high development category. Go look.”

    I agree with you, but be careful about the detail though. For instance, Trinidad and Tobago is an oil-rich country and South Asians are the plurality there. You know HBDers will always search for some admixture to account for the functional aspects of black societies so it is safer for you to base your arguments on purely and typically negroid countries of West Africa. This is why I only consider countries like Nigeria, Ghana, Senegal or Cameroon to be true representatives of the black race, in addition to being located in a region that I’m experienced with. I always avoid the Horn of Africa when discussing with HBDers, though they have no issues with labeling this region as black when they refer to the Somalian chaos or the 90s famines in Ethiopia, when you start talking about the historic civilizational developments or the begining industrialization of Ethiopia, they immediatly bring Arabian admixture as an argument to contradict the idea of black people’s ability to run functional societies.

    Considering West Africa only, you can point to the low crime rates in Niger, Senegal, Mali, or Sierra Leone, to the mid to high 80s average IQ reported from studies and scholastic achievment tests in Nigeria. You can also notice that STD prevalence is considerably lower in West Africa than in other parts of Africa or in Southeast Asia. Ghana has an impressively efficient public health system that many uninsured Americans would envy. Another fact that is too often understated is that Nigeria is one of today’s emerging economies, it has already surpassed South Africa in terms of total output and it will soon dominate it in many other indicators (South Africa is given way too much importance in the western mind in my opinion), it enjoys a middle-income status, oil now only accounts for a small fraction of its GDP and Nigeria’s performance is better than that of Pakistan or Bengladesh inspite of similar or worse adverse pressures. I don’t know South Asia at all but according to what I read it seems to be less devlopped than West Africa for many indices, malnutrition for instance seems to be much worse in Pakistan and India than in Cameroon, Nigeria or Ivory Coast. I also forgot to comment deduction’s claims about Euro colonialism in Africa in the 80s. What is he talking about ? Zimbabwe came under majority rule in 1980, Namibia in 1990 and South Africa in 1994, all other countries in Africa became indigeneously ruled before the 1980s. Deduction is a really ignorant commenter.

    Pretty much like IQ for intelligence, HDI or GDP per capita are not always accurate representations of a country’s living standards. Many countries in Eastern, Central and Southern Africa have their HDI lowered by HIV prevalence. HDI also includes GDP per capita wich is greatly influenced by age structure, countries of Subsaharan Africa often have 40% to 50% of their population under age 15 so a more accurate figure would be non-natural ressources GDP per adult. Moreover, GDP does not integrate the informal sector which generates most of the income in Africa and other developping countries. The other thing that is not taken into account is social inequalities, look at the Gulf countries South Africa, the USA or China for instance. In all of this countries, median leaving standards are well below average figures I’m not a great fan of statistics by the way.

    “They correlate MAOA allele for example with violence in African Americans, but the violence rate has seen massive changes and recently its been constantly decreasing in all groups since the 90s. Blacks have been closing the gap, and its the lowest its been so far.”

    True, and I would add that only 5% of African American men have the violent allele and it is said to express itself with an experience of childhood mistreatment. But in the hereditarian mind, the proportion of black males who are naturally prone to violence is much more than 5% and they never need to have been mistreated in their childhood. If I was an HBDer the MAOA allele would be a very disapointing finding.

    The best study about violence in Black American culture that I’ve found so far is Elijah Anderson’s Code of the Street. I’ve also learned much about the historical and cultural roots of the Ghetto lifestyle in Shadow of the Plantation by Charles Johnson and The Promised Land by Nicholas Lemann. Other good reads about Black youth in America are John Ogbu’s Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement and the unavoidable There Are No Children Here by Alex Kotlowitz. Once you get through all these books (and probably many others) you absolutely don’t need pseudoscientific HBD theories to find the answers you were looking for.

    • Replies: @Jm8
  353. Jm8 says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    One, of the more recent studies finds iqs (it appears) in the low to high 9o’s for Kenyans(Their main ethnic groups have no significant Caucasoid admixture, unlike some horn Africans), unfortunately the full version is no longer accessible for free.

    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/256016516_Environmental_Affordances_Predict_IQ_Test_Performance_of_Kenyan_High_School_Students

    Here Robert Lindsay, I, and others discuss it some in the comments

    https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/massive-flynn-gains-in-kenya/

    • Replies: @Jm8
    , @Anti-Hereditarian
  354. Jm8 says:
    @Jm8

    Some tropical diseases that artificially suppress iq, such as childhood malaria, are less severe in parts of Kenya.

  355. @Deduction

    “Of the bottom 28 countries, 26 are SS African, the other two are Haiti and Afghanistan.”

    Why picking only the bottom 28 and not choosing a threshold ? If I consider countries with an HDI under 0.500 (what can be thought as severe underdevlopment), the picture is different:

    10 don’t have a typical negroid majority (Madagascar, Papua New Guinea, Comoros, Solomon Islands, Mauritania, Sudan, Afghanistan, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Eritrea) whereas 23 do (Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Lesotho, Senegal, Uganda, Benin, Togo, Haïti, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Malawi, Liberia, Mali, Guinea-Bissau, Burkina Faso, Mozambique, Guinea, Burundi, Chad, Sierra Leone, Central African Republic, the DR Congo and Niger).

    Of the 33 countries with an HDI under 0.500, 12 are in West Africa and are home to 127 million inhabitants, 39% of the region’s 327 million population. The non-negroid countries in this category have a combined population of 205 million this is 34.5% of the 594million total.

    If we look for similarities between the these severely underdevlopped countries, race is not the most reliable factor. The only race to have the majority of its members in under 0.500 HDI countries are the Caucasoids of the Horn of Africa. Tropical location however is relevant, the only non tropical country in this category being Afghanistan. Tropicality causes higher infectious diseases prevalence and is an impediment to agricultural productivity. An history of war and political instability, often associated with high ethnocultural diversity obviously plays a role and instability in turn fuels poverty, corruption and many other social issues. Isolation due to landlockedness, continentality or insularity may add to other disadvantages. History is also a common factor, all of these countries have been and still are low technology agrarian societies with limited pre-modern political traditions, they have not yet caught up with the global capitalistic culture and internal economic exchanges still make little use of money.

  356. @Jm8

    Kenya’s IQ gains have been impressive over the last decades and a mean IQ around 90 is perfectly plausible and concordant with the data from Nigeria which has a common genetic profile with the Bantu populations of Kenya. I belive that the Nilotic tribes although they somewhat differe from the Bantus also have a profoundly indigenous subsaharan genetic background while the share of Cushitic peoples related to the Horn of Africa is negligible in Kenya. Moreover, the first study to report a massive increase up to a low 90s average was performed on rural subjects of the Bantu Embu people living in the Mount Kenya region that is less affected by tropical constraints.

    Even with an average IQ around 90, I don’t believe that Subsaharans have yet reached their full potential. They have benefited from improvments in education but the quality is still well below western standards, rote learning, teacher’s absenteism, large classes, obsolete and insufficient facilities and equipments are to blame for it. They don’t either receive the same school support at home nor the same early intellectual stimulation that is so crucial when the brain develops the fastest. Malaria and other diseases are still too common and nutrition though sufficient in quantity still lags behind in qualitative aspects such as sanitary control, diversity, meat consumption and nutrient supplementation. Lead has been suppressed from the atmosphere, improvements in housing will have effects on health too I think they will still benefit from reduced family size when they enter demographic transition thus concentrating more ressources and attention on fewer offsprings. Overall, I’m much more optimistic with Subsaharan African’s ability to bridge the IQ gap with first world whites and even surpass them as they seem to experience stagnation or flynn effect losses than in Blacks of the Americas who have trapped themsleves in a culture of intellectual disengagement.

    What is even more interesting is that Subsaharan Africans perform at the same levels as African Americans or even better inspite of environmental disadvantages. I think this is due to cultural factors, mainly with respect to education. Though there are still many early school drop outs in Subsaharan Africa because of early labor force participation and early marriage, education among the fairly economically secure segments of the population is taken very seriously, teenagers are pushed to become responsible adults, authority and traditional institutions are respected and the underclass mentality is non-existant among Africans, or at least West Africans if I only rely on my own experience and book knowledge. Blacks from Southern Africa however seems to be more similar to Blacks of America, this is may be attributed to the social and cultural legacy of white supremacy as well as the terrific effects of AIDS on family structure.

  357. Dr. Doom says:

    This is really easy to explain. Affirmative Action and dumbed down schools. Grades for blacks are highly inflated, since most go to schools with mostly blacks which are hardly more than daycare centers. Standardised testing will show just how dismally low black IQs really are, and blaming culture is just a standard excuse egalitarian fantasists use to waste educational resources on retards.

  358. No conclusions ????

    Mine would be…….effort.

  359. TD says:

    The basal norms within a population are irrelevant for individuals. If you take two individuals with 100 IQ, if genetics are responsible for their IQ, then it doesn’t matter what color they are, you should expect them to produce offspring with the same intelligence.

    You would expect for exceptional individuals to produce exceptional offspring if IQ was primarily hereditary.

    This doesn’t really provide evidence one way or another regarding basal levels of IQ for their countries of origination, because people who immigrate aren’t randomly selected – in fact, you’re selecting for the people who can afford to get out of their home country. If you took only the Americans who scored 130+ on IQ tests, took them somewhere else, and had them interbreed, they would show a remarkably high level of intelligence in their offspring – but it wouldn’t be telling you anything about the base population.

    That doesn’t mean that Jenson ISN’T wrong about basal IQ levels in Africa, though – they are not really calculable right now, because most of Africa has not undergone the full effects of the Flynn Effect. Claiming 70 to be their “true” IQ is questionable.

    As far as regional differences amongst Africans goes: as anyone who understands population genetics knows, “black” isn’t a race. “Black people” don’t exist. There are more significant differences between blacks than there are amongst other population groups. There’s no reason to expect “Africans” to be uniform, because they aren’t a single population group but multiple population groups which are highly genetically divergent. American descendants of slaves are primarily descended from people who were captured by West Africans, shipped across the ocean, and enslaved for 60-200 years. They are from different basal populations (probably untraceable at this point), and they had selective pressures put on them that might select for specific traits. It is entirely plausible that, for instance, smart slaves were more frequently killed than dumb ones because they were “uppity”, resulting in negative selection for intelligence – or that dumb slaves were more frequently killed than smart ones because they were too stupid to know not to cause trouble. Or it may have had no effect at all.

    • Agree: Deduction
  360. Much more important than IQ is who is inventing modern and high technology, things that are useful to this world.

    No afro-blacks have ever designed, engineered, or invented anything that could be labeled high technology or even useful to the world populace.

    Black studies courses in colleges have created lists of supposed afro invented technologies, but in virtually all cases the claims were bogus.

    Getting a PhD in afro and gender and queer and Semitism college studies does not make anyone truly smart, but it does make them eligible for a nice government job.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  361. The main thing I got from this article was that the Igbo kick ass – good for them, and to me it suggests the importance of having deep cultural roots as much as anything genetic, since the bronzes they produced centuries ago evidence a very developed culture.

    The second thing I got was that black British and white British are pretty much on the same intellectual level – something that firsthand experience will tell you – and, again, that suggests the importance of culture. Black British culture is pretty much just British culture or at least similar – probably because of the West Indian British colonial history.

    The third thing was the importance of making educated distinctions between different groups rather than just lumping people into the categories ‘black’, ‘white’, and ‘Asian’. High time this was recognised! The black/white racism debate in America is looking a bit provincial in its outlook!

    The fourth thing was the causes of black American underachievement must be highly specific to America. The result of policy? The result of culture? The result of historical experience? Genetics again looks less likely as a cause than environment.

    Lastly, where are the Bangladeshis on that British chart? And why the huge difference between Pakistanis and Indians? Extraordinary!

    • Replies: @Joe Franklin
  362. XVO says:

    “It is only in recent years, as the immigrants have stayed long enough to produce a sufficiently high number of offspring, that it has been observed that they are over-represented among high academic achievers, especially when compared to native blacks, particularly at very elite institutions. What has been missed in the IQ debate is the full logical implication of these achievements: they have effectively nullified any arguments for a racial evolutionary explanation of the well-known IQ test score gap between blacks and whites.”

    Erm, actually this is exactly what any logical hereditarian would expect. Intelligent blacks have intelligent children. You pick the best and brightest in Africa and send them to the United States to have children and of course their children are going to do better than the native blacks who were selected because their ancestors were easy to enslave. Presumably being from a stock of Africans that were enslaved, American blacks would have a lower IQ than the average African. Mixing with white’s over the years in American blacks has made up some of the difference.

    Your entire analysis from this point on is flawed and based on confused and faulty logic typical of leftists. I’m surprised you’re writing at this site and I hope we never see your demented logic again.

  363. @silver surfer

    Is violent, excessive felony criminal behavior considered under achievement in your world?

    Making extraordinary claims requires evidence.

    Get busy.

  364. martin_2 says:

    I have been involved in education of a hard science all my working life. I have taught quite a few Nigerian blacks living in London, UK, who have performed remarkably. I mean getting their GCSEs when they were 10 or thereabouts. Doing A levels at 12. OTOH the average black is pretty weak. There is no way that the number of exceptional blacks from Nigeria is “what would one expect from the Gaussian distribution”. I have never met a single white and not even a Jew with such an academic profile. There is clearly something genetic going on. One thing I also notice is that they don’t “train on”. They don’t fulfill their early promise.

  365. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Drake

    That’s why the author also mentioned the children and grandchildren of the immigrants; it rules out selection bias, or at least defeats the idea that they regress to the mean. Finally, your argument could be made about every other immigrant class in America, which is almost everyone.

  366. @Andrew E. Mathis

    I was merely pointing out that Hitler had the same point of view

    He also supported the welfare state. So everyone else who supports the welfare state is his ally in a way.

    Be consistent.

  367. @Joe Franklin

    Getting a PhD in afro and gender and queer and Semitism college studies does not make anyone truly smart, but it does make them eligible for a nice government job.

    Nice for them. Those who hold these positions aren’t nice to the rest of us.

  368. Ironclad says:

    They are the most intellectually elite, the ones from the topmost segment of the IQ bell curve in their countries; the outliers who got some lucky genes in an otherwise poor-gene environment.
    This argument can explain the equally, if not more impressive, achievements of their children: their children are also lottery winners, because children of parents with high intelligence tend to have high intelligence themselves. They inherit the trait. Its that simple.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  369. The white (and Indian, and Chinese) admixture into the lineage of Caribbean blacks is extensive, contrary to the suggestion in this article. How that compares with the non-black admixture of American blacks, however, I don’t know. Similar, I should think.

  370. Whether African ethnic groups have different IQ averages and distributions is a factual question that can be answered by administering tests to different groups. Some might in fact have average IQs equal to or higher than some white groups, but what the author presents as evidence shows little or nothing: it’s not worth arguing about. Get the data and settle the question factually.

  371. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Ironclad

    False. As an immigrant in the U.S, I can tell you that immigrants are mixed mag: You get the “elite”, the average ones, the failures. The last two are generally not taken in account when dismissing the success of Africans abroad, because it’s simply, quite frankly, easier to cling to the idea that Blacks are a dumb bunch.

  372. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Scientific racism is more or less obsolete. These racist folks should get it a rest, they keep been defeated every now and then.

  373. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I love how the charlatans claim victory with bad data or very misrepresented ones. Either that or they construct a strawman to bash HBDers.

    Heres the takeaway from the article:

    Because of a highly select group of Africans whom arent representative of their respective populations performing well on a series of metrics that arent very g-loaded and obfuscated by factors such as affirmative action, government policy, and societal encouragement for diversity, this suddenly dismantles the theory of evolution and natural selection.

    Sorry but you’re gonna have to do better than that.

    Here’s why people use Lynn’s, Jensen’s and Murray’s IQ scores when discussing racial IQ: They are the most comprehensive and the best in terms of what we got. The fact that even nobel prize winners can instantly get ostracized from the scientific community is evidence enough that the witch hunt for “baawww racists” exists and consequently, the prevalent pro-environmental narrative should be under high scrutiny. Brave men like Lynn and Jensen actually approach the subject like scientists: objectively, with little to no bias, without regard for public dissent and social consequences, and politically unmotivated, which is how it SHOULD BE. This article reeks of bias motivated by afrocentrism or hugbox safe space loving liberals. In fact, one of the other posters started arguing on the basis of “think about the social consequences! What about their humanity!!!!!!” which is NOT how science should be approached. Moving on.

    Denying the genetic component in intelligence is literally denying evolution, making you no better than crreationists. Hell, HBDers like Lynn dont even subscribe to a 100% genetic component but a balanced one such as a 60% genetic component, but because of the pervasiveness of intellectual dishonesty in the media and academics, they are characterized as “100% genetic racistr!!!!” Think of whats more likely to be the case: a combination of nature/nurture, or an extreme genetic or environment component in EITHER DIRECTION.

    Then we have the occasional person who strawmans the hell out of the definition of race or intelligence and argues over semantics ie. “We dont have a clear set of genes that demarcates race” or “race is a social construct”. Like intelligence, race has an imprecise but very ubiquitous definition; everyone can see a clear difference between a chinese, african, and white person, but maybe not so much between a chinese, korean, or a jap. The fact that these differences are sometimes difficult to pinpoint doesnt detract away from its existence, it just shows that they are continuuous, not so dissimilar from the geographic manmade boundaries of the world.

    Here’s why HBD makes the best case regarding differences in IQ between races: it has the most explanatory power save certain minute exceptions. Remember that HBD and environmental explanations arent mutually exclusive (alluding to how Lynn believes heredity to be 60% of intelligence). Small little improvements in IQ can be attributed to the other 40% that make up environment or luck. However, this does not materially refute the general HBD position. The fact that Kenyans have a potential IQ of 90 rather than 86 does not refute the general HBD position and so forth. Adoption studies and twin studies already show the genetic basis of IQ.

    To be fair, I have seen very unconvincing evidence arguing for a 100% environmental basis for IQ. This article attempted to do so, but failed based on shoddy sampling and invalid metrics used (when discussing intelligence, its best to used g-loaded tests ie. IQ tests or SAT scores, not things like the 2007 GSCE).

    With that said and to not sound like a cuckservative, I will decry the use of significant achievements used as a metric of intelligence that some HBDers do use. Similar to academic success, Inventions, technology, and innovation are the byproducts of many externalities which may not be related to intelligence at all. So by calling Africans “dumb negroes who havent invented the wheel proves im right!” is as bad as claiming that “blacks who do well in school proves im right!” Again, if you wanna measure intelligence, stick with the IQ tests

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Dipwill_
  374. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Your desperate attempt to save what is left of your scientific racism…. Intelligence is beyond what you make of it, so stop narrowing IQ to your self serving parameters.

    What makes you think the parameters used by Jensen and co are flawless? You just posted a load of subtle biase, not FACTS.

    You have been brainwashed and deluded by what you were CONDITIONED to believe as regards Human Intelligence Quotient… such a pity.

    If only you knew who the west African IGBOS were, from BOWEN’S book on slavery, to this present neocolonial era of Africa, you would not embarrass yourself here.

    Generally, Africans have a rich history of technical prowness in commerce, crafts, etc….using Jensen and co to subjugate them psychologically won’t work on the long run.

    A child who learnt how to write LATE does not make him inferior IN ANY WAY to others. Let the child move at his own pace under the right conditions or environment.

    • Replies: @james1
  375. james1 says:

    GCSEs do not measure I.Q;they have been sabotaged by the political class. A-levels and degrees have been less corrupted and that is why your study doesn’t mention them once because the GCSE results do not translate into superior performance in exams which actually test I.Q.

    Also ,what of the I.Q studies in the UK which show time and time again that blacks have low intelligence. I love the idea that you expect the reader to believe that GCSEs are a superior method for measuring intelligence than actual intelligence tests.

  376. james1 says:
    @Anonymous

    Never managed to even invent the wheel.

    Arabs and Europeans had to bring the wheel into Africa

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  377. […] has been much talk here about Chanda Chisala’s article “The IQ gap is no longer a black and white issue.” Much of the article focuses on the Igbo (known also as Ibo), a people who live in the Niger […]

  378. Jm8 says:

    The GCSE key stage 4 scores are taken around the age of sixteen but The CAT sores given are from a younger age group (11) and even more closely match Group performances at the same age GCSE evaluation stage (Key stage 2). Thus Pakistani and (overall) black African (for instance) scores rise from their closely correlated (maths/english gcse and g/iq being closely correlated, see Ian Deary) age 11 CAT/key stage 2 levels to their respective higher Ks 4 levels seen.
    The Ethnic gaps (across the key stages) on the in the achievement tests do not tend to show a gradual widening but rather seem to narrow with age if anything. The CAT scores would likely show a similar (gaps narrowing with age) pattern.

    See:

    https://z139.wordpress.com/2012/04/05/a-gaping-hole-in-the-masters-evolutionary-theory/

    and:

    Minority Ethnic Pupils in the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England
    Extension Report on Performance in Public Examinations at Age 16
    Dr Steve Strand

    http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/7916/1/DCSF-RR029.pdf

    “Some gaps change very little. For example the relative gap associated with social class, mother’s educational qualifications and entitlement to a FSM did not change substantially over the three time points. Other gaps did show substantial change. For example the gender gap increases significantly, from less than 0.07 SD at KS2 to 0.23 SD by the end of KS4, with the largest shift occurring between KS3 and KS4. The gaps for some ethnic groups decrease substantially, for example Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Black African mean scores were significantly below the White British mean at KS2 and KS3 but these gaps narrowed to less than 0.1 SD by the end of KS4, again with the big change happening during KS4.”(Steve Strand)

    Social class gaps are still significant, more so than most ethnic gaps. This goes against the idea of grade inflation as significant cause of ethnic gap narrowing.

    https://z139.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/race-class-and-cognition-in-the-uk/

  379. Russell says:

    The biggest distinctions that need to be made are between the “hereditarians” and the “environmentalists”.

    Hereditarians are seeking proof of their theory with and for the sake of science.

    This is opposed to “environmentalists”.
    They are seeking proof of their theory with non-science and for the sake of political correctness.

  380. Ben says:
    @M_Young

    Of course immigrants from the UK have swamped North America, Australia etc. So another term for the swarthy migration to the UK is ‘colonization.’ If white people in the UK become an impotent minority in 100 years, well, they can go cry to the Amerindians and Aborigines. It wouldn’t even be the first time the population of the Isles has been displaced/murdered and replaced.

    • Replies: @No_0ne
  381. Dipwill_ says:
    @Anonymous

    As someone who’s an HBDer, this comment is pretty terrible.

    “Because of a highly select group of Africans whom arent representative of their respective populations performing well on a series of metrics that arent very g-loaded and obfuscated by factors such as affirmative action, government policy, and societal encouragement for diversity, this suddenly dismantles the theory of evolution and natural selection.”

    No, you just skimmed over the article and toss out baseless, tired retorts of “affirmative action” and acted like it’s either anti-HBD or whatever you believe. I think it says things like the geography of intelligence is far more complex than many of these shoddy “race realist” arguments that have been flung around and maybe Africa isn’t a continent of drooling retards.

    “Here’s why people use Lynn’s, Jensen’s and Murray’s IQ scores when discussing racial IQ: They are the most comprehensive and the best in terms of what we got. ”

    Yeah, and the “best we’ve got” (atleast in regards to Lynn- Murray hasn’t done much actual IQ research, and Jensen, while much better than Lynn, isn’t without some major flaws) is largely the work of a charlatan: http://www.unz.com/akarlin/ancient-greeks-not-geniuses/#comment-1278467

    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/no-blacks-arent-all-alike-who-said-they-were/#comment-1182461

    “Brave men like Lynn and Jensen actually approach the subject like scientists: objectively, with little to no bias, without regard for public dissent and social consequences, and politically unmotivated, which is how it SHOULD BE. ”

    Lynn isn’t brave, he’s a liar and a fraud who’s been producing shoddy to outright made up work since the earliest days of his career. He’s heavily sympathetic to racial nationalism, and his buddy Rushton is an asiaphile and white nationalist who embraced nordicism (specifically, the works of nordic supremacist and fantasy author Arthur Kemp) later in life: http://www.arthurkemp.com/2011/12/magnificent-very-convincing-professor-j.html

    I do think science and research should be conducted as objectively as possible, but I’ve realized this dettached, Spock-like framework is a joke and unhealthy. Worth noting how Jensen has said he despises people who put their politics into their work yet swallowed Rushton and Lynn’s work (and collaborated with the former) wholesale.

  382. Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    The article says

    The stubborn refusal of their children to conspicuously regress to the much lower African genetic mean IQ (and not even to the African American mean IQ) predicted by hereditarians is simply inexplicable under their racial genetic hierarchy.

    That’s a bad argument. A hereditarian would predict that the children of a genius (top of the bell curve) immigrant would naturally INHERIT (hence, hereditarian) the intelligence.

    Moreover, hereditarians have never argued that it’s 100% DNA. They simply say it is an important factor. It could account for 20% of the variation or up to 80%.

    However, Jensen and Lynn are not claiming IQ is 100% genetic! Not even close.

    The children of the ambitious immigrants acquire the culture and high work ethic of her parents too. So it’s doubly-reinforcing because they get DNA and work-ethic culture!

    I’m a perfect example of this. My parents were both immigrants (Chile + France). They gave me the benefit of their DNA + their culture/work ethic/habits, which then allowed me to go to Harvard and for my brother to go get a masters from Science Po (in Paris), another masters from Cambridge (UK), and an MD from U of Chicago (a top 10 medical school).
    My dad was a college drop out, and my mom was a high school drop out. But they had the DNA and culture which turned them into multi-millionaires.

    There are two kinds of immigrants:

    1) WILLFUL: Like my parents

    2) FORCED: Like slaves and refugees

    #1 is much better than #2 if you want to measure the immigrant effect.

    Then the author makes a poor argument here:

    The academic performance of the African students in the UK is even more remarkable when the well-known fact of higher black involvement in sport and athletics (at any level) is taken into account. Whereas Chinese and Indian students are not exactly expected to lead their schools or colleges to winning athletic championships, many black students are actively involved in athletics even when they have a strong academic focus

    .

    Asian students usually do an extracurricular activity, like student gov, music or drama. It may not be sports, but athletics isn’t the only non-academic activity at school!

  383. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Simon in London

    “Furthermore, white admixture is not necessarily a magic IQ raiser; Ethiopians for instance do not seem to perform at as high a level as some Nigerian groups.”

    …..Ethiopians don’t have White admixtures. Please don’t use the argument “They look different” as the reason to why you’re sure they are.

  384. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The article seems to prove the very point that hereditarians make in general— that cognitive ability among groups has a genetic component. It is undoubtedly true that IQ varies greatly among various African groups. This has been known for many decades. Of course for that reason the lumping of all Africans into a same general IQ category for certain purposes would not take that fact into consideration; but the practical political question then becomes: Will there really be a resort to DNA testing to determine such matters as immigration?

    Simply Google “IQ by country” and the IQ results are plain to see. Even if one takes issue with certain IQ test results, the article simply illustrates the existence of the genetic differences among groups. It’s not at all the position of heretidarians that the average IQ of whites must be higher than the IQ of blacks—only that heredity is a component of cognitive ability (often stated to be 50%). Although tests have shown the black-white disparity to exist in almost all cases, it may not necessarily always apply. For example, if the 15-point IQ difference between blacks and whites in the US would not apply to a certain tribe or tribes in Africa, so be it; it means that the higher-performing Africans in question inherited better genes than other blacks on the continent. Good for them.

    The differences in India provide another example. In India average IQ between 9 measured groups ranges from a high of 120 among Southern Brahmin to a low of 75 among Dalits and Muslims.

    In India the 45 point difference may be partially due to differences in nutrition. The same may be true for Africans. The environmentalists take the position, however, that differences in IQ are 100% the result of culture, and that hereditary has no bearing whatsoever. They claim that all that has to be done is to spend more money on government programs, and that the result will be that all people(s) will be exactly equal. This absurdity is patently wrong both as an inter-and intra-racial thesis.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  385. The differences in India provide another example. In India average IQ between 9 measured groups ranges from a high of 120 among Southern Brahmin to a low of 75 among Dalits and Muslims.

    Kindly back up that low IQ BS propaganda by recognised peer-reviewed data, pls?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  386. I think the author has misunderstood the concept of regression to the mean. It does not mean that the children of high achieving blacks will statistically have a mean IQ equal to the overall black mean. What it means is there is a chance that the IQ will regress towards the mean. But if selection for intelligence continues in the subsequent generation then there will be statistically higher IQs again among those children. In the case of African immigrants, they are often drawn form higher class Africans who may have been selected for intelligence and achievement already over many generations before even reaching America. If regression to the precise mean was literally true then there would be no such thing as dairy cows or champion breed race horses. In fact there would be no such thing as evolution via natural selection.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  387. @Simon in London

    “But economic immigration from high-abililty groups is much preferable to “refugee/asylum seeker” immigration, where the migrating populations tend to be some of the worst on the planet in terms of human capital.”

    Not always, Ashkenazi Jews were refugees with very high IQs. I expect a lot of the persecuted minority groups in the Middle East, such as Middle East Christians, or Alawaites (if the Sunnis defeat Assad), most likely have higher IQ than the Middle East mean. Judging by their economic and political achievements despite persecution.

  388. @Simon in London

    Grade inflation makes cross-temporal comparison difficult. It doesn’t stop comparison between groups at a particular moment in time.

    It does when you are comparing the proportion of students who can achieve at least 5 C grades including English and Maths. I took GCSEs in the 90s. To get a GCSE C grade may only require an IQ of about 85.

  389. 400 comments!

    To future commenters, there is a series of articles I wrote after this article (Closing the Black-White IQ Gap Debate and Towards a Theory of Everyone) that answer the comment you’re about to make — especially if it’s about something you believe I’ve totally misunderstood! :)

    It’s been a great ride here and I hope I’ve contributed a bit to the discussion with the data and analysis.

  390. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Stefan Molyneux has done a series of lectures on this topic that can be seen on YouTube.

  391. @Chanda Chisala

    He doesn’t need to read the article, he already knows everything about the subject, and will delete your comment if you disagree with him, leaving all his articles with an overwhelming majority of complimentary posts.

  392. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    The UK evidence of a decrease in the IQ gap is based on GCSE results. GCSEs are taken at sixteen. Blacks have faster maturation rates and higher self-esteem/confidence which would account for better performance at this age. A proper estimation of relative IQ status would focus on higher educational attainments. British academia is monolithically left-wing, this seems like obvious cherry picking.

    Non-Britons will be unaware that teachers identify as a middle class intelligentsia and tend to favour black children over white working class children. This would encourage positive bias toward blacks; fear of accusations of “racism” are probably also a factor.

    If culture trumps heredity can we have examples of a black academic flourishing in countries like SA and Zimbabwe that inherited and have free access to white educational systems?

  393. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Simon in London

    Reversion to the mean only makes sense if IQ differences are environmental. Jensen must have meant that it is a test to see whether IQ differences are heritable traits. This paper meticulously shows IQ is heritable, using Jensen’s test.

  394. Abc says:
    @David

    Neil DeGrasse Tyson?

  395. Tk says:

    What kind of fictitious nonsense is this esoteric dribble masquerading as scientific research? Pathetic really, you will go to any lengths to validate the black race and invalidate everyone else.

  396. vcragain says:

    I am an immigrant from UK with a lot of personal experience of Caribbean peoples, and the one thing that really stands out when you come to the US is the ATTITUDE & feelings exhibited by black Americans – these people were & are still subjugated, feel so, and there is no comparison to other peoples of color from either UK (Caribbean mostly) and those directly from Africa. The difference is amazing – US blacks are mostly still IN the pain of their centuries-old treatment, their CONFIDENCE is still under duress and I believe this is why so much of their mental capacity is stifled. Regardless how smart the ‘measuring’ of so-called intelligence, this cultural difference between those who are still largely living under their ‘masters’ and those whose countries are largely ruled by their own people is really strong, I have seen it and felt it for years.
    I have no idea how to fix it right now, the joy of being your own self without the constraint of servitude cannot be measured by the ‘intelligence’ testing, and I hope for the future that all mankind will be allowed to grow and learn to be the best they can be. Give these people their own respect and they rapidly rise in stature – it is happening, but very slowly, many black Americans have achieved great things and are able to look the world in the eye with that confidence, I am hoping another generation will entirely solve this problem, little black babies need to be taught that they are smart and given the stimulus WITHOUT also being taught about the denigrating pressure from white society which causes a pull back and clamping down of little minds. They are taught by their mothers, with good reason, to be cautious of white people, to hold back and not trust, none of this is taught to little white children, they are more likely to be free spirits, getting into childhood mischief, and thereby stimulating their minds, mischief is more tolerated by white parents I think, and black kids often have more authoritarian type parenting which is known to cause a clamp-down of inspiration in anybody, this may be partly to blame too.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  397. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I may have missed something, but the IQ gap does not propose that there are no smart blacks…just that the black bell curve is situated well to the left of the White curve. There are obviously…and always have been brilliant black people who exist on the right fringes of said curve.

    That some blacks are geniuses does not negate the general/average/median IQ gap.

    Does it?

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  398. […] I cite Chanda Chisala in the Unz Review: […]

  399. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I haven’t read the whole thing. it’s long. i will get back to it. But in the beginning of the article when they are laying out their case they seem to suggest the children of high achieving african blacks also being high achieving nullifies all the evolutionary explanation for low average black IQ. This is a bold statement and I can’t imagine any serious scientist saying that. I disagree, it seems to make that exact case. IQ is highly correlated with genes. Some say as much as 80% of the white/black gap is genetic. It would make sense that children of high achievers would also be high achievers. That says nothing about the low achievers that bring the average down.

  400. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @vcragain

    [To avoid sockpuppetry, it's important to pick a single handle and stick to it, though Anonymous or Anon is always acceptable.]

    This all sounds great except it has been scientifically debunked by many studies and peer reviewed papers. If you have evidence that black american “pain” from being subjugated by their masters is a reason why their IQ is lower than all other races, please provide it. you will be a rock star in the field. you would probably get a nobel. BTW intelligence testing is not so-called. It is one of the most studied and agreed upon disciplines in social science. It determines many things about your life from how well you will do in school, to who will hire you to even if you are accepted into the military and what level. blacks dismiss this important fact at their own peril.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  401. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    I appreciate the efforts of various intellectual bodies at gaining understanding of the intellectual endowment of different races. The most fundamental error in this analysis is the the empirical data being used. What do I mean by that? The assumption that the best brain of different races is what you have aggregated in U.K or the US. It is simply not so. The most brilliant in the third world economies pass their exams and gain admissions into their higher institutions of learning. It is partly, those who couldn’t make it into their country’s higher institutions of learning, that find their ways out into foreign schools. Also, their are few brilliant children of the rich that go straight to Ivy league institutions abroad, as well as the not so brilliant but parents could afford it group, that also travel for the advantage it could bring to the children.
    In essence, the larger population of the high IQ are resident in their respective countries.
    My contribution to the issue of IQ is that, every human person is well endowed in the area of their God given assignment with a very IQ in that area. Until an individual begins to operate in that area, their can be no special manifestation of high IQ.
    Your society should even understand this better, because you people relate with individuals talents better than the developing world. And you know that a person may seem not to be smart in academic, but gifted in basketball, music, football, athletics etc. and in this area he/she could function like a god, with very high IQ in performance.
    In other words, no individual or race is inferior to another.
    Discovery of talent and understanding of purpose is the need of every individual as well as nation’s, even races.
    People are meant to play their roles in their times, provided they discover their talents and understand their life purpose/assignment.
    There is also the time for each race to lead humanity, and provisions to that effect are always divinely orchestrated, with the requisite deposits made in the people of that race.
    Please get ready, for the world dominance by the black race!

    • Replies: @This Is Our Home
    , @bomag
  402. […] recent report that succeeded in debunking the false narrative of Whites being more intelligent or academically […]

  403. […] recent report that succeeded in debunking the false narrative of Whites being more intelligent or academically […]

  404. […] recent report that succeeded in debunking the false narrative of Whites being more intelligent or academically […]

  405. […] recent report that succeeded in debunking the false narrative of Whites being more intelligent or academically […]

  406. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Do you have any data to support your estimate of iq 120 for brahmin and 75 for dalit ir is it just a figment of your imaginative (but probably low iq) brain.

    To the best of our knowledge the highest iq score for brahmin is 88. In UK, srilanka tamil, a dalit community score higher than brahmins.
    North Indian brahmin (90 % of all brahmins) may have average iq score of 75, lower than blacks and dalit.

  407. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    There are so many problems with this article it’s almost not worth commenting on. Nevertheless:
    1) Largely anecdotal. No real mathematical rigor behind many of the claims.
    2) Writer claims regression to mean non-existent, but again, no hard data. Regression to mean is gradual, & small in a single generation. We simply don’t know if African immigrant lines regress to mean by this article. My guess is they do by a few IQ points. Saying there are a lot of children of African immigrants at elite school proves nothing, particularly given the fact that black pupils get 300 SAT points merely for being black, in being admitted to these schools.
    3) I’d also speculate that 100% or close to it, of African & Carib-black success is due to immigrant selection.
    4) This is an article with cherry-picked data intended to support a particular point/agenda, nothing more.
    5) Another problem with racial comparisons today is that the definition of white has changed to include various non-white caucasian groups. Even the black population has changed, not just in increased white admixture in West, but also due to selective migration of blacks from all over world, from a pool of billions of people. For this reason, inter-generational comparisons are problematic. The black-white IQ gap is as wide as it’s ever been. You just have to compare African Americans who aren’t immigrants or recently descended from immigrants & whites with the same ethnic background as the nation 50 years ago.
    6) Let’s hope this article’s almost African sloppiness isn’t the future of Western science. If it is, we’re in even worse shape than the hereditarians suggest.

    • Replies: @TheHill
  408. Okechukwu says:

    There’s no evidence that only the brightest Africans immigrate. From my personal experience, many of the truly smart remain in Africa while many of the not-so-smart immigrate. You cannot immigrate to the U.K. or U.S. without supportive family members in the host countries. Those family members do not give intelligence tests to prospective immigrants. If indeed the immigration process somehow selected for intelligence, I know many Nigerians who would be in America and many already in America who would’ve remained in Nigeria.

  409. Okechukwu says:
    @Anonymous

    If you have evidence that black american “pain” from being subjugated by their masters is a reason why their IQ is lower than all other races, please provide it.

    If you don’t think that 400+ years of subjection, dehumanization and cultural ostracization will impact IQ scores, one would have to call your own intelligence into question. We have abundant evidence of similar IQ average disparities vis-a-vis an oppressed or ostracized group versus the majority culture. Irish Catholics, for example, score a full standard deviation below Irish Protestants. There are many other such examples. Irish Catholics and Protestants, by the way, are genetically identical, which argues persuasively for the environmental model to explain IQ disparities.

    Black Americans do have higher IQ averages than a host of white/Caucasian and Asian countries, such as Iran, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc. If so-called race realism had any merit, we would expect all Caucasians to have higher IQ averages than all blacks, and they do not.

  410. Okechukwu says:
    @Anonymous

    It’s just that the black bell curve is situated well to the left of the White curve.

    You do realize there are blacks and whites located outside of the United States, right? Your neat little categories borne of wishful thinking and a misplaced superiority complex don’t always jibe with the reality outside of America.

    I have no confidence in IQ testing. IQ can rise once someone acculturates himself to what the IQ test is looking for. Therefore it has virtually nothing to do with genetics. Don’t take my word for it, simply investigate the historical rise of IQ scores among whites themselves. I’m sure you don’t believe that your great-grandparents generation of whites were imbeciles. Well, they actually scored much lower than black Americans score today.

    That some blacks are geniuses does not negate the general/average/median IQ gap.

    What makes you think that genius is more prevalent among whites than blacks? Where’s your data? There are geniuses sitting in African villages right now. The difference between them and the ones you know about is they have either not been exposed or they haven’t had the opportunity for their genius to express itself. Don’t you find it odd that we only discover African geniuses among those that immigrate to the west? Why do you think that is?

    A) These people happen to be the only African geniuses and they just happened to immigrate to the west.

    Or

    B) These are merely a representative sample of African geniuses of which there are countless others.

    If you answered B you’d be correct. In much the same way, we find no evidence of geniuses or great thinkers among Europeans of antiquity with the exception of Romans and Greeks, who were not Europeans back then. What’s more, we find no examples of European geniuses or great thinkers during the Middle Ages. Why do you think that is?

    A) They just didn’t exist.

    Or

    B) They did not have an opportunity to give expression to their genius.

    If you answered B you’d be correct.

  411. Baffle them with BS.

    Of all the charts and data, none that refutes the historical and consistent findings of race/IQ differences.
    Sad CC keeps trying. Why not accept the facts and move on from here ?

  412. TheHill says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    So do you think racial naivete is a good thing?

  413. TheHill says:
    @Anonymous

    African sloppiness, really, let me guess, you’re White South African?

  414. Okechukwu says:
    @james1

    Never managed to even invent the wheel.

    Arabs and Europeans had to bring the wheel into Africa

    Black Africans were using the wheel before Western Europeans.

    The image is from 3500 years ago. Now what was the disposition of Britons or Gauls or Germans back then? They certainly didn’t have the wheel. They were a collection of hunter-gatherer barbarian tribes, not nearly as advanced as the black people in the image.

    As to the wheel itself, it was not independently developed all over the world like the bow and arrow. Only those that were exposed to the technology were able to adopt it. What that means is that if present day England or Germany were never exposed to the wheel, they likely wouldn’t have it even today.

    The long and short of it is that your ancestors didn’t invent the wheel either.

  415. @Anonymous

    Please get ready, for the world dominance by the black race!

    Surely you mean preponderance? Otherwise, I’m sceptical. I’ll review my scepticism once blacks have learned to use birth control.

  416. […] interesting article, The IQ Gap Is No Longer a Black and White Issue, points out […]

  417. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Drake

    This is all fake, there is a reason it is “excluded” from mainstream media, the journalist’s agenda is too biased even for msnbc, god help her twisted little mind, she did put quite a bit of work into this nonsense.

  418. reezy says:

    “If the genetic hypothesis is correct, children of elite African blacks will tend to have lower IQs than children of native black Americans, and perhaps even lower than children of low IQ blacks, the same phenomenon observed between American blacks and whites since native blacks are basically “more white” than African (or Caribbean) immigrants.”

    This shows the author’s abysmal understanding of what regression to the mean is. In layman’s terms, it means the children of parents who are very far away from their population mean with respect to some trait, in this case IQ, will more likely than not be closer to the population mean in comparison to their parents. It does NOT mean the offspring will “revert” exactly back to the population mean.This applies to both directions, as in parents who are extremely low IQ compared to their population mean would be more likely to have children that are smarter than themselves, because that’s also regression to the mean.

    So the real question are those children as stellar and exceptional as their elite first generation African immigrants? Don’t forget to account for better nutrition and living standards, which typically adds 10pts to IQ. Fact of the matter is, those children probably still have a lower genotypic IQ compared to their parents, but the better environment will mask some of that reduction. But subsequent generations though, will undoubtedly regress back to their population mean.

    • Replies: @Math
  419. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @PandaAtWar

    It’s up to you to do your own research. Low IQ in the groups he mentioned have been studied to death. What you can’t use google? Perhaps you might fall in one of the aforesaid groups?

  420. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Erik Sieven

    Like Thomas Jefferson, for example?

  421. @unit472

    IQ and academic achievement really don’t have any correlation when the institutions are relying on quotas.

  422. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Egalitarians use this same nonsense to “prove” that women are smarter than men. These are the test results of very young children. Its no suprise that they outperform whites and asians. If you tested the poorest africans at age 2 then they would outscore the richest american whites at that age. Black children mature faster.

    • Replies: @pink_point
  423. @Anonymous

    Well, I started reading with confidence, got disappointed soon, and dampened my disappointed reminding myself that, well, that’s human nature.

    Nothing will be opposed like truth, till humans will be around. It’s the enemy of the will, and humans are will (to power). Vanity is a daughter to will to power, of course.

    Now, no topic can enkindle vanity, and complexes of inferiority ensuing wounded vanity, like that of intelligence.
    This means that truth, something that very usually can’t be said, will never be able to be said about intelligence.

    You even see… how the author’s aims all are about black-white differences. No Jews, Mongolians, Latinos interest her. Of course, they don’t.
    The hurt is only about one of all the peoples in the world.

    Should this be a problem? I think not. It’s everybody’s right not to be hurt, physically or psychologically.
    So, no grudge and no complaints, but, likewise, nothing to read or even object to.

    As for the “2-year-old” thing you commented on, the article also speaks of scholarship. Not that this alters any substance of what we do have here, yet.

  424. J.Ross says: • Website

    Excellent article. The point about starting to recognize African subgroups is a timely mandate for this community. The only criticism is that we already knew Igbo were consistently brilliant and I’m not worried about a physics-economics double major at MIT bashing my head open with his bare hands because he cannot control his impulses; nor, for that matter, does this help the problem of an affirmative action hire in Constitutional Law claiming that our Second Amendment is about duck hunting. It speaks to something many West African anons at the Path of Light love to joke about: why are American blacks the way they are? Because they are hereditarily slaves, not only slaves in the US, but slaves and the losers of tribal conflicts, in Africa, going back centuries.

    • Replies: @scipio
    , @Lana
  425. Scipio says:

    the reason why Whites point to IQ test it’s because it measures ultimate achievements. the taste is in the pudding. in other words, blacks have to show they are more or at least as intelligent as Whites and Asians by their achievement and contribution to society, not just basketball.
    the fact is that we see constant flow of failure in the black areas. even with the benefits of affirmative action and quotas, blacks can’t seem to get fully integrated into a highly technological society like the US. without White people’s help, blacks would be helpless. majority African countries have not stopped displaying this lack of creativity that is essential to progress. Whites are chased out of places like Rhodesia and the country sinks into steep decline.
    blacks, like this article are always busy try to convince Whites that blacks are members of the human race. Well! prove it.

  426. scipio says:
    @J.Ross

    the most annoying characteristic of black politics is this constant harking back at ancient history to justify present failure.
    Germany was nearly bombed back into the stone age during WWII. within a mere 15 years, Germany was the 2nd most powerful economy in the world, churning out one Nobel Prize winner after another. it still does.
    6 million Jews were exterminated a a few generations ago. Jews are some of the most successful people in every field (except dunking basketballs) in the world.

    and blacks still think that separate water fountains and a $3.5 a year Poll Tax has traumatized them into the ghettos for how long, exactly? Really!. if that’s the case, then it says a lot about the race’s lack of intelligence, courage, or shame. excuses excuses. they never end.

    the problem with the black race is not so much low IQ but low emotional intelligence. lack of self control, aggression, narcissism, dependency, and paranoid are personality disorders that are rooted in an immature mind. Oh, yes, children can have high IQ also.

    • Agree: anarchyst
  427. scipio says:

    Let me add one more thing. There has been studies that show that blacks from the Caribbeans and Africa display a very peculiar phenomena when exposed to American culture. unlike White ethnic groups, there is a tendency for the offspring of these Afr. and Carib to digress culturally toward the life-style of american blacks. in other words, they soon incorporate the gangsta life style of american ghetto ‘culture’. they become gang-bangers, pimps and criminals. Jamaican gangs are a particularly vicious group of murderous thugs living in the US, Canada, and UK. these black immigrants are the only group of immigrants that in fact travel backward socially and economically. Low IQ? Low emotional intelligence? Who cares. What you do is what counts.

  428. Factual says:

    It makes little sense to break down the African ethnic groups without breaking down the Indian or Chinese ethnic groups. It would be interesting to see South Indian ethnic groups like the Tamils or Malayalis included in the list. Sri Lankan Tamils are of the same ethnic group as Indian Tamils.

    Indian ethnic groups are at least as distinct as their African counterparts, and there are several thousand of them, albeit just a few dozen major ones.

  429. Anonymous • Disclaimer says: • Website

    This article rushes to an excess of conclusion with respect to the data used.

    Immigrants do not necessarily have the same average IQ distribution as prevails among the whole population of the country/countries from which they come. Filtration mechanisms can select immigrants whose IQ distribution will differ from that of their countries of origin.

    The average IQ of the black residents of sub-Saharan Africa is between 69 and 76. If immigrants from that part of the world are showing IQs higher than that, then IQ filtration of those immigrants has happened. Either the higher-IQ residents more commonly elected to immigrate, or the countries receiving the immigrants were choosy based on IQ, or both.

    Of course, it’s also possible that the “study” referenced in the article hereinabove is a hoax, and in that case it’s central claim is false.

  430. […] are hereditarily and genetically dumber than whites”  theory into shambles. As it turns out, according to this study, many non-American blacks are consistently equaling and in some cases, serio… and Asians, […]

  431. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Racism and cultural experience affects IQ scores, UK is far more integrated compare to countries like South Africa. where a black child still grow up being told that his less intelligent than whites and see everything positive associated with white people. They are still subjected to poor schooling from a young age.If you compare black Americans and Black South Africans you realised they have common experience from early childhood, hence they tend underperform when compare to other blacks. Blacks who come from countries like Ghana/Cameroon/Nigerian and other African countries. They outperform black South Africans in South African elites universities.

  432. bomag says:
    @Anonymous

    There is also the time for each race to lead humanity, and provisions to that effect are always divinely orchestrated, with the requisite deposits made in the people of that race.

    Wishful thinking.

    Political leadership has never been particularly enlightened in the world; leadership in the Black world less so.

  433. Alden says:
    @jay-w

    Excellent! Reputable historians estimate that about 66 percent of our Anglo Saxon British founding stock came here as indentured servants or transported convicts.
    Convicts had no choice but being in such a socio economic strata that selling oneself into 7 years of slavery was the best option doesn’t say much for our founding stock.

    The pilgrims had no money to fund their voyage abd start up costs. They were unemployable in Holland when the Virginia company paid for their trip back to England and then Massachuets

    Ben Franklin had quite a bit to say about the English government’s dumping its unwanted on the colonies

    Now the UK geta undesirables from all all over the world Karma

    • Replies: @Lana
  434. Alden says:
    @Nico

    Affirmative action invalidates any study or discussion of black admissions to elite universities in America.

    For every black high scoring admission there was a higher scoring better qualified White who was not admitted.

    • Replies: @Lana
  435. @Stogumber

    here’s an interesting scenario ~ what if neanderthal survived? we, by all accounts, are more intelligent people. would neanderthal be assigned to grunt work? being physically stronger, would they win gold medals in strength sports?
    i wonder how society would have handled a very delicate situation?
    i assume prejudice – even hatred – would abound. would more intelligent human beings have wiped out neanderthal on purpose? maybe we did long ago.
    there is evidence that our ancestors interbred with neanderthal. european descendants have about 4 percent neanderthal dna. east asians none. does that make east asians more intelligent than those of european descent?
    interesting question.
    that black africans have higher iq’s than african americans may suggest that culture can & does affect genetics; and to extrapolate, evolution of human beings might, now, be driven by a cultural environment.

  436. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    The reason for the black IQ catching up is that far left liberals are doctoring or manipulating test scores. In fact based on the upswing violence and criminal behavior it is apparent that nothing has changed except the white liberal practice of doctoring racial based IQ scores, Crime statistics, welfare and public assistance stats to fit their agenda. When you have real science instead of the climate change science which is advocacy science which has polluted all levels of academia since the 1980′s.

  437. Truman says:

    “… representation of drive”

    “What has been missed in the IQ debate is the full logical implication of these achievements: they have effectively nullified any arguments for a racial evolutionary explanation of the well-known IQ test score gap between blacks and whites. Even more fatal for the racial hereditarian…”

    So they’re saying (I stopped reading) that this is a product of “drive” and that the results nullify the hereditarian influences.

    “Drive” is the capacity to direct your energies of the goals you have. And your intelligence is the engine of that transmission. High drive, high IQ, high social status. Low Drive, high IQ, you have me. High drive, low iQ, you have people who rob convenient stores without a mask.

    What I didn’t see……. was the IQ tests of the parents of those who had high IQ children, who moved here from africa and did well which were responsible for the results.

    If the parents were low IQ, I’m open minded, although, evolution is the mixing of genes and allele expression, and even here, we KNOW that low IQ parents can (less often than medium and high) IQ have average or higher IQ children.

    This also contradicts the twin studies, the studies of adoptive children, and so on.

    It so explicitly omits parent IQ data of the immigrants that it almost seems intentional. This is, to refute the hereditarian claims… which only then, shows hereditarian results that are positive by the children of the immigrants.

    Inconsistent. Glaring omissions, negates other claims.

    I apologize if I missed something that does a 180 on what I intuit the story to mean based on the beginning of the story. I’m too tired to read the whole thing and am struggling with typos.

  438. Marty says:
    @Simon in London

    Statistics do not bear that out. How do you mean you “see them outperforming the princes of other people” ??? What does that even mean?

  439. There is a significant flaw in this article,
    Legal immigration to the west,is selective for talent.
    In order to move to the US legally one would have to have a successful career, or qualifications, both of which would serve as proxies for IQ, therefore the results here are actually tautological, Smart people who are smart enough to immigrate are smart

  440. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It’s so… striking that writing a piece like this can make help the author feel better about reality.

    Human psychology is striking.

  441. TG says:

    Interesting, but consider this.

    So perhaps many black African nations really have relatively high average IQs? Perhaps.

    And yet these places are dismally poor.

    Perhaps the average IQ of a nation is really not that important after all. Maybe we should go back to thinking about demographics, trade policy, corruption, etc.

    Every nation will have at least some smart people: perhaps enough for all practical purposes. So maybe we should just stop worrying about it.

  442. MigT says:

    Hold on.. unless the black African kids currently excelling in US and UK schools took it upon themselves to emigrate as infants, they ARE the children of the supposedly exceptional parents. If the kids are regressing to the mean (per Jensen et al’s prediction), their parents must have been godlike geniuses. More likely they’ve simply inherited whatever combination of innate ability and good practice their parents brought with them.

  443. No_0ne says:
    @Ben

    Because those settlers from the UK relied on free housing, benefits, and preexisting infrastructure built by the Indians, right?

    • Replies: @J-Bones
  444. No_0ne says:
    @Emil O. W. Kirkegaard

    Exactly. Regression “toward” the mean expresses the phenomenon much more clearly than regression “to” the mean.

  445. Regression to the mean as I understand it happens when random mating within a population occurs with respect to a heritable variable. If highly IQ-selected immigrants mate with one another that IMO is not at all the same as random mating within the larger population from which they were selected. The gene pools of the selected population and the larger population from which they derived are not the same. So, are these highly-selected immigrant populations, for example in the UK, mating randomly with respect to the populations of their countries or not? Are they instead mating with one another or with individuals also highly selected for high IQ? It seems to me to make a critical difference.

    • Replies: @Lana
  446. voxvot says:
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Complete nonsense. This is an optimisation effect. Migrant Blacks tend to have higher than average intelligence. African educational institutions are generally inferior to American institutions. “Regression to the mean” is not instantaneous, it’s a gradual slide. What you have is Black Africans from the highest black percentile of intelligence, educated in sub-optimal African educational institutions, who have children, with higher than average inherited IQs, who attend educational institutions that are far superior to those of their parents. Thus, even with some genetic slide these children will perform at around at least the same level as those of their parents.

    Black Americans also have IQ outliers; if these outliers were streamed to one state that state would have a higher than average % of Black academic achievers. This would not be evidence of the fluidity of Black general IQ, it’s just selection.

    Also “academic success” is a highly general term. Academia has expanded vastly to include a multiplicity of subjects for study, many of which do not require the highest levels of intelligence. Universities are commercial institutions, focused on shifting produce. I see no evidence that Black academic excellence is concentrated in the elite educational categories. I expect a high concentration in the humanities, and low concentrations in Math, Physics, etc.

    The lie is given to this hypothesis by examination of inter-generational East Asian intelligence which follows exactly the same pattern of behaviour at strikingly higher levels of accomplishment than those of African migrants, indicating that general group IQ is absolutely a defining factor.

    The information from the UK is unreliable, resting upon such nebulous categories as “poor”. A far higher percentage of the Black population is defined as poor, and inner city whites inhabit a toxic environment, in which to display intelligence opens white kids up to far more hostility than it does Blacks, also Blacks benefit from well funded racially focused interventions designed to optimize performance, blacks are incentivised, whites are disincentivised. In the UK study it is also the case that the standard for estimation of academic success is set at a very low bench. Faster maturation rates are also a factor. The final expression of “G” is deonstrated at graduate level not GCSE level.

  447. Maybe certain groups prosper when given the right opportunity and the right time. Finding their destiny… it is clear that African immigrants adopting the “Tiger Mom” attitude caused the achievement of their children to accelerate quickly. This expectation and demand of excellence clearly works miracles in the intellect of human beings.

    You do not see as much pedal to the metal culture from whites as was the norm in the past. At least seemingly not.

  448. Ivyleague says:

    I think the writer and many posters have a fundmentally wrong convept of how evolution and genetics work. If Blacks have a lower IQ as a whole; this state is not static through time.

    Genes replicate. Some of these “copies” create variations. Under certain pressures–these variations may be favored; and thus, spread more successfully relative to others.

    Thus, if no environmental pressures exsist, genetic variations proliferate freely.

    Data has shown, that in particular, tribal cultures–collectivist societies discourage individualistic achievement as such merit based acknowledgement might create hierarchies which disrupt the collectivist continuity.

    Thus, in general, genetic variations which produced higher IQ in some collectivist individuals would have given no evolutionary advantage and thus, had no chance to concentrate.

    In America—as Whites historically faced tremendous environmental pressures in their ancestral Northern latitudes which selected for certain genetic variations–will invariably lose the concentration of certain genes as genetic variation is able to proliferate unchecked.

  449. HughCipher says: • Website

    This whole White and Asians are inherently smarter than Blacks or other darker skinned tropical peoples from tribal cultures kills me. Trust me I get it…the surface evidence tells an ugly story but when I scientist and academics spewing these inaccuracies I’m angered and left incredulous. I know I am no anomaly and I understand the environmental factors that allowed me to achieve an higher level of academic proficiency than other youth I grew up with my urban environment. The Richard Lynn quote at the front of this piece is typical of a seemingly “smart” sounding argument that upon a closer look has no basis in fact. Economic success breeds high IQ. Where this is not the case the population is not in poverty and possess a cultural richness. For example all Han Asian types(Chinese, Japanese, Korean) share a Confucian influenced culture and all write in a logo graphic language that facilitates mathematical learning.

    “He who excels in study can follow an official career.””
    “Isn’t it a pleasure to study and practice what you have learned?”
    “Education breeds confidence. Confidence breeds hope. Hope breeds peace.””- Confucius

    Confucius has a gazillion of these type of aphorisms. Imagine if Jesus pushed education in his scripture like this?

    To be functionally literate in China you must have memorized at least 4000 separate symbols. Math is based on memorizing formulas so one can say their very language helps train the brain for working math. Beyond this the Asian focus on study helps push them ahead of most. The only other group that equal or outshine their IQ are the Ashkenazi Jews who too have a culture that places high regard on education and study.
    Africa has been underdeveloped and Blacks have been bared from education at time under pain of death for over 400 yrs so today not but 50 yrs or so latter after Jim Crow Black in America have low regard for education but if your ancestors where killed maimed and or threatened with violence any racial group after this level of abuse would be in a bad state

    I see all of these smart sounding argument that hold up what many all ready wish to be true ie: they are inherently better than another group…they are special and the group who has been abused and discriminated against technically deserves it because they are “too slow” to avoid the blows set upon them. One psychologist I got particularly rankled by was J.Phillipe Rushton
    Rushton argued that Black were inherently inferior IQ wise and gave biological genetic arguments as his causation. This from a psychologist. I was like this guy did care to use a argument from his field of expertise? IQ is an aspect of cognition so psychology has to play some part in the expression of IQ. I dismantled his argument here https://hucipher.wordpress.com/2013/07/28/the-big-brain-cipher-brain-size-iq-and-the-fallacies-in-j-phillippe-rushtons-theory/

    Even his biological basis was flawed. I remember reading where Blacks were said to be physically inferior as well http://discoveringbristol.org.uk/slavery/after-slavery/wider-world/black-white-in-britain/racist-ideas/

    I remember my father telling me Whites used to say Blacks couldn’t play sports because our brains were not sophisticated enough…..imagine that
    I cant wait to we make these racist IQ arguments seem as ridiculous as those racist physical arguments sound today

  450. Lana says:

    I distrust opinions from either white supremacist experts on the one hand, or the Guardian on the other, and accept neither as scientific fact. Has intelligence ever really been defined? And the guy who invented the idea of “g”, which is bandied around as scientific fact, seemed to be bending the truth to argue that African black people are less intelligent.

    One thing I didn’t like in this article was using GCSE’s as a measurement of anything. You can get twenty of the things, and it might be so many Weimar Deutschmarks. The standard for entry into decent jobs in the UK used to be five GCE O levels including English and Maths, that was for all kinds of things from nursing to civil service to trainee bank manager, and people who achieved that had a noticeable quality about their thought that is lacking nowadays in people with a million GCSE’s but who can’t think. It matters, proper education matters. Fifty per cent of the UK population now have a degree, it used to be two per cent, and current degrees are worth less in terms of their holders’ ability to think than the old five O levels standard.

    I think measured intelligence is a lot to do with social oppression, even more than the more physical effects of poverty such as malnutrition, but the whole lot seem to come together in a package very often. The so called scientists can’t even show that individuals score even similar amounts on IQ tests during a lifetime, or even a few months apart. That American (white)woman who supposedly scored a record IQ as a ten year old, she doesn’t seem to have made much of a contribution to humanity’s genius, she certainly hasn’t contributed on the scale of Rosalind Franklin or Marie Curie, more like Kim Kardashian. Maybe that says more about the rottenness of western culture, where empty media entities are valued but scientists and intelligent people are crushed.

    I think it is about poverty, the shadow of power. Money doesn’t create intelligence, but lack of it can destroy it. Our culture is destroying human intelligence, and venerating “expert” sources be it the Guardian or some white supremacist. It is crushing intelligence by the use of power, and bombarding people with mindless media and overpaid media types. Weird that they are conceding that Chinese people have a higher average intelligence than Europeans, when those same people have been crushed by Mao and his great leap forwards, and then by poverty and sweatshops, lock people with an average IQ of 115 in a sweatshop 20 hours out of 24….

    I just don’t buy the idea that black people are less intelligent than white, and they used to say that about the poor working class in Victorian England, especially the Irish, who are the finest writers, musicians and comedians, just look at Michael O’Leary….

    I was looking at a map of Africa to find out where Somalia and Eritrea are, and what their histories are, and this article is right that those people just look as though they have lot of Eurasian genes, and they have an ancient culture, like Punt.

    People are arguing that it was the Ice Ages that gave Chinese and Europeans a higher intelligence, but I am not so sure, those Ice Ages always left in their wake all kinds of disease epidemics, that changed the genetics of the survivors, possibly in many ways not just Darwinian selection but also by retroviruses becoming part of human “junk” DNA, smallpox virus being definitely known for having become part of human DNA. Really makes you wonder if we are just biological computers, machines, or the body part of us is.

    What our current culture likes to call intelligence is just some commodity that gets grabbed in a power fight, that ruthlessly elbows people away, and to survive needs recognition especially for children. It is a cheap little fake that gets recognised. Beware and don’t call either side your friends, and fight like hell for your own thoughts.

    • Replies: @vladdy
  451. Lana says:

    @HughCipher, Jesus did say something similar to Confucius, in the Gospel of Thomas, one of the Gnostic Gospels. Something to the effect that if you bring out of you what is within you, then you will be saved, and if you fail to do this you will be lost.

    The meaning of education is “to draw out”.

    Poverty and the social oppression it brings, even more than malnutrition, are the enemies of this. Don’t listen to the white supremacist psychologist “experts”, or the Guardian types who think they are more intelligent when they are not, they are just part of a group that tell each other how great they are.

    • Replies: @Adolescence 101
  452. Lana says:
    @Alden

    I have heard successful intelligent black people get very angry about positive discrimination, when they have made it on their own ability and not because of any tokenism, that people assume they got there by positive discrimination.

    We don’t need the political correctness types. They are in it for themselves, and they are using you.

    • Replies: @Adolescence 101
  453. Lana says:
    @lifsabsurd

    @lifsabsurd, thanks for your thoughts on regression to the mean. I am not sure it only happens with random mating within a population, as people have almost always, especially in the lower classes, made sexual selection, nobody selects their mates randomly and they tend to pick people like themselves, or like their parents. Also the upper classes are not known for their intelligence, you have that stereotype of “nice but thick”. I don’t know if Prince Charles is intelligent or not, but he went to Cambridge university and his bodyguard studied along with him and got a better degree at the end; this tale may mean nothing. Even a hundred years ago the working classes in the UK were never considered to possess intelligence, yet by the mid twentieth century their descendants were going to grammar schools and universities….and then the whole education system got dumbed down and made worthless. Not surprising that extremely intelligent people emerged from this group that were considered stupid, but what surprises me is people at the moment who are obviously extremely intelligent but whose parents just didn’t show any obvious signs of intelligence. It is the way it seems to spring from nowhere that puzzles me.

  454. Lana says:
    @J.Ross

    No more slaves than the English working classes, generations of ancestors whose labour was worth a tiny fraction of the wealth of their employer, who were there just to keep his machines going; nobody was interested in what they thought or what they were capable of, their fleeting shadows were described by writers like Frederick Engels. Many of them had fled the mid nineteenth century Irish famine, where they were oppressed by landowners.

    The right to education isn’t some luxury reward for winning battles, it is something you have the absolute right to as a human being.

  455. Lana says:
    @Alden

    @ Alden, I agree with you, the argument about slavery doesn’t seem to be valid because the vast majority of the English population were in effect slaves for as far back as history can tell us, certainly the pre-Norman Anglo Saxon society was a slave owning society and the Druids were priests who officiated over live human sacrifice. Though the contemporary prats who dress up and call themselves Druids think they are special and have some sort of special knowledge. Many people in Anglo Saxon society were actually better off after the Norman invasion, the Normans had a code of conduct of treating those they captured fairly and not using slaves.

    I don’t know about the rest of Europe. I do wish I knew more world history.

  456. Freidom says:

    I am assuming this article would make a lot more sense if I was familiar with the usual ‘hereditarian” arguments that are apparently out there.
    From my perspective you seem to be throwing up a very weak straw man to describe the hereditary argument. It looks like this:
    ” On average blacks have a lower IQ than whites by ~2 SD, therefore the children of even the smartest blacks can be expected to have a lower IQ than an average white, because of regression to the mean”
    This argument seems so obviously flawed that I have a hard time believing that you or anyone else believes it.
    Regression to the mean is only applicable if you have the correct scope, IF the great grandparents of a child, and their ancestors, all tended towards a 95 IQ, then you can expect the child to have an IQ around 95 regardless of what his or her direct parents have. (excluding environmental factors like malnutrition etc).
    However, if the child comes from a very specific group of intelligence-selecting breeders, who existed within a larger group of stupid breeders, then you can expect that child to fall somewhere in that hereditary High IQ range. regression to the genetic mean only applies if there IS a genetic mean.

    • Replies: @Adolescence 101
  457. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Forget about GCSE and A level when we have more g loaded exams like PISA.

    African groups in uk score 460+ on pisa which is consistent with test of GCSE.

    A level exams are grade inflated. And hence Chinese score higher.
    As you can make kids understand fractions by hardworking, but need genes to do well in g loaded competitions.
    GCSE and pisa which are more g loaded show real gap on IQ.

  458. @Stonehands

    You idiot, white people commit the most rape and violent crimes, you didn’t even read the artical did you?

    • Replies: @Dr_MMH_MD
  459. @Freidom

    The IQ test was designed by a white man, and re-designed when their people started failing the test. It is dedicated to their psychology which has no emotion. Most IQ test are solely designed for their race, with questions about THEIR history.

  460. @Lana

    You are avoiding the topic of white supremacy. The test was designed by a group of white man, with questions their race would understand about THEIR history.

  461. @Lana

    EXACTLY the test was designed and redesigned by a group of white man, with questions on THEIR history, that only white people are meant to know. Yet their are STILL Africans that tested higher. If you read the complete artical many students were testing higher in the 2010s.

  462. @voxvot

    You did not read the complete article. And if you studied the IQ test it was re-designed by a group of all white men. It’s questions are on the history of THEIR race, to where they would understand. It is on all-white literature and all-white history and math theories. It is meant for white people to look smart, just because they know a few things about themselves.

    • Replies: @artichoke
    , @Runshyt
  463. artichoke says:
    @SFG

    I taught a class where the brightest student was an Ethiopian woman. And she didn’t display any of the unpleasant “African-American” culture. There are some very bright Africans, and surely they were not the ones who got caught and sold as slaves.

    It begs the question though: did those groups ever invent the wheel? Before the British came, did they have any technology?

    • Replies: @Math
  464. artichoke says:
    @voxvot

    The minimum standard for undergrad admission to Oxford is 3 A’s on GCSE. But surely in all racial groups, most applicants with that are rejected. It’s like Harvard saying the minimum SAT score is 550 on each subtest on the 800 scale. They reject most applicants even with 800. But they’ll accept some athletes, legacies, blacks etc. with 550 and other redeeming factors, so they say that’s the minimum.

    Oxford can still reject most blacks with 3 A’s, and yet accept blacks much more easily than whites at any given level of academic performance.

    I’m sorry to hear how bad things are for poor white kids in the UK. I hear it’s almost hopeless for white boys. I am just sad about it. Maybe with new regimes in the USA and UK, things will shift.

  465. artichoke says:
    @Adolescence 101

    I’ve never heard of history questions on an IQ test, and if there are race-specific “math theories”, I guess ours work the best because whites developed technology.

  466. Ernul says:
    @FederalistForever

    With over 2700 religions worldwide, it would be almost impossible to sort through and rate IQs via religion also though, a direct coloration to higher IQs of one religion would be very interesting as would be for sorting out the atheists also.Hmmm.

  467. kek says:

    The truth is difficult to face and we all know that’s just human nature.

    • Replies: @Math
  468. Math says:
    @reezy

    Yeah, as long as you keep making the categories “Ashkenazi Jew,” “Chinese” and….”Black.” Which is the author’s point. When you cast the net so broad, the statistics become less and less explainable. (which, trying to explain data is the whole point of collecting it).But, while we’re at it, what statistically useful reason is there to refer to a group of people so specifically as “Ashkenazi” but not “Igbo,” “Yoruba,” but “black-africans” or “sub-saharan?” Especially considering the hugely tribal identities and genetic differences between different tribes. This post is old now, so we don’t have to discuss it.

    But:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_fallacy

    With regression fallacy someone can always say “genes” or “racism” without ever being proven wrong. You can also say, “African-Americans don’t care about academics. They’re all trying to get sport scholarships in college.” But you can’t prove that’s it either.

    But more importantly, statistics showing “affluent” African-American parents with bachelor’s degrees says nothing on its own. And it it certainly doesn’t indicate IQ fluctuations between generations. (1) No ones seriously believes that a person with a 100 IQ can’t pass one of the many online “degree” programs. They could be salespeople for all we know. (2) Individuals from these groups aren’t being tested to demonstrate the “regression to the mean” idea. (3) SAT scores are a piss poor way of understanding intellectual capacity. There are several reasons why someone may or may not make good scores. (4) Environment doesn’t mean not living in the ghetto. It includes superimposed culture, parenting style, religiosity, and self-perception. (5) There is no way to control for motivation to do well on an IQ exam, different schools, teachers, or how genetically “black” someone is ( even assuming that a score is “heritable.”)

  469. Math says:
    @Anti-Hereditarian

    “Absence of water is not an evolutionary pressure since people then just die instead of adapt.”

    This is a huge part of the problem. That is exactly what natural selection/evolutionary pressure means. People just die. Evolution does not work like X-men in real life. Mutations are random and much more frequently, harmful. “Selection” means that some parts of the population will be “unfit” which means that people will die or they will not attract a mate for social or other reasons. For example, when fisherman notice that their catches get smaller and smaller, it’s because nature is “selecting” for smaller fish that don’t get caught in the nets; or, thousands of people die from malaria and the survivors are people who have sickle cells. Sexual selection- guys with smaller muscles lose fights over women, lose wars, have less babies and, in turn, become “unfit.” “Intelligence” selection- people resourceful enough to obtain water live, the rest need to be socially competent enough to convince them to share it, or die.

  470. Math says:
    @kek

    Yeah, an even more persistent part of human nature is to come up with convenient explanations for natural phenomena and data that fit what we want to believe is “truth.” It’s the reason why religion will stay with us for a lot longer than we think it will, even in the face of all criticism and reason. There’s always a conspiracy or political motive to hide these truths it seems.

  471. Math says:
    @artichoke

    “It begs the question though: did those groups ever invent the wheel?”

    http://ngm.typepad.com/.a/6a00e0098226918833011168f056e5970c-pi

    So that is from about 3500 B.C. Nubians with chariots and wheels. Part of present day Ethiopia. Everyone builds and improves on each others’ ideas when people can and want to learn about respective cultures. But, recording history was like it is today. If it’s not uploaded to social media, it didn’t happen.

  472. El Hason says:
    @FederalistForever

    This has already been explained fully by Chris Rock:

  473. tm says:

    Until you admit that blacks in the US have a major inbreeding problem your results will never make any sense.

    This is why the IQ is lower.

    FBI genetic testing proves this each city is a different provable race according to the FBI.

    Blacks have sex with cousins across town not knowing who the fathers are. Its a major problem that only genetic testing can stop.

    Refusing to admit the problem only makes it worse.

  474. vcragain says:

    My husband was from Barbados and I have lived in the US now for 35 yrs – I am from the UK.
    Without doing a scientific study it has long been apparent to me that West Indians have a distinct advantage over American blacks, entirely in their attitude to life- this is based on their personal ownership of their own country/identity, long since established & because of that a confidence in their own ability to steer their lives where they wanted them to go. THAT in my opinion gives West Indians a real edge. Many American blacks have got ‘past’ their heritage, but they still appear to be confined, in reality AND in their own heads by what their history has done to them. This is apparent everywhere, and is really bad for the kids, and for the parents having to always warn their kids of the perils of being black in this USA – that is stifling to many people, and even if overcome by some is a distinct hold-back to many, in spite of their talents. This country owes these kids a future for the harm that has been done to them. Stop giving time to those just trying to keep the status quo in operation. EVERY child is a potent force of achievement, full of promise & ready for greatness. Every child.

  475. anarchyst says:

    It is easy to observe why American blacks cannot measure up to their peers who have immigrated to the United States.
    You see, in the days of slavery, the African chieftains did not “export” their “best and brightest”, but rather, sold the “dregs” from the various conquests and constant internecine warfare that existed on the African continent.
    It was not the “best and brightest” (any chieftain would have been foolish and short-sighted to do so), but the slow, dull-witted, low IQ, feral types that they were only too happy to get (and be) rid of.
    THIS is the source of our racial problems in the United States. We have inherited an “underclass” which is detrimental to the well-being of the country.

  476. Appreciate the author’s effort to write this long essay.

    If the null-hypothesis is that Africans had average academic achievements lower than that of other racial groups, the experimental effort would have to aim to either prove it or disprove it. I see there are a lot of horizontal and vertical bar charts with no statistical information. What are the sample sizes of the comparison groups? What are the p-values for any difference measured? If you shop online at amazon, you should know a product with 15 5-star reviews out of a total of 25 reviews does not carry the same statistical confidence in assessing it’s likelihood of high quality performance as one with 550 5-star review out of a total of 720 reviews. I am certain Ms. Ota is undoubtedly smart. However, just because Yao Ming is 7’4″ does not mean Chinese on the average are tall. This presentation is analogous to a post hoc subgroup analysis in pharmaceutical research. It’s often plagued with statistical uncertainty. Other reviewers have pointed out that a biased conclusion can result from when you comparing a elite subgroup from Nigeria with the general mixed group with other ethnic majorities or minorities. The fallacy is that while the author sub-divides the African group into smaller tribal groups, he is not giving other ethnic groups where he makes his comparisons with the same subdivision treatment. It is a fine essay but statistic rigor is lacking with certain methodological flaws.

    • Replies: @Leslie landberg
  477. kilimani says:
    @Justin

    Stay in Somali and develop it…only death will meet you

  478. J-Bones says:
    @No_0ne

    You say that as if the British practiced a nobler way to take other people’s resources.

    • Replies: @Anonymous White Male
  479. paul133 says:

    Interesting article. Have only skimmed through for now but observation is there is a lot of reference to exam results.

    Exam results are not really a measure of intelligence.
    They are mostly intellectual. That is to say the ability to remember and repeat facts to take instruction. The motivation to study will make massive differences in final results.

    Very often immigrants come to a new country without support or much money.
    Immigrant groups probably do quite well as they are often fighting to get on.

    Natives often become complacent.

    IQ is somewhat different?

    Another interesting comment made, I forget where i read it, was that given that all these cultures have developed physically separated over generations why would we even expect them all to evolve for the same selection i.e. IQ?
    In fact the idea that all racial groups would evolve the same brain and IQ seems a bit nonsense if you think about it?

  480. Abcsudh says:
    @FederalistForever

    Ashkenazi Jews are a non white racial group, yes ofcourse Judaism is also a religion.

  481. I’ve been surfing online more than one hours today for
    exterior house painting & The IQ Gap is No Longer a
    Black and White Issue, yet I never found any interesting article like yours.
    It’s pretty worth enough for me. In my opinion, if all site owners
    and bloggers made good content as you did, the internet will be a lot more useful
    than ever before.

  482. I find it interesting how many “Its mostly environment” believers immediately jump on a single study that they think implies they are right. Almost all researchers agree there is some HBD component, some environmental. But, when you realize that environment is originally composed of people from the same genetic group, you have to conclude that genes are the primary component. Let’s actually fund research in this area so there will be more evidence that we can examine. Be honest: Science, especially the social sciences, has prostituted itself and performs studies to prove the results that the people that finance the studies desire. That is not science.

    I also notice how much the environmentalists focus on a single individual or group to bolster their claims. It is never about one person or small group. It is always about the sum total of group results and this is what acknowledges that it is primarily about genetics. Because some Africans can excel in a WHITE society does not prove that blacks have the same capacity as Whites. There seems to be some kind of aversion for many Whites to accept that blacks do not have the same capabilities as Whites because it seems “mean”. Notice it doesn’t bother them that it might be a scientific fact, only that it might hurt someone’s “feelings”. They also have no problem believing that “because of genetic” blacks are better at sports, i.e., running and jumping. When there are actually some examples of black countries or cities that are not jungles, figuratively, then maybe we can attribute to blacks a higher level of development than they currently have. That should be taken with a grain of salt since the entire history of black groups doesn’t support this premise.

    I also do not know how you can get a representative sample of blacks based on those that have migrated to a White country. The fact that they know they live in a cesspool and want out and will do whatever is necessary to get out should not be considered to be representative of their fellow countrymen that choose to stay. Intelligence is not the only factor in success. The “will”, whatever that is, and “desires” play even more a factor in results. This is why there have always been stories about those that rose from nothing and were great successes. But, those that get out of black countries to emigrate to White countries have already been pre-selected for traits that result in “success”. This points more to values than it does to intelligence. Let’s face it, most Whites attribute more intelligence to those that achieve success. In spite of the fact that some successful and rich people are as dumb as nails. Their opinion will be sought out because of the supposition that they have been “blessed” more than ordinary mortals.

  483. @anarchyst

    Then how do you explain Africa as it is today? If they are the result of the “overclass”, shouldn’t there be at LEAST one black country in Africa that is not a latrine?

    • Replies: @Ghost Dog
  484. @J-Bones

    “You say that as if the British practiced a nobler way to take other people’s resources”.

    Compared to whom? Other black countries? You are being disingenuous here. Did the peoples that were conquered by the Mongols move to Mongolia? Non-White peoples move to White countries because White countries are so much better. And yes, the immigrants will experience a better life in White countries than they did in their own.

    • Replies: @K. Clucksclan
  485. JC says:

    GCSEs are a farce and so is using them to draw such conclusions. The UK education system is an absolute failure and most success stories are despite, not because of, the current deeply flawed system.

  486. @Anonymous White Male

    “the immigrants will experience a better life in White countries than they did in their own.”

    Mainly because of the plentiful supply of liberal morons who are naive beyond belief and think that blacks are in the position they are because of “misfortune”. “oppression” and “lack of opportunities”. The reason they think these things is because they’re deeply racist and don’t actually spend any time amongst blacks – otherwise they’d quickly realise how base and unhelpable most of them are. These regressive Liberals will gladly use blacks for their virtue signalling and equality-of-outcome agenda but they don’t actually want to live amongst them or analyse reality.

  487. Chika says:

    I see a lot of misinformation about Africa here. It is expected anyway. Chisala has done a good job in making hereditarians think. Their responses so far sound rather defensive, abstract and shallow.

    The bell curve is in my opinion subjective and obsolete. Africa’s problem isn’t low IQ. Africa’s problem is mental laziness due to our almost self sufficient past.

  488. Gdef says:

    IQ tests ‘do not reflect intelligence

  489. @Simon in London

    Somali refugees and other asylum seekers are “poor human capital”, wow, that is just mean! (Not to mention callously general) And you don’t even bother to cite references, as if somehow we’d all just nod our heads…it isn’t even clear what you mean by such a remark: that their IQ’s are low and that they will therefore live in squalor and poverty? That they are somehow to blame for their misfortune and are therefore undesireable? That they spread disease and crime? I guess I only see ordinary people who have been treated horribly and are deserving of care and support and, given that, will be eager to contribute. If this is not your belief, please support your contention.

  490. @anarchyst

    This describes the founding populations of whites in Alabama, Georgia and Florida, as well. All came as indentured slaves straight out of debtors prisons on England and Ireland. Maybe they deserve each other, lol.

  491. @Mohona Ooole

    I read most of the article and it appears that there are deep methodological flaws, a flawed and biased premise, an intentional attempt at obfuscation and misleading argument and a very poor grasp of fundamental concepts being discussed. What is clear is that the author fervently wishes her premise were true and takes great pains to construct this flimsy argument which, due to its careful acemcemic tone, has fooled many of the respondents here. She has succeed by her attempt in starting a very worthwhile discussion, however. Kudos on that! But please take greater pains to construct an intellectually rigorous and honest argument and really research the true meaning of your terms. If you have established a thesis, you cannot then ignore all the counter postulates as if they do not exist, simply because they don’t support your argument. On the contrary, you are expected to acknowledge them and refute them with logic and hard scientific evidence.