The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewFred Reed Archive
IQ. Do UQ? A Sojourn Among the True Believers
🔊 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Writing about intelligence is splendid fun if you like watching dogfights among towering vanities. (This assumes that vanities can tower, though I’m not sure how dogs come into it.)

On one side you have the politically correct protectors of Appropriate Values. These secretly believe that blacks are less intelligent than whites and live in terror that genetics will shortly prove it. This is why they call genetics “pseudoscience.” Which it isn’t.

On the other side you have the cultists of IQ. These are bright white guys who conflate the results of IQ tests with intelligence, a fit which is imperfect. Their political aim is to show that whites, especially IQists, are brighter than blacks and Hispanics and pretty much everybody else, except East Asians who have higher IQs than white guys. Admitting the superiority of the Asians is the political price of showing the inferiority of everyone else.

Politics is a strange place. Anyway they take IQ with the solemnity appropriate to a mass funeral and overlook multiple nonsenses. For example:

Australian aborigines, according to IQst siege howitzer Richard Lynn, quoted in the Unz Review, have a mean IQ of 64. They are often regarded as the least intelligent of humans. This is not implausible. They have invented nothing, certainly not writing, and their number systems, if so they may be called, run to “one,” “two,” and “many.”

So much for aborigines. In this piece by John Derbyshire, a mathematician by training and longtime enthusiast of all things IQical, I find his assertion that the Nepalese have a mean IQ of 60. (He is quoting other I Qists thought to know of these matters.)

Now, a couple of points: First, I have spent time in Nepal and saw nothing to suggest anything even approaching this level of retardation. Second, an average of 60 means that half the population have an IQ of less than that, the distribution being almost symmetrical, and a substantial number below 45. These people would not be able to dress themselves or find their way home at night. I encountered no naked Nepalis wandering about homelessly.

Third, if the above grass hut in Nepal was built by people with a mean IQ of sixty, then the Australian aborigines, at sixty-four, could build something at least as elaborate and perhaps a bit more so.

Does anyone really believe this stuff?

Phredfoto.
Phredfoto.

Three anecdotes. My daughter Macon and I, trekking in the roadless Nepalese Himalayas at 12,000 feet, were approached in a town by these kids, who spoke perfect English. They had, they said, two classes a day in Nepali and the rest in English. Clearly less intelligent than Australian aborigines. Presumably someone else dressed them. I know nothing else about them. The one in the middle is going to have many girlfriends.

Wikipedia:In 1951 Nepal had 10,000 students in 300 schools and an adult literacy rate of five percent. There were 49,000 schools in 2010, and by 2015 the overall adult literacy rate was 63.9 percent (males 76.4 percent and females 53.1 percent.”

If we assume that Nepali girls are as capable of literacy as boys, which of course they are, then in terms of IQ studies literacy was at the 76 percent mark. This means that at least 26 percent are literate with IQs below 60. Since the explosive growth of literacy obviously is a result of getting schools to remote villages, the proportion of severely retarded literates will grow. This is all very mysterious.

Or consider the Meso-American Indians of southern Mexico and Central America. These, said to have a mean IQ of 83, were a minor but remarkable civilization that, while not in a league with Fifth Century Athens, nonetheless did the following: Invented writing, a base-twenty exponential number system, an abacus allowing calculation of huge numbers, and the wheel. They built five-story buildings using poured-in-place concrete and elaborate flood-control systems.

None of this will involve contradictions if IQists agree, clearly and without evasion or equivocation, that an IQ of 83 is sufficient to do these things. Do they so agree?

Colombians, said to have mean IQ 84, run modern cities with telecommunications, airlines and the concomitant people to maintain avionics and big turbofans. This involves no contradiction if IQists say clearly that 84 is sufficient to do these things. Do they so say? (All together now, “Yes! Eighty-four is enough….”)

But then we have American blacks. These, at a mean IQ of 85, are more intelligent than either of the foregoing groups. We must perforce conclude that they could invent writing and sophisticated number systems, maintain avionics and telecommunications.

Do IQists so conclude? The answer must be either ”yes” or “no.” The latter, note, would amount to saying that blacks are not intelligent enough to do things done by people less intelligent than they are. But saying “yes” will imply that something other than IQ must be holding blacks backs such as maybe withe privilege. Oh God….

Another puzzlement difficult of explanation: The 83 figure for Mesoamericans seems plausible today as they do little of intellectual impressiveness. This being so, their considerable pre-Hispanic achievements are hard to understand unless they lost quite a bit of intelligence between 1521 when Tenochtitlan fell to the Spaniards, and now. Since IQists are enthusiastic Darwinians and attribute everything to genetic evolution, probably including loose doorknobs, they may invoke selective pressures favoring stupidity. The advantage in survival of declining acuity in a rough existence with no welfare state is not entirely obvious.

Another mystery, even deeper than the Nepalis: Say IQists, the blacks of sub-Saharan Africa have mean IQs of about 70. This is not implausible given the very low level of civilization in Africa now and before.

But the people of Equatorial Guinea are at 59. This puts them respectively at 15 and 26 points below American blacks, five points below Australian aborigines, and below even Nepalis. The Guineans, half being below 59, provide another example of people who should not be able to put on their shoes, if they have any. Is this the case? (The Darwinian explanation for the low IQ of Africans is that in a hot climate they didn’t have to remember that it gets cold in winter and thus you have to store food, and consequently had no need of intelligence. I am aware of no study showing that Africans can’t remember that seasons change.)

What the faithful need to do, and won’t, is at least try to determine what percentage of a population need to have what IQ for the society to function (engineers, bank clerks, internet help desks, etc.) and then show that a distribution centered on the alleged mean would produce them.

Enough. The point of all of this is not to support the silly idea that “intelligence is a social construct” and does not really exist. Of course it exists. Clearly it has a large innate, and probably genetic, component. This should be obvious to most plants and some rocks. Does anyone think that Mike Tyson and Stephen Hawking would have been equally intelligent given similar childhoods? If intelligence were cultural then all the children in Isaac Newton’s neighborhood should have been towering mathematical geniuses. It is not recorded that they were.

What we do see here is that IQists are more interested in defending their theory than in examining it, a quality they share with radical feminists, Marxists, Creationists, Evolutionists, Evangelicals, Moslems, Keyhesians, and conspiracy theorists. Perhaps intelligence really doesn’t exist after all.

 

Other Stuff : The Mormonicide in Mexico

The story of the cartels killing the LeBarón Mormon family did not make sense to me, or to many others here. The narcos do not kill without a reason. The reasons may be deplorable, such as eliminating unfriendly politicians, but there is a reason. They specifically avoid killing Americans, first because they have no reason, and second because it brings highly unwelcome attention, such as American threats to send the military. The narcos are evil. They are not stupid. For what it’s worth, news-aware people here have serious doubts as to who did it for what reasons, paid for by whom.

A few minutes research online reveals that two groups, the Mormon LeBaróns and the Barzonistas, an agricultural community, have been fighting savagely over water rights. The LeBarons were using at least nine wells ruled illegal by Conagua, the Water Commission, and allegedly depriving the Barzonistas of water. The said fighting including gunfire, burning of buildings and trucks, and allegations of prices being put on heads. The dispute is complex beyond my powers to detail, but a sort of war was going on. The LeBarons were not nice semi-Christian people slaughtered for no discernible reasons while on a pleasant family jaunt.

The war is no secret on the Mexiacn internet: Barzonistas Further, these Mormons seem to have as much in common with Pancho Villa as with Mother Theresa. In particular, murder is an old part of Mexican Mormonism, as officials of the church have killed each other in power struggles. Joel LeBaron The dead were dual citizens, not Americans on vacation.

The following Facebook post, by a resident of Chihuahua–Julio Peraza–where the killing happened, a story very different from the one accepted by Trump. It is poorly written and longer than I want to translate in entirety, but with corroborating links. (These, many of which no longer work, tend to go to news broadcasts. The author says he has known of the hostility for years and wants other Mexicans to know so they can come to their own conclusions.

I cut-and-paste verbatim his links to events of the dispute, with my translations highlighted:

29 diciembre 2017: Barzonistas pelean con lebarones

The Barzons fight with the LeBarons

 

30 abril 2018: A balazos reciben lebarones a barzonistas en buenaventura, chihuahua

The LaBarons receive Barzones with gunfire in Buenaventura, Chihuahua

 

30 abril 2018: Ejidatarios atacan a rancho de la familia lebaron

Ejidatarios attack the ranch of the LeBarons

 

1-2 mayo 2018: rancho lebaron

They invade the LeBaron ranch

 

1-2 mayo 2018: Grupos del barzón irrumpen en rancho lebaron

Groups of Barzons erupt into the LeBaron ranch

 

mayo 2018: de barzón irrumpen rancho propiedad de lebaron

Groups of Barzons erupt into the ranch property of the LeBarons

 

4 mayo 2018: Habitantes de lebaron preocupados por amenazas de grupo barzonistas

LeBarons worried by threats from Barzons

 

Y la información sigue fluyendo.

And the information keeps flowing

https://vanguardia.com.mx/…/javier-corral-acusado-de-prote

 

URL of Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/people/Julio-Peraza/100009494906903?hc_ref=ARRLJgkbe8kKEv8U2kwCkcg-9ZKUyfE-nopjxrwBbmofSj-SPrreIpjTwXVa3pbrTjc&fref=nf

 
SubscribeUnsubscribe
• Category: Science • Tags: IQ, Race and Iq 
Hide 368 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Al Lipton says:

    Each ethnic/national group has its morons and geniuses in some numbers. Some of the groups have them in greater measure than others.

    If you know how to fix a leaky faucet, you are a genius. If you vote Democrat, you are a moron dangerous to yourself and to the environment. It’s that simple.

    • Agree: jim jones
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
  2. utu says:

    “What we do see here is that IQists are more interested in defending their theory than in examining it, a quality they share with radical feminists, Marxists, Creationists, Evolutionists, Evangelicals, Moslems, Keyhesians, and conspiracy theorists. Perhaps intelligence really doesn’t exist after all.”

    Agree, but you forgot to put Libertarians in the list. Haven’t met a Keynesian who would be as moronic and irritating as typical Libertarian.

    And I liked the analogy with mass funerals.

  3. 8A says:

    If “IQ” answered so many questions so easily, the way it is often expressed by the so called alt-right; the entire last 5000 years of human history makes no sense.

    The IQist are onto something but they fail profoundly in fitting the piece to the puzzle.

  4. tygertgr says:

    The framing of the mormon deaths here is very weird. The implication seems to be that because some american crooks were allegedly stealing water it’s OK that toddlers were shot.

    Um, this total lack of rule of law is exactly the complaint about Mexico. The recent overpowering of federales by sinaloa gunmen is the complaint. The civilized world uses courts and police for these problems.

  5. Sean says:

    The narcos wouldn’t hurt a fly. Well, not unless it was necessary.

    Mormons are not Christians at all. But then, Unitarians don’t believe in the Trinity.

    On the other side you have the cultists of IQ. These are bright white guys who conflate the results of IQ tests with intelligence, a fit which is imperfect. Their political aim is to show that whites, especially IQists, are brighter than blacks and Hispanics and pretty much everybody else, except East Asians who have higher IQs than white guys. Admitting the superiority of the Asians is the political price of showing the inferiority of everyone else.

    Ever heard of Jews being of genetically superior intelligence, and also being anti IQ, and anti letting the Chinese into Harvard in numbers commensurate with their exam results?

  6. Sean says:

    Richard Feynman. like almost all super intelligent people who express an opinion, held views very similar to Fred’s on intelligence. The really smart play safe.

    • Replies: @J
    , @Geowizz
  7. johnm33 says:

    My pet theory is that isolated populations inbreed and this lowers their iq, inbreeding leeds to a lack of fertility which in turn leeds to sexual licence. Sexual licence/freedom moves down the age scale, girls produce more robust confident but stupid children who mature ever earlier. Doesn’t matter if your isolation is on an island, in a fuedal village, a plantation, a remote valley, a result of social conflict or belonging to a particular ‘caste’.
    Thus age at menarche should be a reliable proxy for iq levels in a population.

    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
    , @Pls
  8. 1. IQ tests don’t say much about most individual countries (except a few extensively tested ones, mainly in the First World).

    2. IQ = 60 does indeed strike me as implausible for Nepal, probably they are at the level of North Indians or slightly higher (80-85?). So could go up to 95-100 in modern environment.

    However, one thing that must be emphasized is that an IQ of 70 for an adult white person in a First World country is not equivalent to an IQ of 70 for a black in an African country. The former is deeply abnormal, and will probably have many genetic defects, which produce stereotypical “retard” behavior that would not be observed in his African equivalent (even though they’d perform equally poorly on an IQ test).

    3. American blacks live in a First World country with its associated environmental boost, so having them be equal to Colombians is perfectly plausible. Remove the whites who built America, and American blacks will regress to… well, we ran a direct experiment on that: Liberia (average IQ probably somewhere around 70). Would obviously not happen with Colombians, or Latin Americans in general. Average IQ of 85 seems to be the level where one can comfortable maintain a modern technical civilization, but not enough to make large numbers of significant innovations (which pretty much only happens only in Western Europe, Anglo offshoots, and East Asia).

  9. Figures Reed would pour manure on the Lebarons. “Something did something” in other words. This prick doesn’t have an ounce of humanity left in him. Anything inconvenient to Brand Mexico is flicked aside like a biting insect. But Reed’s just following the example of the cowardly muppet running that narco-state. Notice AMLO’s reaction to the El Paso shooting and then the Sonora massacre. The former was “terrorism” and “despicable.” The latter was “lamentable” — a word one might use when your team loses the big game.

    And the Lebarons are Mexican too. Ah but they’re not the right Mexicans are they — they speak perfect English (unlike Reed, who tells us the Barzons “erupted into” the ranch, a laughable concept), are gringo and quite successful. They also fight back against Aztec invaders– probably their biggest sin of all in Reed’s eyes.

  10. The Hun says:

    In the book by Lynn and Vanhanen, IQ and the wealth of nations, the Nepalese IQ is 78 and Mexico 90.

    • Replies: @Ahem
  11. KenH says:

    So Fredrico’s beloved messicans really messed up and murdered innocent women and children and now he’s in full damage control mode.

    We’re hearing all these disputes about water rights and how the Lebarons were allegedly stealing water from innocent and angelic brown peasants. Even if this is true doesn’t Mexico have laws and courts where this matter can be litigated or do Mexicans just slaughter the other party?

    If the Lebarons exchanged gunfire with other parties that doesn’t make them criminal or evil and they still didn’t target and execute women and children as was done to them.

    As far as IQ, since that doesn’t work in favor of meso-Americans then Fred is trying to chip away at its relevance and importance. Because if IQ can be discredited then perhaps meso-Americans can be viewed as equal and their rude invasion of our nation can continue apace and make self hating whites and hispanderers like Fredrico Reedriguez and others jump for joy.

    • Agree: bomag, Irish Savant
    • Replies: @Irish Savant
    , @athEIst
  12. Admitting the superiority of the Asians is the political price of showing the inferiority of everyone else.

    And that is where you can stop reading this idiotic screed. It’s not political. Asians do test higher. It’s called scientific.

    Furthermore, there are differences in the races not just in IQ, but in gestation period, personality types, etc., etc. that are clearly related as is IQ to the evolved history of the different races and have been measured over and over again for decades. Just one of those clearly evolved differences appears to be the breeding with Neanderthals in Europe but they did not exist in Africa or Asia, so you have that thrown into the evolving gene pool.

    I don’t why Fred writes what he writes. Maybe it’s because his IQ is so low?

    • LOL: CanSpeccy
    • Replies: @joe2.5
    , @Arnieus
    , @obwandiyag
  13. Ben Alpin says:

    The author straw mans the hereditarian position by falsely describing it as “IQism.” Yes IQ is very important, but the real hereditarian argument is not only that the distribution of IQ varies across populations, but also the distributions of all attributes related to behavior and personality are going to vary across populations as well. This follows from the ‘iron law of heritability’-it’s not a matter of IF a personality trait is heritable, because it always is, it’s merely a matter of how much it’s heritable.

    Two populations with a similar average IQ, but different levels of conscientiousness, aggression, conformity, etc. are going to have different outcomes even with a similar average IQ.

    If you only care about IQ or think that’s all that matters you are missing the bigger picture of the hereditarian perspective.

    The author also seems to refuse to take any sort of real position on the validity of IQ as a measurement of intelligence, despite the facts it’s by far the most validated and predictive psychometric concept ever created.

  14. Muggles says:

    The subject of IQ measurement in remote places with relatively little education/literacy can be up for debate. But Fred’s supposed first hand observation of people in these places (people Fred happened to come across) is hardly refutation of anything. Abstract thinking and time preferences are what lead to higher IQ scores. Fred could be correct but here he is out of his element.

    Fred also seems to be victim blaming here. Renegade Mormons may have a poor history in some measure and local enemies over water rights, but his theory is totally speculative.

    We hear of continuing puzzlement over the motives for this massacre. But wiping out entire families of in this case, women and children doesn’t appear to fit any prior water rights dust up. Open massacres are the stuff of cartels, not farmers. It is worth considering as an alternative theory but only that.

    Fred extols Mexico against largely imaginary US detractors (until the recent violence, Mexico was the #1 foreign American tourist destination, maybe still is). If Mexico was say, like Canada, he could visit up north and personally discuss the massacre with reputable journalists and newsmen. Ah, but in Mexico this can’t be done, now can it Fred? Why is that? Fred wouldn’t last five minutes, an obvious gringo. Mexican journalists last about 10 minutes. Which is why there is almost no reliable news coverage on that locally. Very sad, but victim blaming is poor style Fred.

    If someone finds you chopped and buried by the narcos, I’ll try to avoid that.

    • Agree: Irish Savant
  15. The numbers for Nepal can’t be right. I’m not sure if that’s what the HBD writers state though, and Mr. Karlin’s comment reads pretty reasonable to me. Just some bad numbers is not a reason to disparage the whole point of inheritability of intelligence and the IQ test as a metric. From my readings of the HBD types, nobody is claiming that IQ is all that is necessary to build a good society*. It sure helps though.

    Some of this post sound seriously recycled. I remember the question about the IQ of Meso-Americans being discussed before by Mr. Reed. You can defend your new countrymen as much as you want, Fred, but not enough of them can read your column, and even if they did, next SHTF phase, and they will be wondering if this one gringo has anything to do with their plight. Keep a low profile.

    .

    * Look at Red China for a couple of generations under the Commies. 1 billion high-IQ people don’t mean much compared to the evil of Communism. Who installed the Commies, anyway? Oh, some high-IQ Chinese people, more than 1/2 a billion of ’em.

    • Replies: @anon
  16. Colombians, said to have mean IQ 84, run modern cities with telecommunications, airlines and the concomitant people to maintain avionics and big turbofans. This involves no contradiction if IQists say clearly that 84 is sufficient to do these things.

    Mr. Reed, do you know what mean means? It’s not the 84-IQ people maintaining the telecom equipment, aircraft and engines. Talk about your severely retarded literates …

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    , @res
  17. IQ,
    Learning to see.
    EQ
    Learning to feel.
    How rare in a land that prizes money,
    When Truth appears riding on a pony.

  18. Cortes says:

    Fascinating.

    Thank you.

  19. Ahem says:
    @The Hun

    And how, how in Eysenck’s name, did they measure these so called I.Q.s. of the various inhabitants of third world dumps? The answer is, they don’t. For the most part they’re simply figures plucked out of thin air.

    I can find no accounts of any researchers administering anything even closely resembling an I.Q. test. These frauds throw out numbers like 60, 78, 85, 99, 65, based on the observed impoverished life styles of the researched group and then they make allegedly scientific declarations that this or that group of people have average I.Q.s of a value sufficiently low to explain why these assumed dotards are living in dystopian conditions.

    • Replies: @The Hun
    , @res
  20. This war between the Leborn and Barzon families is something that I’ve never seen in any coverage of the Lebaron killings. It would seem that people who do know about this would have heard that Trump announced he would help wipe out the Mexican drug cartels in response to the killing of the LeBarons and they would have said WTF?

    It would be like hearing that coyotes killed some of the neighbors and so you announced that you were going to wipe out rats in retaliation.

    • Replies: @J. Gutierrez
  21. @utu

    I doubt you would know a libertarian if one bit you on the ass.

  22. IvyMike says:

    Ever so often a new 9 year old genius appears on the news, math, engineering, musical, pick your prodigy, jumping from middle school to Harvard, OMG ain’t it great? Are any of these children ever heard from again? Do they ever accomplish anything? Was George W. Bush one of them? because W owned a baseball team, became a multi term Governor and a 2 term President of the U.S. and almost single handedly wrecked a significant portion of the world. What did Marilyn Vos Savant ever do to compare to that?
    I always did great on standardized tests and measured 145 I.Q. but all I wanted to do in college was smoke Mexican dope and maybe get laid someday. So I’ve worked with my hands all my life. God, Obama was smart and clean, but he didn’t know nothing, and Trump is so greasy and stupid, and he don’t know nothing.
    I’m glad I don’t ever think about all this.

  23. MarkinLA says:

    Another one of Fred’s stupid columns.

    Or consider the Meso-American Indians of southern Mexico and Central America. These, said to have a mean IQ of 83, were a minor but remarkable civilization that, while not in a league with Fifth Century Athens, nonetheless did the following: Invented writing, a base-twenty exponential number system, an abacus allowing calculation of huge numbers, and the wheel. They built five-story buildings using poured-in-place concrete and elaborate flood-control systems.

    This means absolutely nothing. Nobody knows what the IQ of the Maya were at the height of their civilization. They collapsed long before the Spanish came. If they were so smart, they should have been able to keep their civilization going as did Europe and China despite the Black Plague.

    The Maya seemed to have a period of constant warfare. During that time they may have experienced a lowering of IQ as the ability to succeed in hand-to-hand combat was more important than the type of warfare seen in Eurasia as seige machines and catapults would not likely be as possible without horses and in jungle conditions.

    There is also the issue of necessity. While the Maya were in acendancy, they would naturally have developed those tools needed for advancement. You don’t need them when you are a small tribe living in the jungle and a blowgun is all that is needed for today’s meal. There are various seemingly ad-hoc advancements all around the world in places where the intelligence of the people would not imply it. Sub-Saharan Africa had iron and crude steel smelting where the Maya and Aztecs did not.

    Fred’s strawman argument all thatpeople who believe in IQ also believe that it accounts for every difference between societies is getting old.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
    , @Exile
  24. The Hun says:
    @Ahem

    In their book Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen list the published tests they used for every country mentioned. For some countries there are several tests available for others only a single one.

  25. A person with high IQ is pretty smart in certain ways. For a human.

  26. foobc1 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    probably they are at the level of North Indians or slightly higher (80-85?). So could go up to 95-100 in modern environment.

    Too funny. Which Aryan tribe has an average 80-85 IQ ?

    Most Aryans are at 100+ easily. And North Indians (all 500 million of them) is almost entirely thousands of various Aryan/Indo-European tribes.

    India at 85 ? Nepal at 60 ? Literally LOL at random made up numbers. Its like saying the IQ of the entire American continent is – spins magic 8 ball – right 60! Needless to say just a made up meaningless number that doesn’t even begin to separate black or white people, not to mention various mestizos, amazon people, inuit, etc.

    BTW: Celiac disease is a core Aryan genetic disease (really only Aryans get it). The most common place found on the planet is in North India (specifically Punjab) followed by various hot spots in Europe.

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
  27. Dumbo says:

    I tend to agree with Fred on this one. As they say, “if you’re so smart, then how come you are so poor?”

    If Whites are so smart, then how come they are so fucked-up today?

    Now, I think that it might be possible that whites have “higher IQ” relative to most other groups, but “higher IQ” basically means a higher ability to solve certain kinds of puzzles fast. Now I am certain that that has a certain utility, but it is far from being all there is in life, or even in intelligence. There are other kinds of abilities that are also useful, and even more useful than being able to solve puzzles. Even the Australian aborigines have some of those.

    “IQ” is really unimportant in the large scale of things. The thing that bothers people about blacks is not that they have “low IQ”, is that they are more prone to violent crime, which is a completely different issue.

    Also, these people Fred calls “IQ-fetishists” are wrong in more ways than one. For instance, we may accept that, let’s say, Brazilians have, according to Lynn, an “average IQ” of 80. Now, even if the majority of the population is supposedly dumb, you will still have a small fraction that has high intelligence and is able to maintain society working and even create things like Embraer, the third civil aircraft company after Boeing and Airbus.

    The real question is, then, how many smart people as a percentage relative to the dumber masses do you need to keep a country functioning? The answer may be seen shortly with the United States in the future decades to come.

    • Replies: @Biff
    , @ThreeCranes
    , @CanSpeccy
  28. I wish I could add anything sensible about IQ and its measurements to this page, but as I was a fruit fly in my previous life, I’m genetically and intellectually challenged, so, the best thing to do, is to remain silent [more or less]…

  29. Dumbo says:

    P.S. I think a lot of these HDB-types tend to over-value “high IQ”, because, well, they are “high IQ” nerds. But as you soon learn, being a “high IQ” nerd is not always the most useful thing in life, especially if you think that the main purpose of life is merely to reproduce our genes (I don’t, but many “high IQ” nerds seem to think it is).

  30. Patricus says:

    I have met so-called low IQ people from American slums. It seems to me they have the same percentage of clever characters, and slow ones, as any group of whites or asians. Differences in college attendance and other estimates of intelligence are due to cultural factors. The ordinary black male might be an assistant clerk in a liqour store. The ordinary suburban jew probably gets a bachelor degree, because of family pressure, and works in the government. They are however equally ordinary and Intellectually unremarkable.

    It is ridiculous to assume some written IQ test can objectively compare people from all over the world, brain surgeons and goatherds.

  31. “What we do see here is that IQists are more interested in defending their theory than in examining it, a quality they share with radical feminists, Marxists, Creationists, Evolutionists, Evangelicals, Moslems, Keyhesians, and conspiracy theorists. Perhaps intelligence really doesn’t exist after all.”

    “I don’t believe in evolution but I’m not one of those icky creationists!”

    Fred always has to let you know that he’s a dissenter without actually running the risk of taking an unpopular stance.

    The rest of the column is more of the same. “IQ doesn’t exist, and I have the anecdotal evidence and travel slides to prove it, so let the hombres in, gringo!”

  32. On the other side you have the cultists of IQ. These are bright white guys who conflate the results of IQ tests with intelligence, a fit which is imperfect. Their political aim is to show that whites, especially IQists, are brighter than blacks and Hispanics and pretty much everybody else, except East Asians who have higher IQs than white guys. Admitting the superiority of the Asians is the political price of showing the inferiority of everyone else.

    Did we also have to admit that Jews were more intelligent than other whites? I can see paying one “political price” in order to prove our superiority, but two political prices? Seems a little too steep for me.

    How about women? Did we have to admit that they were of approximately equal intelligence as IQ tests show? Because I feel that was a major mistake and would like a do-over if possible.

    With East Asians and Jews showing superior results, and women showing approximately equal results, it’s almost as if we racist, sexist white guys didn’t really have a choice in what the science would show.

    • LOL: CanSpeccy
  33. @MarkinLA

    Which is more intelligent: to live sustainably and in harmony with nature in the jungle under the tree line or to replace forests with concrete and invent nuclear weapons to wipe out the world?

  34. @Ben Alpin

    Two populations with a similar average IQ, but different levels of conscientiousness, aggression, conformity, etc. are going to have different outcomes even with a similar average IQ.

    This would be much clearer if those other traits could be directly tested and assigned a numerical measure the way intelligence can.

  35. @Achmed E. Newman

    I think you misunderstood him there. He clearly grasps the concept of an IQ distribution. I think his point is a good one if you recall that many of the more politically motivated “IQists” do indeed pretend to know just what a particular mean IQ implies about a given group’s ability to accomplish certain things. Amren is full of comments like “haw haw, what do you expect when their IQ is only 90” in response to an article that some country has run into difficulties implementing, say, a new public transport system (or whatever). They essentially believe that whatever a lower IQ group has accomplished up to the present time is the most that the group is capable of ever accomplishing, so any attempt to do better than they’ve done till now is necessarily doomed to fail.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  36. @Twodees Partain

    Why would you say that? Libertarians don’t exactly try to hide the fact that they’re libertarians, so they’re not really difficult to identify. I think you’re just upset that he fails to see any wisdom in libertarian economic prescriptions.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @Wally
  37. Willem says:

    ‘On one side ….
    On the other side’

    It does not strike me as particularly intelligent when a writer needs a false dichotomy to make his point.

    And IQ, as Fred and all the other IQists from Unz show here, is highly related with class. So why not redefine IQ into class?

    The difference between IQ and class is that one cannot do much about IQ as IQists think that IQ is genetic. In contrast, class is non-natural and can therefore be changed. Just give these people from Nepal a chance, which is easy if you redefine IQ (genetic) to class (nurture). Send money, show them your heart, etc.

    But if you would do that the IQists would be out of a job and I am not sure if many of the IQists here are willing to see themselves as socialists. Actually, I am pretty sure that these IQists much prefer to see themselves as hypocrits, racists, utter fools, instead of acknowledging to anyone that they are actually socialists who do not dare to come out of the closet.

    What happened to these people? Why do they prefer to live in the year 0 instead of thinking about things that could change the world for the better if they only had the guts?

    Which reminds me of

    • Replies: @Anon
  38. Exile says:
    @MarkinLA

    Let’s see if James Thompson or one of the other IQ guys weighs in. Nick Taleb’s ham-fisted ethno-centrically-motivated halo-effect spiral on IQ was bad enough, but Fred’s even more clumsy and obvious in trying to defend the IQ’s of Others b/c IQ testing is mean to them.

  39. I take the originator of the IQ hypothesis and test as his word. He considered environment and part and parcel to how IQ is developed. Given that, testing said populations with varying degrees of exposure to what develops a high IQ or IQ in general is going to have limited value.

    Einstein, Oppenheimer and a host of others all worked for people considered lower IQ. They may have influence in several areas. Think tanks are certainly powerful entities in government and linked to various departments. But the results are mixed at best for where they have taken the country, if in fact they have that level of influence.

    And despite my low IQ, it’s clear that high IQ isn’t enough to rest assured of sound or effective governance. if I give my car to someone because they have a higher IQ on the assumption that a higher IQ means they will avoid drive more effectively, but wreck my car more times in a month, than I have in ten years —-

    it’s a safe bet their high IQ isn’t actor in more effective driving. If high IQ is the key to running an effective shop of state and whiteness holds as some innate trait of higher IQ, then in my view, I the country has some serious questions about the number of accidents undermining the country’s standing.

    And one hopes the answer is not that the blacks made me do it.

  40. The solution is to use a Stupidity Quotient which can be averaged with the IQ. Things like low impulse control and rudeness can then be accurately assessed wrt impact on working intelligence: WQ or WI.

    Rude Jerk/Q x cooperative/Q gets to why Fred Reed was deported from the US as well as why Derbyshire’s retreads are savants rather than geniuses. It could perhaps be incorporated like a friction coefficient in physics.

  41. anon[210] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The numbers for Nepal can’t be right.

    Why not?
    They’re a violent Tibetan tribe known only for being cannon fodder British mercenaries.
    I’d also question the assertion that the Chinese have an average IQ of 105.
    Their elites, perhaps.
    The average Chinaman would be around IQ80, from what i’ve seen.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  42. @foobc1

    Possibly the ancient Aryans did have IQs in that range. And there has been thousands of years of differential selection for intelligence since.

    India’s national IQ of ~80 given by Lynn etc. is supported by international standardized tests that show the same thing: http://www.unz.com/akarlin/the-puzzle-of-indian-iq-a-country-of-gypsies-and-jews/

    The PISA-adjusted IQ of India – as extrapolated from the states of Tamil Nadu and Himachal Pradesh, which are relatively rich and are reputed to have good school systems by Indian standards – is a miserly 75.4; Richard Lynn, in his latest estimates based on an international standardized test from 1970 and a more recent TIMSS study in the states of Rajasthan and Orissa is 82.2. The chart above compiled by Steve Sailer from Lynn’s data on numerous IQ tests also indicates it is the low 80’s.

    Incidentally, the Dravidian Indian south tends to have higher IQs (and human development in general) than its more Aryan north.

    • Troll: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Truth
  43. J says: • Website
    @Sean

    About Richard Feynman: He went to Sao Paulo to teach and was consulted about a project how to pump drinking water to the favelas up on the top of the hills. Local engineers needed supplementary IQ to solve the problem. Feynman went to see the favelas in person (middle class Brazilians would not approach those slums) and looked around. What are these pipes? They supply drinking water to the upper favelas. Who did it? Nobody, they are illegal. But the local mulattoes were unable to tie their own shoelaces. Really? So much for IQ. But you need the IQ of a Feynman to notice things.

    • Replies: @scg16121
  44. IQ measures your ability to score high on an IQ test. That’s it.

    There’s a fairly close mapping between what’s tested for on an IQ test and what colleges like Harvard er uhm, Haaaaaaaaah-Vaaaaaaaahd, want to see in students.

    In the 1950s world of the first part of the movie “A Beautiful Mind”, a high score on an IQ test meant you probably had it made. Probably.

    Now, all rules are off. Junkyardmen make more than engineers, Africans like right outta Africa with no Neanderthal in ’em, come here to the US and do great. Haitians are noted for doing well in business. Plus the country is full of dunderheads of all races. Who cares what IQ tests measure because all college will get you now is a lifetime of debt and if you’re lucky you’ll get your old warehouse job back when you’re done.

    I’m gonna piss some people off here and note that “American Black” culture is largely lower-class lumpenproletariat English/European culture. Remember the “Ebonics” debacle? It was doing fine until they found out that particular mutter and twang came from some Godforsaken villages in England, exactly the kind that the denizens thereof would gladly commit some petty crime to get “transported” the England’s penal colony that later became the US. Why do you think the typical “Southern” accent, spoken by at least as many whites as blacks, is pretty much the same? The lower-class whip crackers didn’t decide to start talking African; they’d always talked that way.

  45. Biff says:
    @Dumbo

    Now, I think that it might be possible that whites have “higher IQ” relative to most other groups, but “higher IQ” basically means a higher ability to solve certain kinds of puzzles fast. Now I am certain that that has a certain utility, but it is far from being all there is in life, or even in intelligence. There are other kinds of abilities that are also useful, and even more useful than being able to solve puzzles.

    Everybody rolls differently. An IQ test manufactured in one society is not an exact science to determine intelligence in another society. Not that it’s not worth trying.

  46. @utu

    “… and conspiracy theorists. ”

    I don’t know why Fred keeps picking on conspiracy theorists, as if a “conspiracy” can’t possibly be true. I guess Fred must believe whoever thinks John Wilkes Booth conspired with David E. Herold, G. A. Atzerodt, Lewis Payne, Mary E. Surratt, Michael O’Laughlin, Edward Spangler, Samuel Arnold to kill Lincoln and VP Johnson is a dimwit “conspiracy theorist.”

  47. joe2.5 says:
    @restless94110

    Looks like you skipped the bit where he describes you.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  48. It is true that the “IQists” might occasionally go slightly overboard in their claims on the importance and pervasiveness of genetically-mediated differences in cognitive ability as the explanation for social and economic differences. On the other hand, HBDers are fighting against an incredibly powerful and entrenched media/political machine dedicated to hiding the truth of their insight. So cut them a teeny bit of slack in sometimes they very slightly exaggerate. The basic scientific truth of the HBD theory is clear, despite the calumny heaped upon it. So a teeny bit of exaggeration by proponents is forgivable in these circumstances.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @joe2.5
  49. mikemikev says:

    It’s the smart fraction that run technical things.

  50. Anonymous[244] • Disclaimer says:

    >These people would not be able to dress themselves or find their way home at night. I encountered no naked Nepalis wandering about homelessly.
    Not sure about the Nepalese, but that isn’t an uncommon experience for the Australian abo. They run TV ads in this country warning them not to sleep in the road.

  51. Escher says:
    @Bragadocious

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ervil_LeBaron

    The Wikipedia article above shows a pretty interesting lifestyle, with liberal use of violence to settle scores.

  52. @Commentator Mike

    Really, Mike? You’d rather live in the jungle with the savages? I hate to tell you, but, though he plays a mean guitar Neil Young was full of shit.

    Write us back from the jungle and tell us how you like the lifestyle, if you can get you some internet.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  53. @silviosilver

    I can’t speak for all the IQists, Silvio. They may jump the gun on that sort of thing. However, it’s really a matter of who is LET to run things. In Latin America, when things are organized so that the high-IQ go-getters are in charge and in place in the positions that need this, things may work out OK. Once the hierarchy is overturned by Communist revolution or just general imposed multi-culturalism, as we have here, the low-IQ people can make the place, well, 3rd World.

    When the mean-IQ people are in positions that require good thinking skills, in (something resembling) engineering, IT, and middle management, then things just don’t work right, big ideas can’t get accomplished, and you can’t get something you want done, done right. Affirmative Action here is helping us turn into the 3rd world in that manner.

    • Agree: buckwheat
  54. @anon

    No way on the Chinamen. I’m not sure if it’s purely genetic, BTW, as their culture of high discipline and respect for education has probably brought up the IQ of many average people quite a few points.

    Just to be able to read and write, you need to memorize 3-4 thousand characters, each with 5 to 20 squiggly lines. You can’t be a literate retard over there, per Fred’s quip.

    • Replies: @scg16121
    , @Haha
  55. Rahan says:

    Fred Reed is my new no-nonsense uncle.
    It’s good to have a no-nonsense uncle around.

    I see some poster reply with stuff like “So you’re saying” and “Um, no…” and other leftie techniques.
    People, please don’t fall to this level. Say what you gotta say without slipping into “online drama tranny mode”.

    • LOL: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @George Gent
  56. nymom says:

    Well it would have been nice to have some English translations of some of the material posted.

    But in essence you are saying it was a fight over water rights that led to the murder of these people. Still justice must be served whatever the reason for this attack.

    Can Mexico handle it is the next query.

    To be continued…

  57. @silviosilver

    I doubt that you would be able to identify a libertarian either.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    , @MarkinLA
  58. Mike P says:

    Very funny.

    It always puzzles me how grown men can obsess over IQ. Sure, if you want to predict whether little Johnny has what it takes to one day become a brain engineer or rocket surgeon, IQ may be your best bet. However, for judging the ability of adult individuals or of entire cultures, there is a better way, as Fred points out – simply look at their accomplishments. In that context, the whole argument is simply over the validity of IQ itself and should really only interest the psychologists.

  59. Dwright says:

    I love how this goes from IQ into a defense of senseless slaughter of women and babies.

  60. KenH says:

    The FBI will now get involved in helping Mexican authorities investigate the Lebaron murders. Anytime the FBI gets involved then we’ll know even less than we do know since all they do is cover up, obfuscate and mislead just like they did with the Las Vegas shooting.

  61. @Anonymous

    Where I grew up there were traffic signs warning drivers to be aware of deer suddenly darting across the roads. Perhaps the DMV down under should post signs warning drivers of the risk of hitting aborigines asleep in the road.

  62. @Rahan

    Could be. Sounds like Fred has a lot of nonwhite nephews.

  63. @Twodees Partain

    Utu’s just pissed that he’s too dumb to imagine living without a nanny state, a patronage civil service job, or a war machine paycheck. Libertarianism – the non-aggression principle – is civility. The state is brutality, theft, gatekeeping, severe limitation of human potential . . . and the antithesis of justice. It is parasitic; a locust swarm.

    The State Is Too Dangerous To Tolerate:

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  64. res says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Responding to your comments 16 and 17 in one place.

    The numbers for Nepal can’t be right. I’m not sure if that’s what the HBD writers state though, and Mr. Karlin’s comment reads pretty reasonable to me. Just some bad numbers is not a reason to disparage the whole point of inheritability of intelligence and the IQ test as a metric. From my readings of the HBD types, nobody is claiming that IQ is all that is necessary to build a good society*. It sure helps though.

    The best single reference for country IQs is David Becker’s spreadsheet:
    https://www.researchgate.net/project/Worlds-IQ
    https://viewoniq.org

    He provides multiple estimates for country IQs in sheet FAV with methodological notes in the MANUAL text file. I would recommend focusing on the following columns:

    NIQ-QNF+SAS+GEO (col. H): Means of NIQ-QNW (col. E) and NIQ-SAS (col. F), and supplemented for missing nations by geographic means of neighboring countries
    (I think it is fair to call this Becker’s primary estimate)

    NIQ-L&V12+GEO (col. L): National IQ-scores from Lynn & Vanhanen (2012) supplemented for missing nations by geographic means of neighboring countries
    (the most recent L&V estimates)

    NIQ-R (col. N): National IQ-scores from Prof. Dr. Heiner Rindermann, calculated from L&V02 and school assessment studies (PISA; TIMSS; PIRLS)
    – See “Appendix I Data” in Becker & Rindermann (2016).

    He also supplies a column with the differences between his measure and L&V12+GEO
    IQ(L&V12)-NIQ: Differences between NIQ-QNF+SAS+GEO (col. H) and NIQ-L&V12+GEO (col. L)
    which is useful for finding countries with substantial disagreement/uncertainty. Nepal is one of those.

    The estimates given for Nepal are:
    NIQ-QNF+SAS+GEO 60
    NIQ-L&V12+GEO 78
    R (Rindermann) 76.59

    I am not sure why these are so different. I agree that the higher two estimates sound more plausible.

    The sheet REC has entries for all of the studies used in the spreadsheet for each country. There are 9 studies given for Nepal. If one has an issue with the IQ estimate a good first step would be to review those studies.

    What we really need is better data. School assessment studies (PISA; TIMSS; PIRLS) would be perfect. If only the low IQ scoring countries could provide those. A large selection of scores like that can be seen starting in column PD of the sheet NAT, but there are none for Nepal.

    Mr. Reed, do you know what mean means? It’s not the 84-IQ people maintaining the telecom equipment, aircraft and engines.

    As silviosilver notes, the mean does matter for the distribution. Assuming the distribution is roughly normal allows one to estimate the number of people with higher level IQs. That assumption is reasonable in countries with fairly uniform environments and genetic populations, but can become questionable as the environments and genetics become more varied.

    Smart fraction theory (e.g. the top 5% per Rindermann) is probably a better metric than mean for evaluating whether a country can maintain first world infrastructure. But remember that experts can always be hired if a country is fairly functional and non-corrupt. Notice that the top 5% corresponds to a Z-score of 1.6 so the normal distribution (and SD 15) smart fraction level would be 24 IQ points above the mean.

    The problem here is that if we can’t even get reliable IQ means for some countries how are we to get SDs and top 5% levels?

    BTW, this ability to extract the 5%-95% values as well as the means is one of the things which makes Rindermann’s data so valuable.

    • Replies: @gregor
  65. @Al Lipton

    An old proverb goes sumpin’ like this: “A one-eyed man is a genius in the land of the blind.”

    • Replies: @Simply Simon
  66. res says:
    @Ahem

    And how, how in Eysenck’s name, did they measure these so called I.Q.s. of the various inhabitants of third world dumps? The answer is, they don’t. For the most part they’re simply figures plucked out of thin air.

    Test results. And when those were lacking they used geographical estimates from neighboring countries. Any better ideas?

    I can find no accounts of any researchers administering anything even closely resembling an I.Q. test.

    You needed to look harder (at all?) . There are over 650 sets of country test results listed in sheet REC of Becker’s IQ data: https://www.researchgate.net/project/Worlds-IQ

  67. Arnieus says:
    @restless94110

    It’s not political. Asians do test higher.
    I think you missed his point. White Europeans who want to view humanity in terms of IQ must admit (and they do) that white Europeans are not the sharpest knife in the drawer. There is a political price to pay for that admission because lots of other white Europeans don’t want to hear it.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  68. scg16121 says:
    @J

    What is this supposed to prove? Wow, they rigged up some pipes and a pump. Alert the corporations searching for geniuses to make breakthroughs. There’s a completely untapped well of high-iq talent in the Brazilian favelas. All you have to do is not be racist and you can reap the benefits.

  69. MEH 0910 says:

  70. scg16121 says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I agree. Everywhere the Chinese go they do well. In the French suburbs the muslims are attacking the Chinese because they resent how well they are doing. Chinese do indeed have high iqs.

    http://www.financetwitter.com/2017/02/north-african-attack-chinese-in-france-for-being-too-hardworking-rich.html

    This is just one example. See Singapore for another. It was a part of Malaysia but the Malays were tired of competing with the Chinese population so they created Singapore to be done with them. 105 for the average Chinese person is very plausible.

  71. Wally says:
    @silviosilver

    said:
    ” I think you’re just upset that he fails to see any wisdom in libertarian economic prescriptions.”

    Nope.

    The fact is that utu never specifies what it is he dislikes about Libertarians, he merely rants like a child.

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  72. Anon[405] • Disclaimer says:

    Re: the Cult of IQ, I think you’re missing a beat, Mr. Reed. The current Narrative is that blacks and Latinos are not doing as well as whites (Asians are invisible when convenient to the Narrative) because Whitey is keeping ’em down. And if this is true, then it’s the white man’s burden to fix the blacks’ and Latinos’ woes (and pay for the fix) thru social programs. These programs just happen to give more power to those behind the Narrative.

    White IQ enthusiasts are hopeful that impartial genetic evidence will blow up the Narrative and release whites from the burden of fixing dysfunctional minorities.

    Re: the Mormonicide, you don’t kill women and children. Doesn’t matter if they’re white, mestizo, Indio, or black, or whatever. Your defense of and making excuses for this action is despicable.

    • Replies: @Kolya Krassotkin
  73. Truth says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Incidentally, the Dravidian Indian south tends to have higher IQs (and human development in general) than its more Aryan north.

    Oleksander Usyk is right here. The short, fat dark-skinned southerners in India, are considered MUCH smarter than the tall, whitish, hazel-eyed northerners that you see in Indian movies. that is why they are the ones with the industry, the IT skills, and the laborers in the Middle East.

    Kinda sucks, I know.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  74. As far as the Mormons who were disrespected down ole Mexico Way – it has been general knowledge for a long time that they have had settlements in Mexico who had been there for many years and were dual citizens. I believe that Mittens even acknowledged he had relatives there when he was vying for the title of king-shit. Some people who claim to be Mormons (Mind you not all) have pretty dubious histories. A bunch have been trying to cheat the Hopi and Navajo out of their land and coal rights in the Black Mesa region of Arizona for years, mostly successfully.

    The IQ thing is misleading at best, especially during recent history. My questionable observations indicate that the general IQ of Americans has been dropping like a rock over the last 50 years. Take those Australian aborigines with claimed mean IQ of 64. Pair one with the average American in the wild and ask yourself which one would survive sans, government protector, lawyers, or corrupt bankers to prop them up.

  75. nsa says:

    Koko the gorilla is said to have mastered sign language, utilizing a vocabulary of more than 2000 words…….a considerably larger lexicon than your average food stamp recipient, football fan, or megachurch attendee. As an adult, she was administered infant IQ tests and scored between 75 and 90. Koko particularly enjoyed hanging out with rock stars and taking care of her pet kitten.

  76. Fred Reed is, whichever his personal reasons my be, mostly right about IQ (I wouldn’t comment on Mormons in Mexico etc.).

    But, it boils down to unreliability of psychometry as such. And I’m not talking about geniuses, bursts of creativity & similar stuff.

    Simply, what those tests should measure is talent, gift, capability for some area. If limited to such, rather narrow field, psychometry tests could very well work.They could show that some people are gifted for numbers, or for engineering tasks, good with words, or good in space orientation etc.

    But it is absurd to derive (I know the argument of factor analysis, but it is bollocks) that some magical number, IQ, is the final product which will show a person’s success in life in general. What is “success”? How can we measure capability of an individual to attain”success” in a given field?

    The answer: we can’t.

    And it is even more absurd to try it with human collectives.

    We all see with our own eyes what different human collectives are capable of, and it is not some magical number that will give us varieties of human accomplishment & functionality of human collectives, given the historical moment, ideas, manners, environment, … and even more- hope, self-reliance, adaptability, stubbornness, morals..

  77. @Ben Alpin

    “If you only care about IQ or think that’s all that matters you are missing the bigger picture of the hereditarian perspective. ”

    This is the kind of straw-man Kiko loves to erect, so he can throw empty mescal bottles at it to knock it down. Who are all these people that think “all that matters” is IQ? Just about everyone I read with any authority on HBD (meaning NOT Kiko Reed) concedes that individual human personality and achievement is a combination of genetics and environment (nature and nurture). The degree to which either contributes is the point that is disputed. But I must be missing all of these strict absolutists in regards to HBD. Then again, I don’t have pink elephants circling my dome every late afternoon like Kiko does, so maybe he hallucinates all these hateful hating hate filled white supremacist absolutist IQ worshiping KKK members with nothing better to do than target innocent, peaceful, incestuous, littering, drunken mestizos who aspire to nothing more than to sneak into a neighboring country and viva la gibbos.

    • LOL: bomag
  78. nsa says:

    Beals, Smith, and Dodd (1984) studied cranial capacity by race, examining a large number of skulls. Their results: East Asians 1415 cc, Europeans 1362, Africans 1268 cc. It is interesting that average cranial capacity has been decreasing over the last 10,000 to 20,000 years…..indicating raw intelligence is needed less and less for survival. Survival 20,000 years ago required considerable brains, cunning, and courage. Now, not so much……as can be verified by a quick tour of any local Walmart.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  79. Durruti says:

    So much for aborigines. In this piece by John Derbyshire, a mathematician by training and longtime enthusiast of all things IQical, I find his assertion that the Nepalese have a mean IQ of 60. (He is quoting other I Qists thought to know of these matters.)

    Now, a couple of points: First, I have spent time in Nepal and saw nothing to suggest anything even approaching this level of retardation. Second, an average of 60 means that half the population have an IQ of less than that, the distribution being almost symmetrical, and a substantial number below 45. These people would not be able to dress themselves or find their way home at night. I encountered no naked Nepalis wandering about homelessly.

    At times Mr. Reed displays a decent sense of humor. His article discusses the so-called IQ (Intelligence Quotient), and displays some serious inconconsistencies in the Theory.

    I will add here, the not vital piece of information, that I attended school in Mexico. I met Siquieros, when he was released from Prison.

    Mr. Reed, Have you ever read Churchill’s description of the average British voter?

    The IQ fraud is another bogus Theory that serves to:

    1. Separate (divide) humans (and build excuses of why most humans must be Ruled, Controlled, Robbed, Slaughtered, and their little boys & girls, separated from their own families, and Raped.

    2. This IQ crap is another expansion of Freud’s,we all want to have sex with our mother. Therefore, any Moral Crime is allowed (Ethnic cleansing the Palestinians, The Liberty, 9/11, and the Coup D’état of 11/22/1963.

    3. The Maxwells, Epstein & Barak Shadow Government controlled the USA for 30 years, in complete violation of our Nation’s Sovereignty, depriving us of our Honor & Liberty, (a so-called ‘male President’ in Blue Dress), the political cover SEX, of of Raped Boys & Girls. It’s only depravity, nothing new here! Do not examine further.

    4. There is one Race, complete with different cultures. Just one Human Race. And our happy survival depends on whether or not we can resolve the many Human problems that injure us, divide us. In America, we might Restore Our Republic! We aught to at least try!

    5. What is the IQ of UNZ & the Commenters – who do not see this Zionist New World Order connection? [There goes my chance to ever have an article published on this website!!!]

    Fuck IQ. Fuck IQers. Fuck their bullshit Hollywood brainwashing “superior people” (I wonder who they might be?), advocacies. Has anyone viewed their “Independence Day” movie? Jews save the world. Huh? I thought they were destroying it?

    People are what they do, what they accomplish. This conundrum was giving Mr. Reed some problems. He opened the discussion with some tounge in cheek, and some misconceptions.

    In America, we have a very difficult Road ahead of us. As I tell my students, “Leave fear at the door.”

    Durruti

  80. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Good stuff Fred. Difficult to maintain a bogus science in the face of general laughter. And …

    What we do see here is that IQists are more interested in defending their theory than in examining it…

    That’s because it’s not a real theory, but more a prop to the self-esteem of certain groups and individuals. Hence it is defended with the fanaticism of religious zeal (and of professors of psychology and psychology practitioners whose livelihood depends on it).

    Best thing, really, would be to kick the psychologists out of the university along with the chiropracters, naturopaths, feminists and other hate groups.

    • Agree: Durruti
  81. @Anatoly Karlin

    This sounds about right to me. I’m not an expert on the topic by any means, but IQ tests seem to test things that are more weighted to advancing civilization. Complex thinking is required for moving from the wheel, to a water wheel, to a steam engine, to a jet turbine. Add to that a cultural tradition that is more individualistic and competitive and you get the modern West.

    But for a subsistence farmer or hunter gatherer, complex thinking isn’t required. Memorization of seasons, perhaps, or basic observational skills that two big pigs will make big baby pigs. Tool use is limited because the basic requirements are met early and change isn’t required.

    Stack that up with a few thousand years of interbreeding and you get 60 IQ Nepalese who live well enough in mountainous terrain but aren’t going to crap out a Tesla anytime soon.

    That said, using IQ as a metric to determine who will fit best into a modern Western nation is a pretty good proxy for success. You can pluck a Zulu infant out of Africa, raise it in suburban Virginia, and that child is unlikely to become the next Steve Jobs. They will probably be far more intelligent than their Zulu family back in Africa, but not a genius. (Unless, I suppose, they happen to be on the very thin right-hand side of the Zulu bell curve.)

    IQ is important. Culture is important too. The way to bet is on IQ. Culture will only come into play if the immigrant doesn’t have the opportunity to surround themselves with others of their ethnic tribe. A passel of Zulus in suburban VA will remain largely Zulu, regardless of their IQ.

    The problem with 85 IQ people maintaining a technical civilization is that, like a boat in a harbor, if the 85 IQs don’t or can’t see that the current rot will only get worse over time, the civilization will decay and crumble. 70 IQ Africans build mud huts because once dried, they’re practically stone and last forever. If you put 70 IQ Africans in a wood frame house on a slab foundation with electricity and modern plumbing, they don’t understand that it must be cared for. The house will go to seed and they have no idea why, or how to fix it.

    • Replies: @miss marple
  82. @nsa

    Beals, Smith, and Dodd (1984) studied cranial capacity by race, examining a large number of skulls. Their results: East Asians 1415 cc, Europeans 1362, Africans 1268 cc.

    Alright- but where from history could we see that it matters at all? Why didn’t east Asians accomplish, in past 2500 years, as much as Caucasians? They lag behind Caucasians in virtually all fields: statesmanship, philosophy, visual arts, music, literature, exact sciences, social sciences,… everything.

    So- what they got to show to the world that would parallel, or even be better, than accomplishments of Homer, Plato, Michelangelo, Shakespeare, Rembrandt, Newton, Bach, Napoleon, Gauss, Darwin, Dostoevsky, Einstein, …?

    • Replies: @Poco
  83. Mike1 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Good points.

    Something very obvious missed by both the author and you is that the technological side of things in Colombia are built, and when necessary, run by by foreigners. I can see someone with an IQ of 85 being a capable airplane mechanic but the implication that the same person is capable of building a subway system is silly. Colombians don’t do these things.

    People that worship IQ do a huge disservice by taking as gospel IQ’s in places where the research is weak. An IQ of 60 in Nepal is absurd.

    I’m fascinated by this:

    “However, one thing that must be emphasized is that an IQ of 70 for an adult white person in a First World country is not equivalent to an IQ of 70 for a black in an African country. The former is deeply abnormal, and will probably have many genetic defects, which produce stereotypical “retard” behavior that would not be observed in his African equivalent (even though they’d perform equally poorly on an IQ test).”

    It’s actually fairly obvious but I hadn’t made the direct connection.

  84. jsm says:
    @Twodees Partain

    Not to be pedantic, but since libertarians ostensibly espouse the non-aggression principal, they wouldn’t be going around biting people, so if someone does bite him in the ass, it by definition would not be a libertarian. So, no, he would not know a libertarian if one bit him in the ass, cuz that creature doesn’t exist.

  85. gregor says:

    Or consider the Meso-American Indians of southern Mexico and Central America. These, said to have a mean IQ of 83, were a minor but remarkable civilization that, while not in a league with Fifth Century Athens, nonetheless did the following: Invented writing, a base-twenty exponential number system, an abacus allowing calculation of huge numbers, and the wheel. They built five-story buildings using poured-in-place concrete and elaborate flood-control systems.

    They did not have the wheel. There may have been some wheeled toys in pre-Columbian America, but that’s about it. Zero evidence of wagons or anything like that. And the only domesticated pack animals were llamas (in South America) and dogs. No horses or oxen to pull any sort of substantial vehicle.

  86. @Durruti

    The IQ fraud is another bogus Theory that serves to:

    1. Separate (divide) humans (and build excuses of why most humans must be Ruled, Controlled, Robbed, Slaughtered, and their little boys & girls, separated from their own families, and Raped.

    Yeah, like mankind needed the theory of IQ to do that.

    The science of IQ has been around for over a hundred years, and it was first discovered and developed in the most free and civilized of countries at the time. And it was done so in part by smart, virtuous men who hoped to use the science to help poor children – both those lads who were intelligent but whose talents might go undiscovered because they were from undistinguished families and mentally-challenged children whose handicaps required aid.

    • Replies: @Durruti
  87. Mexico is a failed state.

    The “smartest” Mexicans flee their shithole to illegally settle in the US and the legitimately dumbfuckiest Whites and cleverer (((Whites))) allow them to stay and replace them.

  88. SuzanneL says:

    Not just humans, but every species has it’s own custom intelligence based on its body and environment/habitat. I could not live as as a chimpanzee does, foraging and living for decades without farming. Does that mean I’m low IQ, or just low chimp Q? Likewise with the Australian aborigines. I’d die in a week trying to live where they live. My IQ in the civilized U.S. is decent, but I sure have a low outback Q.

    See the new study on NaturalNews, discussing how people living in cities can no longer recognize natural objects (in callage pictures). Being so unfamiliar with the natural world will not serve them well when the self-aggrandized elites make their move to depopulated the earth by collapsing civilization. (This is how the MEAK shall inherit the earth.)

    • Replies: @scg16121
  89. @Demeter Last

    Wrt below average IQ types and maintenance, you’re greatly oversimplifying the issue. True, one person could not want to spend money on repairs but there also may be community dysfunction at play. I’d say this is more typically the case in the developing world. For instance, said individual could live in territory controlled by a rival faction, a faction that has gained control of plumbing, roofing and car repair businesses. Just for a thought experiment, what would a person do if they were denied services such as these? I know such targeting would never happen in the US of course but, what if?

    • Replies: @bomag
  90. Durruti says:
    @Pincher Martin

    The science of IQ has been around for over a hundred years, and it was first discovered and developed in the most free and civilized of countries at the time. And it was done so in part by smart, virtuous men who hoped to use the science to help poor children – both those lads who were intelligent but whose talents might go undiscovered because they were from undistinguished families and mentally-challenged children whose handicaps required aid.

    Awfully nice of them.

    I’ll deal with my own handicaps. Thankyou!

    Yeah, like mankind needed the theory of IQ to do that.

    I wrote- “The IQ fraud is another bogus Theory” You understand the meaning of “another”?

    The IQ fraud is just another front (one of many), in the post WW II efforts by the Zionist Financial Oligarchs to control the world. In the latter stage the war, they began to put in effect their New World Order, from Breton Woods, https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/wwii/98681.htm – to elaborate psychological – skewed mind control for the Masses. For us Brooklyn students, the IQ tests arrived in the middle 1950s.

    By 1945, The Power Elite (term used by C. Wright Mills), had a mostly prostrate world with which they would forge their moves at Planet Control (known as New World Order). Except for the United States, even the victorious nations were (heavily) economically and morally damaged, in great financial debt, with much damage of infrastructure, and had lost many millions of their people.

    Put this history all together, and we arrive at 2019.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  91. To true believers, IQ is true because they want it to be true. And because it compliments their own amour-propre.

    • Agree: Durruti
  92. Jett Rucker says: • Website

    There are no seasons as we know them in Equatorial Guinea. None. Ever.

    • Agree: Marshall Lentini
  93. ruralguy says:

    An IQ is a composite measure of different functional processing in the brain. Like any science, to understand it thoroughly, you must understand it within the rigor of that field. To make non-scientific claims about it, as Fred has done, is not proper and can be very damaging. Leftists have been changing our demographics based not on a proper understanding of this science, but on the emotional belief that everyone is equal. Fred is just adding to this damage.

  94. @Anatoly Karlin

    Good points Karlin. Fred misses the idea that the smartest people in the group can build the infrastructure and the rest can assimilate. Blacks in Western Civilization if they are civil enough can make a good living if they want. In America Blacks like Lefraud James make 30 million a year and criticize America about everything. In his native Africa the Chinese and Russians are there building an infrastructure.

    Fred is a simpleton. He takes a simple idea and then magnifies it to fit his ideology about everything. His ideas on the morality of the Narco Nation Mexico is pure idiocy. They don’t kill for no reason. They kill tourists …they kill fishermen..(especially further south in Middle America). Of course didn’t they just kill a judge? In 2017 they killed a You Tube star who supposedly insulted a cartel member. Nice Place!

  95. Anon7 says:

    Fred often makes this sort of assertion about different countries with “low” average IQ:

    Colombians, said to have mean IQ 84, run modern cities with telecommunications, airlines and the concomitant people to maintain avionics and big turbofans. This involves no contradiction if IQists say clearly that 84 is sufficient to do these things.

    You can’t run these things with IQ 84 people. You’ll need a fair number of bright normals (100-115) to make things run right.

    But it doesn’t take a whole country full of people who can run telecommunications and airlines. I don’t have a good number for how many people it takes to run the most essential modern technology (which gets you to a “modern city”), but I don’t think it’s a very big number.

    Technology infrastructure today comes “pre-packaged”, that is to say, you buy the whole thing as a turnkey package. You just need people who are bright enough to run it (the aforementioned IQ 100-115 people).

    Developing advanced technology, like designing and building airplanes or telecommunications infrastructure from scratch, is a different kettle of fish entirely.

  96. @Anatoly Karlin

    You just make up shit, don’t you? What a child. Why don’t you pull out your sword again? That’s mature.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  97. Republic says:
    @Bragadocious

    Re: Other Stuff : The Mormonicide in Mexico

    I thought that Reed was once a professional journalist, a police reporter in Washington,
    DC, If that was indeed the case, his reportage or lack thereof seems very inadequate for this important story.

    His so called proof for his water dispute cause of the deaths was to dump a Spanish language
    Facebook account of some local person living in the area

    Other explanations for the Mormon massacre must be examined, for example,

    The theory that the LeBaron community had an agreement with the local drug cartel,

    the cartel de sinoloa,

    Another rival cartel from Juarez,

    La Linea

    , targeted the Mormons because of this association.

    This report of the BBC gives a summary of that theory

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-50339377

  98. @restless94110

    You don’t even get Reed’s joke. What a flat, braindead, ironyless clod grind drudge.

    • Agree: Durruti
    • Replies: @restless94110
  99. @Durruti

    Oh dear Lord.

    The IQ fraud is just another front (one of many), in the post WW II efforts by the Zionist Financial Oligarchs to control the world. In the latter stage the war, they began to put in effect their New World Order, from Breton Woods, https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/wwii/98681.htm – to elaborate psychological – skewed mind control for the Masses. For us Brooklyn students, the IQ tests arrived in the middle 1950s.

    A major – but not singular – trouble with your interpretation is that IQ tests were introduced on a massive scale into the United States long before the end of WW2, and they were introduced by gentile scientists, not Jews. You can read here about the first large-scale use of IQ tests in the United States.

    At the time, Jews were primarily in the opposition against IQ tests – or at least against how they were used. That was true of a wide range of Jews, from Jewish intellectuals like Franz Boas to political commentators like Walter Lippman. That’s not because these Jews were naturally good guys, but because they were often at least sympathetic to socialism and communism, if not outright socialists and commies themselves. IQ tests, in their view, were about stratifying the world, and that would not lead to socialist paradise.

  100. @johnm33

    Interesting. Link to your elaboration. Original. That would refer to upping drive, an keeping robustness in dogs, while line breeding, and horizontal breeding. What is good for dogs sits not necessarily well for humans.

  101. scg16121 says:
    @SuzanneL

    So what? How quickly can you learn difficult concepts? How well can you follow a complicated argument? People differ in these abilities. Groups differ on average in these abilities. That is the point. Your example is irrelevant to the discussion of IQ. Maintaining a technologically advanced society requires large numbers of people who can learn what needs to be learned. People with low IQs cannot be taught these things. It’s just how it is.

  102. Here is what a far more interesting and intelligent writer than Fred Reed had to say about IQ tests and their opponents nearly a century ago:

    “There are minds which start out with superior equipment, and proceed to high and arduous tasks; there are minds which never get any further than a sort of insensate sweating, like that of a kidney. We not only observe such differences; we also begin to chart them with more or less accuracy. Of one mind we may begin to say with some confidence that it shows an extraordinary capacity for function and development — that its possessor, exposed to a suitable process of training, may be trusted to acquire the largest body of knowledge and the highest skill at ratiocination to which Homo sapiens is adapted. Of another we may say with some confidence that its abilities are sharply limited — that no conceivable training can move it beyond a certain point. In other words, men differ inside their heads as they differ outside. There are men who are naturally intelligent and can learn, and there are men who are naturally stupid and cannot.’

    “Here, of course, I flirt with the so-called intelligence tests, and so bring down upon my head that acrid bile which they have set to flowing. My plea in avoidance is that I have surely done my share of damning them: they aroused, when they were first heard of, my most brutish passions, for pedagogues had them in hand. But I can only say that time and experience have won me to them, for the evidence in favor of them slowly piles up, pedagogues or no pedagogues. In other words, they actually work. What they teach is borne out by immense accumulations of empiric collaboration. It is safe, nine times out of ten, to give them credence, and so it seems to me to be safe to generalize from them. Is it only a coincidence that their most frantic critics are the Liberals, which is to say, the only surviving honest believers in democracy? I think not. These Liberals, whatever their defects otherwise, are themselves capable of learning, and so they quickly mastered the fact that MM. Simon and Binet offered the most dangerous menace to their vapourings ever heard of since the collapse of the Holy Alliance. Their dudgeon followed. In two ways the tests give aid and comfort to their enemies. First, they provide a more or less scientific means of demonstrating the difference in natural limits between man and man — a difference noted ages ago by common observation, and held to be real by all men save democrats, at all times and everywhere. Second, they provide a rational scale for measuring it and a rational explanation of it. Intelligence is reduced to levels, and so given a reasonable precision of meaning. An intelligent man is one who is capable of taking in knowledge until the natural limits of the species are reached. A stupid man is one whose progress is arrested at some specific time and place before then. There thus appears in psychology — and the next instant in politics — the concept of the unteachable. Some men can learn almost indefinitely; their capacity goes on increasing until their bodies begin to wear out. Others stop in childhood, even in infancy. They reach, say, the mental age of ten or twelve, and then they develop no more. Physically, they become men, and sprout beards, political delusions, and the desire to propagate their kind. But mentally they remain on the level of schoolboys.’

    “The fact here is challenged sharply by the democrats aforesaid, but certainly not with evidence. Their objection to it is rather of a metaphysical character, and involves gratuitous, transcendental assumptions as to what ought and what ought not to be true. They echo also, of course, the caveats of other and less romantic critics, some of them very ingenious; but always, when hard pressed, they fall back pathetically upon the argument that believing such things would be in contempt of the dignity of man, made in God’s image. Is this argument sound? Is it, indeed, new? I seem to have heard it long ago, from the gentleman of the sacred faculty. Don’t they defend the rubbish of Genesis on the theory that rejecting it would leave the rabble without faith, and that without faith it would be one with the brutes, and very unhappy, and, what is worse, immoral? I leave such contentions to the frequenters of little Bethel, and pause only to observe that if the progress of the human race had depended upon them we’d all believe in witches, ectoplasms, and madstones today. Democracy, alas, is also a form of theology, and shows all the immemorial stigmata. Confronted by uncomfortable facts, it invariably tries to dispose of them by appeals to the highest sentiments of the human heart. An anti-democrat is not merely mistaken; he is also wicked, and the more plausible he is the more wicked he becomes. As I have said, the earliest of modern democracies were full of Christian juices. Their successors never got very far from Genesis I, 27. They are Fundamentalists by instinct, however much they pretend to a mellow scepticism.” [My emphasis in bold.]

    – H.L. Mencken, Notes on Democracy

    Please note that Mencken, like Fred, started off highly skeptical about the tests, for as he put it, they were in the hands of pedagogues. But Mencken showed himself to be a better man than Reed because he was won over by the sheer empirics of them. They worked. Mencken could follow the basic science in a way that Fred cannot.

    Mencken also understood what the opponents of IQ were really about.

    It’s too bad we still don’t have great writers like H.L. Mencken around, huh, Fred?

    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @CanSpeccy
  103. @Achmed E. Newman

    Savages are no danger to me, whatever their IQ, as long as they stay in the jungle. On the other hand these high IQ people who invent WMDs could be the end of all of us. Although those who invented civilisation and the modern world generally have high IQ as measured by tests, still I wouldn’t rate a lot of what they do as intelligent. Let’s face it, how intelligent are they if they have brought us to this point where we have to argue about the things we argue about on UR, which are mostly questions about our future survival as a race and civilisation? And if in the end the savages overwhelm us on our own turf we’ll have to ask how intelligent were we truly, or those whom we entrusted to run our world.

  104. @Anatoly Karlin

    Contrary to the wealth gap, the gap between rich and poor, which is environmentally created, the gap between the commoner and the elites IQ, secondly the absolute IQ of the elites per nation, when staying with nations comparisons, might be responsible for a measure of what a country, state, political entity achieves.

    The case, Colombia, the indigenous Guahira, are remarkably homogeneous in their dimness, hence the jokes and reality bits between native Colombians of different(mixed, Spanish, Portugese, Italian, Syrian) breeds. Hybrids as they are(most Colombians), over the last five hundred years, about fifteen generations, that and distinctly from them the Colombian elites, building on top of them, and pulling in their illegitimate critters, might be responsible for the Colombian “first world´´ miracle. The Colombian elites have the tools at estimate, they make no qualms about being racist.

    In Nepal, culling, the Chinese pressure on the elites, to organize their breeding as a group, and consequently coming out in a positive way, might be responsible for fast advancement when pressure allows. Not familiar with the region.

  105. Definition of low intelligence:
    Republican Party.
    Were cucked by Dem cabal not worth two cents,
    Stripped of power by a flea.
    Refuse to fight for their just recompense;
    No brains nor nads, they fry.

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  106. Fred, so-called IQists realize there is more to talent than a score on a test. G is a far superior metric. Forget IQ tests: any idiot knows that certain groups, esp blacks, are cognitively unprepared to create civilization. That’s why there’s Haiti and Somalia.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  107. Vojkan says:

    With regards to the general subject of IQ, for once I agree with Fred Reed. Besides, one can score high on IQ tests and be a moron.
    With regards to conspiracy theorists however, though I find disconcerting flat-Earthers and similar loons – that I suspect were invented to discredit all conspiracy theories by association -, I also believe that one is entitled to be skeptical of MSM or government narratives because, well, they are proven liars. Noticing incongruities or obvious falsities in official fabrications doesn’t make one a conspiracist.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  108. gregor says:
    @res

    Regarding the smart fraction, I would note that even the variance will not be adequate if you’re dealing with what is truly a multimodal distribution. For example, how many people in South Africa would be expected to have IQ>130 based a normal distribution fit to the overall population? Naturally the real number will be way higher because of the white minority.

    With multiracial societies, the question of political control and “civil rights” obviously matters tremendously. Whites in pre-revolution Haiti were a tiny minority. When they were all murdered or expelled, the overall demographics didn’t change that much. In the US, the expansion of civil rights caused the quality of the cities to deteriorate significantly despite not directly changing the overall demographics of the country and despite there being a big overall white majority. The actual headcounts don’t seem all that important except after “liberation.”

    Under multiracial “democracy,” what seems to happen is that you still have enough smart people for advanced technology and so forth and you get pockets of extreme wealth. But there is a great overall deterioration in order and quality of life.

  109. @Durruti

    “… There is one Race, complete with different cultures. Just one Human Race…”

    Such an opinion is a clear sign of a low IQ.

    “…Separate (divide) humans (and build excuses of why most humans must be Ruled, Controlled, Robbed, Slaughtered, and their little boys & girls, separated from their own families, and Raped…”

    Non sequitur. Again a sign of a low IQ.

    • Replies: @Durruti
  110. anonymous[242] • Disclaimer says:

    What we do see here is that IQists are more interested in defending their theory than in examining it, a quality they share with radical feminists, Marxists, Creationists, Evolutionists, Evangelicals, Moslems, Keyhesians, and conspiracy theorists. Perhaps intelligence really doesn’t exist after all.

    Ok, since you included “Moslems” in the list…

    So, what is the fundamental “theory” of the “Moslem” faith?

    God is One, and the only One worthy of worship. This is what we breathe, day in and day out.

    This is succinctly mentioned in the following of our verses…

    Say, “He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent.” Holy Quran

    We “Moslems” have already examined this “theory,” and firmly concluded it to be the only logical truth… True Monotheism for the win, baby! 😀

    Also, we find no need to defend it, e.g. with mind-bending metaphors used by other mangods-worshipping faiths, as ours is completely self-defending. Since the other side, those rabidly pagan/godless enemies of true monotheism, has been utterly impotent in countering it, instead of needing to defend it, we use it to clobber them on a spiritual level.

    The enemies then respond in the only way which comes naturally to them… by mass murdering “Moslems.” Sigh!

    • Troll: Ian Smith
    • Replies: @Phasmo
  111. Gene Su says:

    I don’t think any test can really measure intelligence. I think these tests measure competence and knowledge. They have their place and purposes in selecting suitable candidates for college and jobs. Measuring intelligence is not a valid purpose of these tests.

    John Taylor Gatto once said if you don’t know how to read, you could be the smartest person in the world but there will be a lot of things that you won’t know. Note that the American education system has been purposely impaired to degrade reading instruction.

    Finally, I really don’t think blacks are less intelligent than non-blacks. But it seems that “they” use their intelligence to do things that most non-blacks would not do. Instead of being productive and contributing to the society around them, blacks dream of ways to scam non-blacks, steal more freebies (like welfare and government jobs), extort “respect”, and drive whites away from the cities they built. Maybe the problem is not one of intelligence but of ethics, as Gary North has said.

  112. Durruti says:
    @Franklin Ryckaert

    Non sequitur. Again a sign of a low IQ.

    This is not a proper sentence, as there is no verb. This is a sign of stupidity, combined with not paying attention at school.

  113. @Dumbo

    “The real question is, then, how many smart people as a percentage relative to the dumber masses do you need to keep a country functioning? The answer may be seen shortly with the United States in the future decades to come.”

    The answer to your question:

    http://lagriffedulion.f2s.com/sft.htm

    and more:

    http://lagriffedulion.f2s.com

  114. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Dumbo

    but “higher IQ” basically means a higher ability to solve certain kinds of puzzles fast.

    Daily study of the Talmud surely boosts such skill. Hoeing yams and cassava all day long, or balancing jugs of water on your head for a journey of a mile or more from the village well affects the mind in a different way. Collectively, such influences are called the Flynn Effect. Most people should here should read about, then they’d have a better idea of what they were talking about.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  115. Geowizz says:
    @Sean

    Subsequent to Feynman’s Nobel Prize, a reporter, speaking to Richie’s mom, said “Some people think your son is the world’s smartest man.” Her response, “God help us.”

  116. @Carroll Price

    I always heard, “In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.”

  117. @SeekerofthePresence

    Trumpenberg goes up against the Washington cartel…

  118. Durruti says:

    A major – but not singular – trouble with your interpretation is that IQ tests were introduced on a massive scale into the United States long before the end of WW2, and they were introduced by gentile scientists, not Jews. You can read here about the first large-scale use of IQ tests in the United States.

    I read your link, and your information is Untrue. These Army exams for WW I, were NOT IQ tests. And the article makes no such claim.

    The original purposes of the committee in preparing methods for intelligence testing were less important than the uses made of the results. The committee intended as stated above to prepare an examination that would indicate the drafted men who were too low-grade mentally to make satisfactory privates in the Army; it was desired also to indicate, if possible, those who were mentally unstable or who might prove incorrigible so far as army discipline was concerned. Also, the committee hoped to be able to pick out exceptional types of men who could be used for special tasks that demanded a high degree of intelligence. In interesting contrast with these original purposes of mental examining, stand the results actually achieved.[1]

    These were practical examinations to enable the US Army officials to properly assign the “drafted men.” The Draftees were not assigned % numbers for their proficiencies. To argue that all testing throughout history led to the fraudulent IQ theories, is an interesting Thesis that you should pursue.

    In 2019, Jewish ‘educators’ – propagandists, strongly support the proto-fascist, & racist IQ theories.

    You misrepresent; to cover for the Zionist New World Order Oligarchs, and one of their anti-Human advocacies. You can Place Freud’s-Fraud & the IQ theories, along side of circumcision. And do not forget, the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, 9/11, murder of JFK & RFK, The Assault on the Liberty, all accomplished by the Land Thieves (who are supposedly, the highest IQ Group).

    Maybe there is a connection between IQ, and Brutality, and sexual deviance (was not Epstein advertised as being ‘brilliant’?).

    The IQ theory, just plainly, sucks.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  119. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Meretricious

    Fred, so-called IQists realize there is more to talent than a score on a test. G is a far superior metric.

    Meretricious, you sobriquet is well chosen, if your argument is a guide. G is a measure not of intelligence but of the correlation among scores on different IQ test components.

    The existence of G is supposed to prove an underlying general intelligence factor, but the correlations upon which estimates of G are based are trivial, and no more than one would expect due to the fact that all mental functions share a common substrate and support system: you know, neurons, the exercise of which depends on the functioning of heart, liver and lungs, etc.

    The notion of a general intelligence factor ensuring equal potential in all areas of mental function is utterly refuted by the obvious differentiation among individuals aptitude profile. For example, Richard Feynman’s unquestioned mathematical genius, but his literary limitations that raises serious questions about his suitability to grad school. That is why of the three Nobel Prize winning physicists for whom an IQ score is known, not one was tagged as geniuses on the basis of their IQ test score.

  120. Isabella says: • Website
    @Anatoly Karlin

    It is so often forgotten that the I.Q. “tests” [the choice of word is illuminative] are put together by person[s] who are of a particular cultural system, and therefor will reflect it’s own values, beliefs. The number of examples of failures are considerable.
    Eysenck was one of the first. Now, I would have failed his first question which asked if Balls was related to dancing, field games or something else. I would have said the first two. He gave only no.2 . I could only assume that whiles the English in England had dances called “a Ball” Americans didn’t.
    What sort of questions did they use to so castigate the Australian Aborigines?? they dont think as we do [I spent over 40 yrs living in Australia] ;but that doesn’t make them stupid. They have managed to keep a living culture for longer than anyone else, – now 65, 000 yrs and counting. This doesn’t equate to stupid, especially when you live in country with a harsh environment, little rainfall, natural forest fires and a million and one animals out to kill you. They did one study of IQ comparing Aborigine kids to city white kids. The Abo’s looked retarded. Then they took them all out bush with questions about how to find water, how to survive various threats, what certain patterns n grass, dust etc meant. The Aboriginals looked like geniuses, the white kids looked — dead, frankly.
    In a WISC-R for 5 yr olds, my son was asked “how many legs does an octopus have?”. Now he has a mother who answers all questions and never ever baby talks to her kids. So he said “None.” When he scored “dense” on that one, I suggested they ask him why he answered so. He told them “Octopi [yes, he got the plural correct] dont have legs, they have tentacles.
    IQ you can “Test ” with a few questions demonstrates the narrow minded stupidity of those who set them and nothing else.

  121. mikemikev says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Are you saying we should parachute thousands of Talmuds into Detroit?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @CanSpeccy
  122. mhenry says:

    Mr. Reed seems not to know there are non-evolution-believers who acknowledge IQ validity.

    • Replies: @Kolya Krassotkin
  123. @Durruti

    I read your link, and your information is Untrue. These Army exams for WW I, were NOT IQ tests. And the article makes no such claim.

    It’s never a good idea to double down on your original mistake by boldly restating it.

    They were IQ tests. They were administered by psychologists who considered them IQ tests and who used previous IQ tests as models. And in their opinion, the scores were used to estimate “native intelligence,” not education.

    I’m not presenting this fact to you as novel information or a bold interpretation. Saying that these WW1 tests were IQ tests is no different than saying that George Washington was the first U.S. president. Either you know it or you don’t.

  124. @KenH

    “doesn’t Mexico have laws and courts where this matter can be litigated?”

    Yes but the courts are about as honest and impartial as the narco gangs.

    • Replies: @JMcG
  125. Reed ain’t interested in getting to the bottom of this. His job is to back up the Mexican government and provide excuses for them as they inevitably fail to bring the killers to justice. He’s a spinmeister, nothing more.

  126. What exactly IQ represents is open to some debate and comparative figures for undeveloped countries must be treated with suspicion. But IQ represents an extraordinarily powerful metric for determining life outcomes and retains remarkable lifetime consistency,

    • Agree: MEFOBILLS
  127. @Anonymous

    Speaking of IQ and the urge to play in traffic, how many times have I seen young black boys riding bicycles down the middle of busy 4 lane streets.

  128. ” Second, an average of 60 means that half the population have an IQ…… ”

    Not so bright Freddy.

    That would be a median, not an average.

    IQ much?

  129. @Gene Su

    Finally, I really don’t think blacks are less intelligent than non-blacks. But it seems that “they” use their intelligence to do things that most non-blacks would not do. Instead of being productive and contributing to the society around them, blacks dream of ways to scam non-blacks, steal more freebies (like welfare and government jobs), extort “respect”, and drive whites away from the cities they built

    But why would they choose to “scam” for a living(and I’m sure that blacks don’t “scam ” just whites, but other blacks as well, ie they are, fairly, equal opportunity scammers) when they could be fighter jet pilots(or transport if they don’t like excitement), because the USAF is desperate for more black pilots.

    “Despite decades of recruitment attempts, the Air Force has been unsuccessful in significantly increasing its number of black pilots, says Air Force Reserve Brig. Gen. Leon Johnson, above.”

    https://www.stripes.com/lifestyle/despite-recruitment-efforts-few-black-pilots-land-in-air-force-navy-cockpits-1.11138

    “Once in flight school, blacks generally don’t do as well as their white colleagues, according to DOD data.”

    The US armed forces have been practicing positive discrimination for decades and the effects have been disastrous, e.g. Fitzgerald.

  130. JMcG says:
    @Irish Savant

    Love your website, haven’t seen you comment here before. Are you new here?

  131. Anonymous[255] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    I thought Charles Murray found that the vast majority of significant figures in the arts and sciences were from Europe and the United States, were more likely Jewish depending on how recently they were born beginning from the early 1800s, and each region of Europe, Northwestern, Eastern, and Southern Europe, had significant representation among their origins, albeit Gentile and Jewish significant figures born in Northwestern Europe numbered many more times than Gentile and Jewish significant figures born in Eastern or Southern Europe respectively. East Asian figures were negligible in the span of history.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  132. Mr Reed is being disingenuous.

    It is not possible for non-Jewish IQ theorists to examine IQ – because any hint of doing so leads to deplatorming and de-certifications.

    Look at what has happened to so many like E O Wilson and James Watson. Discovering DNA is nothing compared to equalitarianism. Even Sam Harris, of ‘all Christians should be preemptively killed beceause ideas matter’ fame is now persona non-grata for his linking of race and religion with IQ.

    Stefan-Molyneux just got deplatformed by PayPal primarily for his linking race and IQ.

    Reed is also flippant.

    “What the faithful need to do, and won’t, is at least try to determine what percentage of a population need to have what IQ for the society to function (engineers, bank clerks, internet help desks, etc.) and then show that a distribution centered on the alleged mean would produce them.”

    People ‘are’ doing the pre-conditional steps to that:

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289615001221#bb0030

    https://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/iq-and-education-resources/

    But whenever they attempt to do what Reed suggests, the results are deemed to be politically incorrect and unallowable. Because people are fixated on the relative differences in IQ, not establishing a floor for functioning western civilization.

    No one, and I mean NO ONE is allowed to say there any relative differences in IQ, except that Jews have an average of 115 (they don’t) and that this explains every-thang.

    Fred knows this.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-many-developed-countries-doesn-t-bode-ncna1008576

    We ‘are’ going to find out the IQ floor, because we are in the process of descending below it.

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/people-getting-dumber-human-intelligence-victoria-era_n_3293846

    – 15 points since the Victorian era. Which makes perfect sense. The Victorians were formidable.

    And is ‘too low IQ to parent’ a reasonable proxy for ‘sufficient societal average for civilization’?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4747316/Oregon-couple-loses-custody-children-low-IQ-scores.html

    Apparently, IQ’s of 69 and 72 if you’re white are too low in the United States to have children.

    Which means nearly 18% of African Americas are illegally having children outside Oregon.

    Maybe Equatorial Guinea and Meso-America were simply different environments where a lower IQ could sustain their material base of society.

    That’s the argument that Jim Flynn makes.

    Anyway Reed shouldn’t intimate that it is possible to study IQ except at massive risk to personal destruction, or that attempts aren’t still being made, or that there is somehow nothing to worry about as IQ’s continue to plummet in the West.

  133. Anonymous[255] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Gentile and Jewish significant figures born in Northwestern Europe numbered many more times than Gentile and Jewish significant figures born in Eastern or Southern Europe respectively.

    I forgot to mention this, but Gentile and Jewish significant figures per capita born in Northwestern Europe also numbered many more times than Gentile and Jewish significant figures per capita born in Eastern or Southern Europe respectively.

  134. Dumbo says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I think no one, not even Fred, is denying that some people are smarter and others are dumber. Neither that such difference are unequal among different ethnic groups (the real problem of progressives is that blacks appear to test lower, they would not have a problem with the tests otherwise).

    However, IQ tests as far as I know were designed by the Army to detect those who did not have certain minImum requirements for certain tasks. So they are better to predict failures or average, but not so much to detect geniuses, whose IQ results can be all over the place (apparently Feynman and Einstein scored lower than expected). On the other hand there are quite a few of Mensa members with supposedly extremely high IQ who never did anything very impressive.

    I think IQ tests are a useful tool but must not be taken too seriously.

    As for Mencken, he could be funny sometimes but once I read pages of his diary and he gave the impression of being a bit of a dick, one of those people whom very few can stand. Of course, many great writers were assholes, so there’s that. But I’m not sure I would count Mencken among the great writers. A good polemicist, nevertheless.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  135. @jsm

    Well, I hafta admit; you got me there.

  136. @Bard of Bumperstickers

    Yep, that’s probably it. There’s also the possibility that he watches TV a lot and thinks that the libtards who claim to be libertarians are the real deal. Maybe they should be called “neolibertarians”. That’s what became of liberals and conservatives, they were infiltrated by takeover artists who claimed to be them, kind of like the pod people in those old movies.

  137. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @mikemikev

    Are you saying we should parachute thousands of Talmuds into Detroit?

    Question is, would the people of Detroit be able to read the Talmud?

    Seems doubtful whether the President of the Detroit School Board could do so.

  138. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @mikemikev

    Are you saying we should parachute thousands of Talmuds into Detroit?

    Question is, would the people of Detroit be able to read the Talmud?

    Seems doubtful whether the President of the Detroit School Board could.

  139. SafeNow says:

    IQ means more than the ability to solve puzzles on IQ tests. For virtually every occupation, the most significant predictor of proficiency is g, general intelligence. For a surgeon or dentist, it is surgical judgment more than skillful hands. At my gym, it is having the g to know that doing side bends will not burn the fat off the love handles. However, the low-IQ believer in spot-reducing, by checking his phone for urgent, important, messages once per minute, is generally presumed to be smart; the masking effect of the smartphone. When a gardener pauses leafblowing to check his smartphone, I have to make a conscious effort to remind myself that he is not actually a surgeon on call.

  140. @mhenry

    Re: Parachuting thousands of Talmuds into Detroit

    Unless accompanied by thousands of rabbis to explain them, they’d only become free rolling paper.

    (Lookie there, Ma. It’s raining rabbis.)

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  141. Poco says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Caucasians, at least previous to the last 20 years have seemed much more interested in what makes things tick, how things work, the relationships in the natural world. A lot of older white guys are tinkerers even when they have little formal scientific training.
    It was my experience in college that the asians could read a book on a subject and memorize and often understand it but lacked a deeper curiosity of the why and how of things. It was enough for them that something was so because they read it in a book.

  142. @Durruti

    Telegram style. Minimum IQ required for understanding. Hopeless case suspected.

    • LOL: Kolya Krassotkin
  143. @Dumbo

    But I’m not sure I would count Mencken among the great writers.

    Here is the 23-year-old Mencken making fun of Henry James:

    “The average newspaper reporter writes better English than Henry [James], if good English means clear, comprehensible English…. Take any considerable sentence from any of his novels and examine its architecture. Isn’t it wobbly with qualifying clauses and subassistant phrases? Doesn’t it wriggle and stumble and stagger and flounder? Isn’t it ‘crude, untidy, careless,’ bedraggled, loose, frowsy, disorderly, unkempt, uncombed, uncurried, unbrushed, unscrubbed? Doesn’t it begin in the middle and work away from both ends? Doesn’t it often bounce along for a while and then, of a sudden, roll up its eyes and go out of business entirely?”

    That’s hilarious. And true.

    Here is Mencken making fun of Thorstein Veblen’s writing style and lack of ideas:

    “Well, what have we here? What does this appalling salvo of rhetorical artillery signify? What was the sweating professor trying to say? Simply that in the course of time the worship of God is commonly corrupted by other enterprises, and that the church, ceasing to be a mere temple of adoration, becomes the headquarters of these other enterprises. More simply still, that men sometimes vary serving God by serving other men, which means, of course, serving themselves. This bald platitude, which must be obvious to any child who has ever been to a church bazaar, was here tortured, worried and run through rollers until it spread out to 241 words, of which fully 200 were unnecessary. The next paragraph was even worse. In it the master undertook to explain in his peculiar dialect the meaning of “that non-reverent sense of aesthetic congruity with the environment which is left as a residue of the latter-day act of worship after elimination of its anthropomorphic content.” Just what did he mean by this “non-reverent sense of aesthetic congruity”? I studied the whole paragraph for three days, halting only for prayer and sleep, and I came to certain conclusions. What I concluded was this: he was trying to say that many people go to church, not because they are afraid of the devil but because they enjoy the music, and like to look at the stained glass, the potted lilies and the rev. pastor. To get this profound and highly original observation upon paper, he wasted, not merely 241, but more than 300 words. To say what might have been said on a postage stamp he took more than a page in his book.’

    “And so it went, alas, alas, in all his other volumes—a cent’s worth of information wrapped in a bale of polysyllables. In “The Higher Learning in America” the thing perhaps reached its damndest and worst. It was as if the practise of that incredibly obscure and malodorous style were a relentless disease, a sort of progressive intellectual diabetes, a leprosy of the horse sense. Words were flung upon words until all recollection that there must be a meaning in them, a ground and excuse for them, were lost. One wandered in a labyrinth of nouns, adjectives, verbs, pronouns, adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions and participles, most of them swollen and nearly all of them unable to walk. It was, and is, impossible to imagine worse English, within the limits of intelligible grammar. It was clumsy, affected, opaque, bombastic, windy, empty. It was without grace or distinction and it was often without the most elementary order. The professor got himself enmeshed in his gnarled sentences like a bull trapped by barbed wire, and his efforts to extricate himself were quite as furious and quite as spectacular. He heaved, he leaped, he writhed; at times he seemed to be at the point of yelling for the police. It was a picture to bemuse the vulgar and to give the judicious grief.’

    “Worse, there was nothing at the bottom of all this strident wind-music—the ideas it was designed to set forth were, in the overwhelming main, poor ideas, and often they were ideas that were almost idiotic. The concepts underlying, say, “The Theory of the Leisure Class” were simply Socialism and well water; the concepts underlying “The Higher Learning in America” were so childishly obvious that even the poor drudges who wrote editorials for newspapers often voiced them, and when, now and then, the professor tired of this emission of stale bosh and attempted flights of a more original character, he straightway came tumbling down into absurdity. What the reader then had to struggle with was not only intolerably bad writing, but also loose, flabby, cocksure and preposterous thinking….”

    Here is the older Mencken writing about his run-ins with those trying to squelch his right to free speech:

    “The common notion that free speech prevails in the United States always makes me laugh. It is actually hedged in enormously both in peace and in war. All the ideas with which my name is associated had to be launched during the interval between 1925 and 1940, and even in that interval there were several attempts to silence me— for example, the “Hatrack” episode. Twice in one lifetime I have been forced to shut down altogether— first in 1916 and then in 1941. Even during the interval I have mentioned I was constantly menaced by censorships of a dozen different varieties, and they greatly incommoded me while I was editing the American Mercury. The American people, I am convinced, really detest free speech. At the slightest alarm they are ready and eager to put it down. Looking back, I sometimes marvel that I managed, despite this implacable hostility, to launch some of my notions. War, in this country, wipes out all the rules of fair play, even those prevailing among wild animals. Even the dissenters from the prevailing balderdash seek to escape the penalties of dissent by whooping up the official doctrine. From that ignominy, at all events, I have managed to escape. I have not written a line in this war, and I wrote none in the last, that I am not prepared to ratify today. There has been no acquiescence in my enforced silence.”

    Here’s a Mencken aphorism of undeniable insight:

    “An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup.”

    A longer Menckenian insight, both true and beautiful:

    “The value the world sets upon motives is often grossly unjust and inaccurate. Consider, for example, two of them: mere insatiable curiosity and the desire to do good. The latter is put high above the former, and yet it is the former that moves one of the most useful men the human race has yet produced: the scientific investigator. What actually urges him on is not some brummagem idea of Service, but a boundless, almost pathological thirst to penetrate the unknown, to uncover the secret, to find out what has not been found out before. His prototype is not the liberator releasing slaves, the good Samaritan lifting up the fallen, but a dog sniffing tremendously at an infinite series of rat-holes.”

    Mencken’s scholarship on the American language is still read today, despite the fact he never went to college. His three-volume biography is a masterpiece. I believe he’s the only full-time professional journalist of the 20th century to have his work included in the Library of America.

    If Mencken is not a great writer, then there are no great writers.

  144. Adrian says:

    There is a controversial passage in Jared Diamond’s highly acclaimed and Pulitzer Prize winning Guns, Germs and Steel that runs as follows:

    From the very beginning of my work with New Guineans, they impressed me as being on the average more intelligent, more alert, more expressive, and more interested in things and people around them than the average European or American is.

    It’s easy to recognize two reasons why my impression that New Guineans are smarter than Westerners may be correct. First, Europeans have for thousands of years been living in densely populated societies with central governments, police, and judiciaries. In those societies, infectious epidemic diseases of dense populations (such as smallpox) were historically the major cause of death, while murders were relatively uncommon and a state of war was the exception rather than the rule. Most Europeans who escaped fatal infections also escaped other potential causes of death and proceeded to pass on their genes. Today, most live-born Western infants survive fatal infections as well and reproduce themselves, regardless of their intelligence and the genes they bear. In contrast, New Guineans have been living in societies where human numbers were too low for epidemic diseases of dense populations to evolve. Instead, traditional New Guineans suffered high mortality from murder, chronic tribal warfare, accidents, and problems in procuring food.
    Besides this genetic reason, there is also a second reason why New Guineans may have come to be smarter than Westerners. Modern European and American children spend much of their time being passively entertained by television, radio, and movies. In the average American household, the TV set is on for seven hours per day. In contrast, traditional New Guinea children have virtually no such opportunities for passive entertainment and instead spend almost all of their waking hours actively doing something, such as talking or playing with other children or adults. Almost all studies of child development emphasize the role of childhood stimulation and activity in promoting mental development, and stress the irreversible mental stunting associated with reduced childhood stimulation. This effect surely contributes a non-genetic component to the superior average mental function displayed by New Guineans. .’

    I have myself spent considerable time in the Western half of the island (now colonized by Indonesia) and I am inclined to support Diamond’s contention. Admittedly the circumstances under which I had most immediate contact with them, i.e. during jungle patrols, were conducive to me being aware of their comparative superiority. Where I only could seee a wall of green they perceived a clear track and their ability to operate without a compass on the basis of a mental map, also remarked on by Diamond, greatly impressed me. – as did their ability to construe from jungle materials a shelter for the night in an amazingly short time.

    But that wasn’t the only thing. Some of them looked conspiculously intelligent. I remember particularly one occasion where I saw a discussion going on between two of them in which that was so much the case that I inquired what they were talking about, half expecting, against better knowledge, that it was about some abstruse subject. But no, it was about the fish population and the prospects for fishing in the nearby bay.

    I don’t know whether there is an “official” IQ figure for Papuans but if it is a low one. as for the Nepalese or the Australian aborigines, I will regard it in their case too as so much bs.

  145. @Isabella

    Your objections were valid in the past, but nowadays such IQ tests are “culture-free”.

    • Replies: @Isabella
  146. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Pincher Martin

    But Mencken showed himself to be a better man than Reed …

    Given his misanthropic view of the world, it was surely gratifying to Mencken to learn that the men in white coats had invented a test proving, scientifically, that at least half of his fellow Americans were of below average mental competence.

    But it seems to me improbably in the extreme that Mencken would have sided with the boobs here who are up in arms at Fred’s send-up of the dim-witted wittering of white IQ-supremacists.

    But if, as it appears, you know nothing of the Flynn effect, it is understandable that you would find Fred’s testimonial to the mental competence of the Nepalese, in such stark contradiction of their abysmal IQ test scores, hard to accept.

    To discover why, in the matter of evaluating intelligence, Fred is a better man than Mencken, you might read Flynn on Flynn in What is Intelligence. There you will learn that, within broad limits, IQ is not set in nucleotide sequences, and that by today’s standards, Americans in the days of America’s industrial, scientific, technological and military supremacy had much lower IQ’s those of Americans today, when the edifice of American exceptionalism appears about to undergo catastrophic disintegration.

  147. iffen says:

    Other Stuff : The Mormonicide in Mexico

    Who cares? Of what consequence is it?

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Ian Smith
  148. @Gene Su

    So what success do those “intelligent” Blacks achieve if there are no Whites around to scam? Haiti and Liberia are the answer.

  149. iffen says:
    @iffen

    Some people in Mexico killed other people in Mexico.

    Real news at 10:00.

    • Replies: @acementhead
  150. @Adrian

    I don’t know whether there is an “official” IQ figure for Papuans but if it is a low one. as for the Nepalese or the Australian aborigines, I will regard it in their case too as so much bs.

    Your questionable reasoning makes me suspect we should take a close look at your IQ.

    They looked “conspicuously intelligent”? Really. Did they smell and taste “conspicuously intelligent,” too? Are you like one of those cancer-sniffing dogs who can see, sniff, and lick IQ through your special senses?

    And they guided you through the jungle bush (something they have done all their lives) and you took that as a sign they could do calculus, design rocket ships, and write a sonnet or symphony if they were just given the chance?

    Well, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the opportunity has been provided numerous times to these fellows. The lessons never seem to take.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Adrian
  151. @CanSpeccy

    Canned Sulky,

    To discover why, in the matter of evaluating intelligence, Fred is a better man than Mencken, you might read Flynn on Flynn in What is Intelligence.

    I’ve read the book. Many years ago when it first came out. Flynn’s a serious researcher and I like many of his insights. I particularly liked one of his essays on Asian-American IQ, where he controlled for intelligence to show how hard Asian-Americans worked to improve their positions vis a vis whites. It was a fine example of how to control for IQ to find out about other characteristics which aid success.

    But it seems to me improbably in the extreme that Mencken would have sided with the boobs here who are up in arms at Fred’s send-up of the dim-witted wittering of white IQ-supremacists.

    Mencken hated everyone in a good-natured way, including white Americans, but he rarely let any of his likes and dislikes affect his judgment about what he thought true. The short passage of his on IQ that I quoted above was balanced. He admitted that he was initially skeptical about the tests, but began to appreciate their value as he read more about them and discovered their usefulness.

    If Mencken were alive, today, he certainly would not support the conventional wisdom that the races are equal in their talents. It would have galled him. Not because he thought white Americans are superior, but because he would recognize the conventional wisdom for what it was – a semi-religious attempt to enforce a democratic idea that was unsupported by the evidence.

  152. @Adrian

    “Where I only could seee a wall of green they perceived a clear track and their ability to operate without a compass on the basis of a mental map…”

    This can be said of just about any life form that makes a forested habitat their home. It doesn’t prove much concerning humans, other than the ones who were unable to navigate their way through jungles likely fell prey to natural selection (or a hungry beast) long ago.

  153. @CanSpeccy

    That isn’t what Flynn says.

    Flynn said our ancestors lived in a world of the concrete, not the abstract. They were empirical, we have almost completely lost the empirical world view. They were vastly superior in concrete intelligence, and I’ve linked to material showing we have a 15 point lower IQ then men of the Victorian era.

    Flynn is an intelligence materialist. Like Frederick Engels – he observes intelligence is an emergent property of the environment to which it applies. Which makes perfect sense to me.

    Thus Aborigines in the desert are king, but in the city they rape toddlers and get eaten by dingos when they’re totally inebriated into unconsciousness.

    And the Flynn Effect is now in reverse.

    https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2016-dutton.pdf

    It was reversing enough and long ago enough that Flynn effect reversal was seen as far back as 2006.

    If Black IQ were 50 times higher then white IQ, it would make zero difference to the necessity and justice of white sovereignty. None whatsoever. Any more then white IQ superiority was a basis for the depradations of say the Belgians in West Africa.

    Flynn is walking a tight-rope. He can’t really say what he knows to be true because he is a progressive academic in a very progressive and now censorious country in New Zealand.

    It would be good for Jim to provide an update as to why the Flynn Effect has ceased or is in reverse, even as all the same apparent factors of complexity and education in abstracts are both present and increasing in magnitude.

    Jim is now learning that his liberalism never applied to the races that he has championed so admirably, because universalism is a Christian remnant concept and is not indigenous to any non-whites races, cultures and religions.

    https://quillette.com/2019/09/24/my-book-defending-free-speech-has-been-banned/

    All of Jim Flynn’s progressiveness and liberalism and racial submission and environmental factorisation is for naught.

    Jim is a white man, beset by white privilege, and all his works are tainted by his unconscious bias.

    Soon, you will be able to add Jim Flynn, who used to be part of the NAACP to the list with James Watson, E O Wilson, Kevin MacDonald, A J P Taylor and all the other white men who were universalist, liberal and altruistic and didn’t understand.

    Flynn said black culture explains divergence between the intelligence of the rape victims of African GI’s and French colonial troops in Germany and African Americans in the United States post-war.

    Maybe it was the fact they were lucky enough to be half German, but who can say.

    Regardless, Jim Flynn is exhibit number 1billion that the world is at war with well meaning white men. The world can get fucked.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  154. Anon[184] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Your questionable reasoning makes me suspect we should take a close look at your IQ.

    Your random veering into irrelevancies of insult makes me suspect yours.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  155. @Pincher Martin

    Thank you for your appreciation and superb examples of this vastly underrated author.

    Believe Aristophanes and Juvenal would have loved him like a brother.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  156. @Anatoly Karlin

    It’s not clear that “intelligence” can be defined with any real precision. Indeed, the subject of IQ is one which raises the possibility of paradox. We know empirically that “intelligence” exists–as the late SCOTUS judge Potter Stewart said about pornography “I know it when I see it”–yet question remains : How does one actually “measure” intelligence with any precision without being forced to make what may or may not be a priori assumptions?

    Wonder what Kurt Gödel would have had to say about this subject.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  157. Adrian says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Your questionable reasoning makes me suspect we should take a close look at your IQ.

    Witty

    They looked “conspicuously intelligent”? Really. Did they smell and taste “conspicuously intelligent,” too?

    Is that what you do? How do you get away with it?

    And they guided you through the jungle bush (something they have done all their lives) and you took that as a sign they could do calculus, design rocket ships, and write a sonnet or symphony if they were just given the chance?

    How many people in your neck of the woods can do that?

    Well, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the opportunity has been provided numerous times to these fellows. The lessons never seem to take.

    What opportunity? Where? When?

    You can get Diamond’s book for as low as three bucks. Take the oppoprtunity.. His lesson might take.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  158. @Wally

    “The fact is that utu never specifies what it is he dislikes about Libertarians, he merely rants like a child.”

    Exactly. That’s the reason for my comment to him. I doubt he knows enough about libertarians or their positions to recognize one when he sees one.

  159. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Flint Clint

    Flynn said our ancestors lived in a world of the concrete, not the abstract. They were empirical, we have almost completely lost the empirical world view. They were vastly superior in concrete intelligence …

    Absolutely. That is the reason for the modest IQ’s (modest IQ’s that the IQ-ists hate to acknowledge) of physicists Feynman, Alvarez, and Shockley: they were empiricists their ideas rooted in the concrete world.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  160. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Kolya Krassotkin

    Re: Parachuting thousands of Talmuds into Detroit

    Unless accompanied by thousands of rabbis to explain them, they’d only become free rolling paper.

    Of course. Rabbis would be essential. Even Jews need rabbis to help them sharpen their wits.

    But wouldn’t that be a wonderful experiment if a Detroit Synagogues would adopt say 100 African-American kids and give them a proper Jewish education.

    Just for fun, maybe the Jesuits would take on a bunch of the victims of the Detroit School Board for educational enrichment too.

    There’d be no need for a control group. The success of the trial would be measured by the number of kids going on to Harvard.

    • Replies: @Kolya Krassotkin
  161. @obwandiyag

    “Why don’t you pull out your sword again? ”

    Now, that’s just too cruel. Anatoly is very proud of his portrait with the sword.

  162. There are around 1500 chess grand masters in the world . As of 2015 3 were black.

    https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=black++grandmasters

    Black americans do not have an average IQ of 85 like we are told. It’s way below that. Blacks are extremely inferior mentally and the evidence is overwhelming.

    • Replies: @res
  163. Thomm says:

    Keep in mind that white IQ is bimodal.

    The functional majority of the white race has an average IQ of 105.

    But there is a unique feature of the white race, where all the negative traits concentrate into a subpopulation and turns them into a wastematter tier, in order to facilitate rapid removal of this wastematter from the gene p0ol. This comprises 20% of all whites. This tier, which can accurately be described as a defective subrace, has an IQ of just about 70.

    The men of this wastematter tier become White Trashionalists. The women of this wastematter tier become fat bluehaired feminists.

    Hence, fixating on median White IQ makes little sense, given this bimodal reality.

    • Replies: @Kolya Krassotkin
  164. Haha says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Exactly, on all points. Chineeman velly good at make money, velly good at make things, velly many things. Chineeman invent paper, without which … ? Him also invent boom boom powder and much philosophy. That at time when white man live in caves.

    Now him make modern economy, modern army, modern boom boom, while white man make debates, political crises, problems, snowflakes, and fads about gender and washrooms.

    Long back Chineeman have higher IQ. Then it come down and white man IQ go up. Now Chinee IQ go up, white man IQ go down. Much mystery this IQ thing. That why many black people don’t bother with IQ and don’t use it.

  165. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Prester John

    How does one actually “measure” intelligence with any precision

    Look, although the IQ-ist will try to distract you with BS about g, and a bewildering array of named tests, intelligence is simply, as defined by the Oxford English Dictionary:

    the acquisition and use of knowledge and skills.

    That means that intelligence is multi-faceted, just as the brain is multi-modular, with different lobes and ganglia to handle sight versus sound, smell versus touch, memory versus executive action, etc. These are all different faculties and every individual has a unique profile of abilities, which cannot be assessed on a single scale anymore than a student’s grade on physics and history can be assessed with a single grade.

    But it’s easy enough to measure intelligence in any specific area: have an exam, a competition, or whatever. Itzak Perlman would be a highly intelligent violinist, even if his IQ were sub-normal. Richard Feynman was a highly original physicist, even though his IQ may have been lower that Fred’s.

    The point is, the IQist claim that intelligence is one thing, that can be measured on a uni-dimensional scale, i.e., by a single number, is total rubbish.

    The idea that kids or university entrants can be assessed with an IQ test is simply an abandonment of serious education. If all it takes to get into Harvard is an elevate SAT score, why bother learning anything. On that philosophy, soon Americans will know essentially nothing of what can be known only through hard work aided by good teaching.

  166. @Anon

    My insults are neither random nor irrelevant. Like Voltaire’s and Mencken’s, they are right on target.

    • Replies: @Anon
  167. @Adrian

    How many people in your neck of the woods can do that?

    Since I currently live in the middle of the Silicon Valley, I would say the answer is a much higher percentage than the number of people in Papua New Guinea who have just taken a calculus class.

    You can get Diamond’s book for as low as three bucks. Take the oppoprtunity.. His lesson might take.

    I’ve read it three times, the first time back in the late nineties when it was first published. I’ve also participated in a discussion group about the book, and I’ve read several of Diamond’s other books, including The Third Chimpanzee, Why is Sex Fun?, Collapse, and The World Until Yesterday.

    He’s a brilliant guy, and some of his books are interesting even if fatally flawed because the ideas that ultimately most animate Diamond’s scholarship are not scientific ones, but quasi-religious feelings.

    • Replies: @Adrian
  168. MarkinLA says:
    @Commentator Mike

    The Maya and the Aztecs did not live in harmony with nature. The Mayan civilization collapsed and we don’t know why. Some think a long term drought caused it but they weren’t smart enough to overcome whatever it was. The Aztecs were hated by almost all tribes around them and some think they resorted to ritual cannibalism of their captured enemies.

  169. @CanSpeccy

    A brilliant idea, which would make a worthy experiment. I know Jesuit high schools award scholarships to deserving non-Catholics. Do yeshivot award scholarships to non-Jews?

  170. ““The fact here is challenged sharply by the democrats aforesaid, but certainly not with evidence. Their objection to it is rather of a metaphysical character, and involves gratuitous, transcendental assumptions as to what ought and what ought not to be true. ”

    Well,

    that was a nice try. of course biology matters. No kidding that some brains function to critical thought and learning more than others. I am no liberal, but I am alittle dubious about claims based on standards that float.

    It’s like testing a frog who lives grasslands to a frog that lives on a pond. Those different environments matter – regardless of brain capacity. The developer of IQ scoring makes that clear — his foundational principles don’t change. I am sure I have posted his views previously. if one is going to test a trait as benign as skin color to intell or even something more fluid such as culture – then the variables have to be of like mind and environment with the target variable set aside.

  171. @Thomm

    Many of the women of that wastematter tier become coal burners.

    • Replies: @Thomm
  172. Phasmo says:

    What we do see here is that IQists are more interested in defending their theory than in examining it, a quality they share with radical feminists, Marxists, Creationists, Evolutionists, Evangelicals, Moslems, Keyhesians, and conspiracy theorists.

    What about divorced expats married to single mothers and living in gated white communities in Northern Mexico who insist that race-mixing is good for America, or is it somehow that credulity only occurs in groups that Fred doesn’t like? I guarantee the average Evangelical has had more ideological reflection than Fred has waiting to die in a drunken stupor with this or that native wife (first the Thai prostitute and then the Mexican Jew with a kid from a previous marriage).

  173. Phasmo says:
    @anonymous

    The enemies then respond in the only way which comes naturally to them… by mass murdering “Moslems.”

    Was that before or after you guys killed everyone first?

  174. MarkinLA says:
    @Gene Su

    There are various components to intelligence. Blacks as a group do particularly worse on things that have a mathematical nature like visual spatial tests. This shows up in the real world in their significantly lower participation in the hard sciences and mathematics in college than their percentage of the population.

  175. Onebornfree says: • Website

    It seems to me that -underneath it all, ultimately the whole IQ debate is really about excuses for:

    1] Institutionalized [i.e. governmental ] racism, leading to: [2] Government Eugenics programs

    Onebornfree

    • Replies: @silviosilver
  176. @Twodees Partain

    I doubt that you would be able to identify a libertarian either.

    The mystery, though, is why you would actually think that. It’s hardly some Herculean mental feat, after all.

  177. MarkinLA says:
    @Twodees Partain

    If somebody says something really really stupid, he may not be a libertarian, but that’s the way to bet it.

  178. @Truth

    the tall, whitish, hazel-eyed

    The term is wheatish. Which doesn’t sound celiac-friendly.

  179. Thomm says:
    @Kolya Krassotkin

    Fully agree. Remember, they absolutely don’t want to mate with men of their same defective subrace, so a black guy is where they go. Black men are equally tolerant of female obesity as White Trashionalists are, so there are further synergies.

    This also explains why White Trashionalism is 99% male, and why Heartiste used to say that ‘99% of White Nationalism is nothing more than the bottom 20% of men getting angry that the bottom 20% of white women are no longer forced to be with them’.

    Those ‘missing women’ are the fat bluehaired feminists.

  180. MarkinLA says:
    @Vojkan

    Besides, one can score high on IQ tests and be a moron.

    Yes, but there is a difference. A low IQ moron sounds stupid when he talks. A high IQ moron ultimately says the same thing but takes 25 pages of written seemingly coherent argument to do so.

    • Replies: @Vojkan
  181. @Durruti

    Playing bridge is one of the best things in the world that one can do, but does require high intellect to do well, so I’ve been wondering why, as US Blacks are so intelligent(according to okefenokee) I’d never heard of a Black Bridge team.

    Well now I’ve just found one.

    Headline: Bridge Blacks storm Lyon

    https://tewahanui.nz/sport/bridge-blacks-storm-lyon

  182. @Onebornfree

    Eugenics is one of mankind’s greatest ideas. Why would you deliberately opt for dumber society when, with some simple, non-intrusive tweaking of fertility incentives, you could have a smarter society?

    • Agree: Cat Hierophant
  183. joe2.5 says:
    @Peter Johnson

    The delicate point is the confusion between those who believe that a significant component of intelligence is hereditary and those who defend IQ measurements (as they are conducted in real life) to be the end-al (or, for some, to even be somewhat reliable as an index of intelligence.) Not taking sides here, just underlining where the confusion arises. There is no confusion between those who defend a hereditary component and the Orthodox blank-statists.

  184. @iffen

    Some people in Mexico killed other people in Mexico.

    Nice. Reminds me of a favorite movie. Bad Teacher

    ELIZABETH Yeah, that one kid hit the other kid with the Cole-slaw

  185. Adrian says:

    Quasi-religious feelings? That is new to me. He has been chided for his alleged over-reliance on some specific material factors – not for religious feelings.

    I must confess that I cannot understand how someone who claims to have read most of his books (some of them repeatedly) could come up with such an uninformed comment on Papuans as this:

    Well, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the opportunity has been provided numerous times to these fellows. The lessons never seem to take.

    I think that either Voltaire or Mencken, with whom you seemed to compare yourself in your last post, would have read Diamond with greater profit.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  186. To move from the bottom up, let’s specify that intelligence itself is a reification. Intelligence is the term we use for being mentally able to perform various tasks. The thing itself is the performance of those tasks. IQ, obviously, is a reification of intelligence and therefore a reification of a reification.

    The problem is how to quantify the first reification. Unfortunately, almost all IQ metrics are one- or two-dimensional. Generally, verbal and quantitative skills are tested. But how do these assessments apply to those who have had no language or mathematical instruction? Well, we assume that we can get a rough assessment of young children through various abstract methods that are thought to correlate well to something more in general use, such as the Wechsler, for example. The key words here are “thought to correlate well,” since assessment of childhood intelligence is much more difficult than assessment of adult intelligence. That’s just one problem.

    Ultimately, IQ tests almost inevitably contain a huge component that is culturally biased, contrary to Jensen. How do you measure the “intelligence” of someone who has grown up far from any normative western-style instruction? Are they idiots by default? The question is relevant to the Nepalis, New Guineans, sub-Saharan Africans, and others whose IQs are put at very low levels that would correspond to those of people barely able to dress themselves in, say, America. And yet they are fully functional adults — functioning well within the constraints of quite different environments, where most of us westerners would be completely lost.

    More specifically, let’s focus on the failure of IQ to measure real intelligence. Richard Feynman, famously, was said to have an IQ of 126 — above average, certainly, but hardly stellar — although he is thought to be one of the greatest physicists of all times and an excellent mathematician. Mozart was well known among his contemporaries to be a virtual zero in every academic area other than music. Mozart had never gone to school! Had Mozart taken a standard Wechsler IQ test, he probably would have scored well under 100. He was one of the greatest musical geniuses of all times!

    Oh, OK, you reply, I have no knowledge of what an IQ test would have said about Mozart. Fine. What about Andy Warhol, said to have an IQ of 85? True, Campbell’s soup cans and prints of Marilyn Monroe might not have been high art, but consider that Andy Warhol ran a successful business, employed a lot of people, sold a lot of his art (and films), and recruited many people (some of whom likely had IQs well above 100) to work with him. Is this what the “IQists” think of as the intelligence level of someone with an IQ of 85?

    There are so many problems with IQ that it’s hard to know how to condense a reasonable critique of the concept into a publishable comment. The verbal and mathematical components of IQ are thought to stand in for “g,” or general intelligence, the existence of which is an article of faith among many psychometricians. So the idea is that regardless of differences between verbal IQ and quantitative IQ, the IQ number is a valid measure of g, or actual intelligence. Whatever has been left out simply doesn’t matter. Go back to Kindergarten, Wolfgang. Take a coloring book.

    An alternative theory is that of multiple intelligences, pioneered by Howard Gardner. In this theory, one might be intelligent in one area and quite lacking in another. Interestingly, this idea corresponds well to the common-sense notions of average people about people’s intelligence: well, he’s really good at this, but he’s an idiot when it comes to that. Unfortunately, psychologists give little credence to Gardner’s theories, although he has continued to publish research up to this day. Of course, the theory of g trumps all. There can’t be multiple intelligences, because we are absolutely sure of g! And we’ve found all these great statistical correlations! Please don’t look too carefully at the numbers.

    Let’s also consider that when we’re comparing the IQ of the average American to the IQ of the average Nepali, New Guinean, or sub-Saharan African, we have to understand that IQ scores are normed against the American mean. This means that scores above or below the American mean are scored accordingly. The scale of American IQ scores is the scale that is applied to people around the world. They take the same test. The testers could calculate a mean score for Nepalis, for example, set that mean at 100, and calculate Nepali scores accordingly; this they do not do. They score Nepalis against the American mean.

    So what? What’s wrong with this? Well, we assume that the American mean equals the median, ie, that the scores fit a normal distribution, or bell curve. The distribution of scores should be symmetrical from left to right. Is this necessarily the case with scores for tests given around the world? No. The distribution may be skewed, or asymmetrical, between the left and the right sides of the mean. In such cases, the mean does not equal the median. Who knows how great that skewness is? It’s not stated in the topline reports. All scores are calculated with respect to the norm, the American mean. This means that the farther one goes from middle-class middle-American culture, the further one goes from the applicability of the American norm, the American mean, to the mean and distribution of the culture or country to which the test is given.

    In other words, the use of standard IQ tests to measure the IQs of Nepalis, African tribesmen, or New Guineans is about as useless as reading tarot cards.

    I could go further, but fatigue restrains me.

  187. Adrian says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Quasi-religious feelings? That is new to me. He has been chided for his alleged over-reliance on some specific material factors – not for religious feelings.

    I must confess that I cannot understand how someone who claims to have read most of his books (some of them repeatedly) could come up with such an uninformed comment on Papuans as this:

    Well, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the opportunity has been provided numerous times to these fellows. The lessons never seem to take.

    I think that either Voltaire or Mencken, with whom you seemed to compare yourself in your last post, would have read Diamond with greater profit.

    • Replies: @Aj7575
  188. @Stochastic Determinist

    I’ll add one more comment. My conclusion is that IQ testing is reasonably valid for some people and quite lacking in validity for others. Therefore, as a measure of intelligence, IQ is unreliable.

  189. The Hun says:
    @Commentator Mike

    Low IQ countries like Haiti, Madagascar, several African countries have the worst self-generated environmental problems like deforestation and overgrazing. They certainly do not care about sustainably, all they are interested is in the now. I have been living in South Africa for nearly 50 years and visited several other African countries too.

  190. joe2.5 says:
    @Isabella

    “He told them “Octopi [yes, he got the plural correct]”

    Which means he might have everything very high or genius quality, but he also has someone who teaches him wrongity-wrong.

    1. Classical: octopus has no Latin -us ending. It’s octo – pous, Greek. Pous is foot and its classical plural is podes: plural of octopus, octopodes. “Octopi” is a screaming barbarism.

    2. English: in order to avoid the indelible stigma of snobbishness for using the correct Greco-Roman plural, one may prefer the plural (correct in English, as English goes) “octopuses”.

    • Replies: @Poco
    , @Isabella
  191. @CanSpeccy

    Absolutely. That is the reason for the modest IQ’s (modest IQ’s that the IQ-ists hate to acknowledge) of physicists Feynman, Alvarez, and Shockley: they were empiricists their ideas rooted in the concrete world.

    When Canned Sulky talks about these men’s “modest” IQs, please keep in mind that he is talking about three fellows who all tested in the top five percent on the IQ tests they are famous among IQ critics for duffing (scores from 125 to 134). And one of those men (Shockley) would later become such an enthusiastic proponent of the science of psychometrics that many in the public thought he was a crank.

    IQ tests are not fortune balls or astrological charts. They don’t divine a person’s precise future. They simply give you a pretty good idea of their brain power. People who score below 130 can still do impressive intellectual work, depending on their interests and drive, just as people who score over 145 can be known for doing pretty much nothing at all.

  192. @Adrian

    Quasi-religious feelings? That is new to me. He has been chided for his alleged over-reliance on some specific material factors – not for religious feelings.

    Diamond has some strange critics who are even more quasi-religious than he is, but I judge the man by my own criteria, not theirs.

    I must confess that I cannot understand how someone who claims to have read most of his books (some of them repeatedly) could come up with such an uninformed comment on Papuans as this: [Pincher presents some reasonable comment about Papuan talents.]

    I think it was on this site, or some other site I frequent, where I read about some person’s experience in PNG, in which he reported a head-shaking incident about the natives unplugging a refrigerator filled with medicine just so they could watch TV – and this was despite being warned about it!

  193. It’s only a matter of time before the neo-Aztec cartels get heavily invested in Fred’s little neck of the woods.
    When that happens, he’ll be singing a different tune (assuming he still has his head to sing at all).

  194. It’s only a matter of time before the neo-Aztec cartels get heavily invested in Fred’s little neck of the woods.
    When that happens, he’ll be singing a different tune (assuming he still has his head to sing at all).

  195. @joe2.5

    Do tell. What part would that be, Sr. Troll?

    • Replies: @joe2.5
  196. ‘Colombians, said to have mean IQ 84, run modern cities with telecommunications, airlines and the concomitant people to maintain avionics and big turbofans.’

    The Colombian population is about 49 million. The IQ required to maintain elements of a modern civilization is probably at 120 minimum. I cannot find any data on the variance of the associated Gaussian distribution for Colombian IQ. However, the upper tail starting from 120 probably includes half a million people (I’m being generous), which is enough to meet Reed’s minimal levels of proof for running things, assuming of course that we give him the benefit of the doubt about the definition of “modern cities”.

    Next we should parse what “running” means. It denotes maintenance, nothing more, nothing less. That certainly does not include the ability to create, build, or produce, most of which Colombians can’t do. They certainly did not create modernity, having borrowed it wholesale from the nortes in the US and Europe. Colombians probably don’t build more than 25% of it, especially the simpler aspects of piping, electrical wiring, etc. It certainly does not include manufacturing any aerospace parts, all of which must be imported. Then in terms of maintenance, most maintenance regimes today for complex items consist of standard testing no further down than the subassembly level, and then replacing that completely. And to top it off, there are scads of contractors from the US, Europe, Australia employed in 3rd world countries who do all work requiring real understanding and intelligence.

    In short, once again F. Reed displays his stupidity while whitewashing it with half-wit pretensions of being droll, curmudgeonly, and coy. This clown is wrong on so many levels, so much of the time, with such a false and unwarranted attitude, that he should never be allowed to publish anything except in his local pueblo de mierda excuse for a newspaper.

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  197. @Arnieus

    That wasn’t the point at all in Fred’s screed. His point was that differences in IQ are not scientific, but instead only political. And no one is looking at humanity completely in terms of IQ, least of all Europeans. People who study and measure IQ are reporting race-based differences in IQ that seem to hold across countries. They have even measured IQ of mixed-race humans and found correlations based on race. It ain’t political. And it ain’t Europeans that are wanting or not wanting to hear it, whatever it is, in your sentence.

    Fred’s comment was a swipe at this fact of life about human beings: he is obviously claiming that measurable differences in IQ among the races are fake. it’s not.

    Fred is apparently a perfect fit for your theory: he’s a European that doesn’t want to hear that Caucasians test higher Negroids test lower, Mongoloids test highest. Hispanics are a fair mix and studies show that they test a bit lower than whites.

    But this is just one of the race-based qualities of the different groups. Fred is a fool in many things. This is just another one of them.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  198. @obwandiyag

    Yeah, I didn’t get the “joke.” That’s because it wasn’t a joke, dipshit. It was a snarky putdown of science by a senile curmudgeon named Fred Reed. You, being his son, don’t understand what your dad is saying, Try reading and then re-reading his nonsense until you do.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  199. Vojkan says:
    @Commentator Mike

    I wrote in another comment that one can score high on IQ tests and be a moron. One can score high on IQ tests and be vainglorious and greedy. One can score high on IQ tests and be shallow as a puddle. Advanced industry is hardly possible without enough people with IQ > 105-110 to maintain it or enough people with IQ > 120-125 to develop it. I doubt the people who developed GMO cotton with fibres that break after two washings were stupid. Advanced industry is also responsible for poisoning the planet. Not foreseeing the consequences of actions certainly is shallow.
    Just before coming here, I read an article on a French site with a nice quote from Cicero, “quam quisque norit artem, in hac se exerceat”, let each practice the skill he knows. Then the whole IQ debate would be irrelevant.

  200. bomag says:
    @miss marple

    I’d say he’s pretty spot on about the maintenance.

    what would a person do if they were denied services such as these?

    One finds a work-around: Cubans famously maintained vintage 50s cars without access to the extant supply chain.

    Africans have a strange dynamic with mechanical maintenance. Travelers often find prodigious repair abilities in remote African village with access to very basic tools; yet rather intelligent Africans will buy a new car and use it until a single breakdown occurs, then stop using the car and make no attempt to repair.

  201. @silviosilver

    ” with some simple, non-intrusive tweaking of fertility incentives, you could have a smarter society?”

    How are involuntary sterilization, forced abortion and euthanasia “non-intrusive tweaking”?

    • Replies: @silviosilver
  202. @utu

    Haven’t met a Keynesian who would be as moronic and irritating as a typical Libertarian.

    Just look in the mirror.

  203. @Monotonous Languor

    Yes, because a country’s cognitive elite performs well and thus must be intelligent, that doesn’t mean that the rest its population is also intelligent. That is what Reed says all the time. Reed’s argument is that an intelligent elite also needs an intelligent population at large in order to function well, but that is not necessarily so. Stupid people can obey intelligent orders from an intelligent ruling class and thus function well. Look how Rhodesia functioned very well when it was ruled by a small group of Whites over a majority of black Africans. The average IQ of that black majority was and is very low (66 as per Lasha Darkmoon’s : World IQ Figures). This was true for nearly all European colonies. When the European colonialists were driven out from their colonies, they relapsed to their real cognitive level. Some of those former colonies developed in due time their own cognitive elites from their own (small) group of intellectually gifted and thus started to function well, but of course the average IQ of their populations remained the same. Give me an army of stupid soldiers with stupid officers and it will perform badly. But give me an army of those same stupid soldiers with intelligent officers and it will perform well.

  204. @Anatoly Karlin

    However, one thing that must be emphasized is that an IQ of 70 for an adult white person in a First World country is not equivalent to an IQ of 70 for a black in an African country.

    You know, this is really such exasperating double-talk. What if somebody said: “One thing that must be emphasized is that a height of 6 feet for an adult white person in a First World country is not equivalent to a height of 6 feet for a black in an African country.

    That would just be absurd. I mean to say… OBVIOUSLY… you are either measuring some objective, real thing or you aren’t and if you are, it does mean the same thing. Somebody being 6 feet tall means you pull out the tape measure and that’s how tall the guy is. The same applies to weight or any other objective indisputable physically measurable quantity.

    If your position is that there is some objectively measurable (more or less, anyway…) quantity called intelligence that can be reduced to a single scalar number, analogous to height or weight, then that number does mean the same thing in Africa or Europe or anywhere else.

    I mean, really, once you start arguing that IQ test results mean something different in different contexts, then you’re basically scoring an own goal — undermining your own ostensible position.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @utu
  205. onebornfree says: • Website
    @silviosilver

    Silvio silver says: “Eugenics is one of mankind’s greatest ideas”

    Which makes you a halfwit- or, to put it in “scientific” terms : an “F.I” , aka “ fuckin’ idiot.

    Of course, all of the “F.I”s” ,including you, would be among the first to be liquidated, which would have its advantages, I guess 😂

    ‘Regards” onebornfree

    • Replies: @silviosilver
  206. anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @Isabella

    “They have managed to keep a living culture for longer than anyone else, – now 65, 000 yrs and counting”

    Kangaroos have lived in Australia for millions of years longer than the Aborigines and survived, but I would assume that they have lower IQ’s than the Aborigines.

    If you were going to do a proper comparison of Aboriginal children’s IQ’s to White children’s IQ’s, you would need to raise them in the same environment.

    • Replies: @europeasant
  207. @Jonathan Revusky

    That would just be absurd. I mean to say… OBVIOUSLY… you are either measuring some objective, real thing or you aren’t and if you are, it does mean the same thing. Somebody being 6 feet tall means you pull out the tape measure and that’s how tall the guy is. The same applies to weight or any other objective indisputable physically measurable quantity.

    If someone runs a 9.9 second 100-meter dash at a 2,000-meter-altitude, is that the same as someone who runs it at sea level?

    Does a 35 C temperature feel the same in Hawaii as it does in California?

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  208. joe2.5 says:
    @restless94110

    When he describes the group where a statement like “… do test higher. It’s called scientific” may be found unexceptional.
    That it’s not immediately obvious may be cause for concern.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  209. utu says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    “… once you start arguing that IQ test results mean something different in different contexts, then you’re basically scoring an own goal — undermining your own ostensible position.”

    The IQists transcended the constrains of scientific methodology long time ago. IQism and associated with it psychometry is a para science at best. It is a cargo cult where they pretend to imitate the moves real scientists do thinking it will produce scienc. Nobody will publish their drivel so they create their own journals. It is a masturbatory group of mutual adoration. Karlin is its Great Wizard Masturbator assigned to the Eastern Front in Moscow.

    IQism just like libertarianism attracts many simpletons that’s why nobody picked up here on the Karlin’s double-talk.

  210. @Pincher Martin

    Indeed, qualities must be assessed IN THEIR ENVIRONMENT. A person 1,5 m high functions differently among people of normal height than among Pygmies.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  211. res says:
    @Hang All Text Drivers

    There are around 1500 chess grand masters in the world . As of 2015 3 were black.

    This link has the number of people with FIDE titles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIDE_titles#Open_titles
    Currently 1649 GMs (so you are on target there).

    One interesting thing about this is the old standard included an Elo rating of 2500. Now there are other criteria which don’t require that. Here are three black chess grandmasters and their highest Elo ratings:

    Amon Simutowe 2449 (? highest rating I see for him)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amon_Simutowe
    https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=8700168 (only goes back to 2017?!)
    The odd thing is I see this excerpt from an article about his journey:
    https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-gm-journey-of-amon-simutowe

    Olafsson congratulated Simutowe and mentioned that he was the first Grandmaster of Iceland and knew how special this moment was for him. Of course, Simutowe is still required to get the ELO points to reach 2500, so he has enlisted additional tournaments to reach this standard. He will compete in the African Championship beginning on August 31st along with his brother Musatwe. If Simutowe is successful in winning one of the six coveted spots, it will make his 4th trip to compete in the FIDE Championship cycle.

    Did he ever achieve 2500?

    Maurice Ashley 2504 (per wiki)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Ashley
    His FIDE page only goes back to 2003 with a maximum of 2465.
    https://ratings.fide.com/id.phtml?event=2001012

    Pontus Carlsson 2515 (per wiki)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontus_Carlsson
    https://ratings.fide.com/id.phtml?event=1705814 (shows peak of 2531 in 2012-May)

    Here is an article about black grandmasters mentioning the three above. The comments discuss the 2500 Elo issue. The argument style of the article author in the comments is…interesting.
    https://www.thechessdrum.net/blog/2010/08/19/the-challenges-of-black-chess-masters/
    One of the comments has an excerpt from Pontus Carlsson talking about his effort to reach 2500. Here are the backgrounds of the three GMs:

    As of 2010, there are three Grandmasters of African descent (Maurice Ashley-USA, Pontus Carlsson-Sweden, Amon Simutowe-Zambia).

    In addition there is
    Kenny Solomon 2461 (South African)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenny_Solomon
    https://ratings.fide.com/id.phtml?event=14300192
    Kenny Solomon became a GM by winning a continental championship in 2014 (no Elo requirement with that). More details in this comment:
    http://www.unz.com/article/my-last-word-on-the-scrabble-and-iq-debate-2/?showcomments#comment-2005131

    So I see a total of four black grandmasters. Two are from Africa and neither of them has ever achieved a 2500 rating (as far as I can see). Two are of African descent, but not from there. Both of them have achieved a 2500 rating.

    Are there any more? Anyone have further details to add?

  212. @Franklin Ryckaert

    Indeed, qualities must be assessed IN THEIR ENVIRONMENT. A person 1,5 m high functions differently among people of normal height than among Pygmies.

    No, qualities MUST NOT be assessed in their environment. They can be assessed in any environment we choose. We can then make assumptions about how the environment and genes interact on their qualities based on those various assessments.

    Do Pygmies only grow so tall because of their environment? Well, that’s easy to check precisely because a Pygmy DOES NOT have to be assessed in its environment. They can move to America, breath free air, and eat McDonalds every day – and they can do so at any age of their life. What you might discover is that they grow a little taller than in their native Congo, but that they are still shorter than other races. Their environment is not what makes individual Pygmies short.

    Similarly, you can take a Sierra redwood tree out of its environment in the Pacific Northwest to see how high it will grow in other environments, and then compare those differences, if there are any. What you might discover is that Sierra redwoods ALWAYS grow taller than Joshua trees, presuming the environment allows them to grow at all.

    So you’re wrong again. Qualities don’t have to be measured in their environment. And those qualities can differ in different environments, and yet relative rank order of their differences might stay the same (i.e., a redwood is always taller than a Joshua tree in any environment in which the two trees can grow, even if there are differences in their measurements in different environments).

  213. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @restless94110

    Fred’s comment was a swipe at this fact of life about human beings: he is obviously claiming that measurable differences in IQ among the races are fake. it’s not.

    Fred is apparently a perfect fit for your theory: he’s a European that doesn’t want to hear that Caucasians test higher Negroids test lower, Mongoloids test highest.

    To say that what Fred is “obviously claiming [is] that measurable differences in IQ among the races are fake” when he claimed nothing of the sort seems kind of, well, not high IQ.

    No one is saying the test results are other than what they are said to be. What Fred seems clearly to be saying is that the idea that IQ tests provide a useful gauge for comparing the mental competence of different races, nations and cultural groups is false, an assertion he bases on the fact that, with his own eyes, he has seen that nations reported to have a mean IQ lower than that necessary to tie a shoe-lace have, in fact, few people unable to tie a shoe-lace.

    See, it’s just a logical inference based on direct observation. You really can’t fault it without either calling Fred an outright liar, or making a fool of yourself.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @restless94110
  214. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Stochastic Determinist

    Your argument defeats itself.

    Far too many moving parts for an IQ-ist to understand, or want to understand.

    The IQ-ist is, after all, just a simple-minded fascist.

    In America he feels threatened by truculent inner city blacks and Hispanic illegals speaking a foreign language. In Europe he lives in a nightmare world of Muslim bully boys and rapists and black-shrouded Muslim women scuttling around like roaches and gabbling in Urdu or some other incomprehensible alien code.

    What our oppressed IQ-ist needs is justification for his natural hatred of these hostile natives and fast multiplying invaders. Reported race differences in IQ test scores provide all the proof needed of the these creatures’ inferiority and hence of their need for urgent attention from the pest exterminator.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  215. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    We are in the New Scholastic Age – direct observations matters less than theory.

    Empiricism is no longer the foundation of science.

  216. @jsm

    if someone does bite him in the ass, it by definition would not be a libertarian.

    Libertarians do believe in retaliation, so one might bite him in the ass if he did this first:

    • LOL: Twodees Partain
  217. Anon[112] • Disclaimer says:
    @Willem

    The best proxy for IQ level in a population is class size. If you have a big middle class, your population is probably has a smart average. If you have a small middle class and a big lower class, your average is probably dumb.

  218. @CanSpeccy

    Your argument defeats itself.

    Far too many moving parts for an IQ-ist to understand, or want to understand.

    The IQ-ist is, after all, just a simple-minded fascist.

    You guys are both morons. You keep repeating the same tired, discredited lines with all the passion of hack actors. “But Feynman! But Mozart!” “Reification!” “Culturally biased!”

    But your segue comes to you naturally enough. You jump on that fascist line and the ensuing paragraphs with all the skill and ardor of Laurence Olivier doing a monologue he both loves and knows by heart.

    Best to stick with what you know. Political hackery, not science, is your natural métier.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  219. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Pincher Martin

    Best to stick with what you know. Political hackery

    Better a political hack than a scientific quack.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  220. @CanSpeccy

    Better a political hack than a scientific quack.

    But you wouldn’t know the difference!

    That’s the problem political hacks have in serious discussions, Sulky. They always assume everyone else is also faking it.

  221. Anonymous[206] • Disclaimer says:

    These are bright white guys who conflate the results of IQ tests with intelligence, a fit which is imperfect

    Very outdated– online, nobody knows you’re not white, it seems. The cause/fetish has been taken up most enthusiastically by aggrieved first- or second-generation Westerners descended from the rice nations. They may not care for the holdover “thought leader” whiteys in the field but hate competing with the black/mestizo mascots more. So they endeavor mightily to feign outrage about removal of Confederate statues, i.e. first rule of IQ Club.

    Fred is a media guy, so he just assumes the default-white world his pasty round-eye/big-nose noggin has formulated. In defense against the blind-spot charge he is equipped with exactly two excuses: 1) marrying a non-white woman late in his dotage; and 2) here, look at this anecdote from last field trip. Fred well performs to the manners & politesse standard of White Gentry goodthinkers.

  222. Anon[118] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Read my comment again; your insults are not random, your veering into them is, and the engaging in them is an irrelevancy.

    Voltaire’s insults, whatever target they may have struck in their day, are entirely irrelevant; Mencken’s may or may not be depending on the specific insult; however, the rest of us probably have something better to do than to retail epithets and personalities a century old.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @CanSpeccy
  223. @Stochastic Determinist

    No, it isn’t.

    You’ve just repeated the point I made above.

    You said that IQ expresses itself differently in different settings.

    With respect to the invasion of the West we are interested in how IQ is expressed in high density/Industrial technological societies. Not pastoral/agrarian low density low industrial/technological societies.

    How IQ expresses itself in Nepal, Equatorial Guinea, Tanzania and the heartland Aborigine Pilbara is of no concern to those trying to preserve the West. IQ expresses itself differently in the West – and that is what we are seeing every single day.

    That’s the point the Jim Flynn makes. Because he’s an honest man. Not that it’s made any difference to his outcomes with his books now being banned.

    Here’s one example: https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/reading/

    Lets look at reading proficiency in the United States:

    “On the most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress 12th Grade Reading Level Assessment (2015), 46 percent of white students scored at or above proficient. Just 17 percent of black students and 25 percent of Latino students scored proficient. Females scored higher than males. In McKinsey & Company’s The Economic Impact of the Achievement Gap in America’s Schools, “Black and Latino students are roughly two to three years of learning behind White students of the same age.” McKinsey’s research showed that that the achievement gap can lead to “heavy and often tragic consequences, via lower earnings, poorer health and higher rates of incarceration.” This achievement gap becomes an opportunity gap, an economic gap, and a racial gap, which gets passed on generation to generation unless it’s disrupted.”

    Per Mckinseys.

    How is this possible? IQ differences between races don’t exist. And since Lyndon Johnson literally trillions and trillions of dollars have been poured into programs to remove this gap. Why does it persist? How is it possible?

    There is no such thing as IQ right? Oh right, the answer must be institutionalised racism and white privilege.

    The fact that only 46% of white students can read proficiently is a scandal in and of itself.

    As I said, Flynn applying his socialist formation, quite accurately in my opinon describes IQ in a materialist sense – where the expression of IQ is determined by the material bases which form it and in which it is operative. Read Engels. The Materialists have a point. They are probably about one third right.

    That’s why there is nothing whatsoever surprising about your various examples of Mencken, or Mozart, or differences in performance in various people in their shit-holes compared to the West. Because IQ expression is moderated by the material bases in which it is operative. Mozart didn’t have an opportunity to be a genius engineer. Because he had to make a living.

    Being able to find a trail in a jungle isn’t the same thing as being able to find equilibrium on a motor-way between current and future traffic etc.

    IQ tests are ‘not’ culturally biased. You can set them up with whatever ebonics and Swahili you like, and it won’t materially effect all the relative IQ gaps. You can even set them up using ghetto trivia in the general knowledge sections – and it won’t make any material difference to the IQ gaps.

    IQ is the single most replicated and validated social science phenomenon that exists.

    Anyone who questions it’s validity basically is questioning social science as a discipline as a whole.

    We are seeing the inapplicability of the invaders IQ’s every single day. Society is getting more and more stupid and more and more unmoored every single day.

    Regardless of their IQ, these invaders need to be removed. The fact they are almost uniformly stupid parasites or corrupt criminals just makes the economics of it more compelling.

  224. Yo Fred,
    I just returned from branding(city folk may need to google this)in south western New Mexico(Grant County), and it is dryer than a popcorn fart down there. Many of the water wells they are drilling are having very disappointing results.

    That is why your section on this being a war for water between the Le Baron family and the Barzonistas makes all the sense in the world. I think you nailed it my man. Good job!!

    • Agree: J. Gutierrez
  225. @Anon

    Read my comment again; your insults are not random, your veering into them is, and the engaging in them is an irrelevancy.

    I don’t need to read your comment again. It was brief and pointless.

    Something for you to consider: My insults ARE an argument. I use them because I think they fit the circumstances. As Oscar Wilde once said, “That argument doesn’t deserve the compliment of rational debate”. And the people I insult don’t deserve a rational response because they’re neither rational nor intelligent.

    So I don’t want to debate them; I want to laugh at them.

    What’s more, the history of Western civilization has thrived on this kind of discourse. Who are you to gainsay it? I’ve already mentioned – half in jest – Voltaire and Mencken. But I could have mentioned two dozen others. How about Jonathan Swift? Or the aforementioned Oscar Wilde? Gore Vidal? Aristophanes? Mark Twain? George Bernard Shaw? Evelyn Waugh?

    As all these men knew, laughing at your dumb opponents is an argument. As Mencken once said, “A horse-laugh is worth ten thousand syllogisms. It’s not only more effective; it is vastly more intelligent.” I don’t expect a humorless twit like you to understand that sentiment, but that’s okay. You don’t have to understand it. I deliberately appeal to a small and highly selective audience.

    • Replies: @Anon
  226. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Anon

    @Pincher Martin
    your insults

    Ol Pinch is just an idiot troll.

    Ignore him, is the best thing, really.

    He insults people to induce a response to his inane comments.

    He knows nothing, understands nothing, has no worthwhile thesis to present and isn’t even funny.

    He’s a scientific illiterate and dopier than your average IQ-ist who thinks you can measure ten or more things things with one number.

    Still, that would make a good intelligence test question: How many things can you measure with just one number?

    Anyone who thinks it can be more than one is automatically designated an IQ-ist First Class and a Scientific Illiterate.

    • Agree: utu
  227. @Flint Clint

    And well, that’s harsh language. But it’s reactionary to the war being waged on truth.

    And that war is costing the American nation terribly.

    “If you are a white American, over the course of your lifetime the federal government will, on average and on your behalf, transfer $384,109 of your wealth and income to a single black individual.

    According to the data derived from the 2014 federal budget, the average annual net tax/benefit broke down as follows:

    White: -$2,795
    Black: +$10,016

    Over the course of an average 79-year lifespan, a white individual contributes a net $220,805 to the system, whereas over the course of an average 75-year lifespan, a black individual receives a net $751,200. However, since there are 4.6 times more whites than blacks in the USA, the black share has to be divided among the various contributors to sort out a one-to-one comparison.

    So, the net cost to the average White American of the average Black American is $384,109. Married? That’s $768,218. Got 2 kids? That’s $1,536,436. 4 kids? Now we’re talking $2,304,654 lifetime.

    Diversity is expensive. Now you understand why you won’t have much of an inheritance to leave to your children. Do you really think it’s worth it? And then, those natural conservatives to the south, the Hispanics, will surely improve the situation, right? After all, immigration helps the economy! Well, not so much.

    Hispanic: +7,298

    In fact, because there are more Hispanics in the USA than Blacks, Hispanics are already a bigger cumulative net drain on the economy, $411,950,000,000 to $389,710,000,000. Needless to say, the ongoing demographic change from a predominantly white society to a less productive, less white one can be expected to have even more serious negative effects on the long-term economic prospects of the United States that it already has.

    To quote the original author: “The negative fiscal impact of blacks and hispanics is significant. All of this discussion of a “national debt” and “deficit” is primarily of function of blacks and hispanics. Without them, we would be running budget surpluses today, even when keeping the military the same size.””

    Now the analysis isn’t totally valid, because welfare exists in all western countries, and there would be a higher number of whites receiving welfare in the absence of our diversity friends.

    But it’s quite likely it would be vastly lower – akin to the welfare numbers in the 50’s and 60’s.

    I mean it’s stunning.

    IQ doesn’t exist, and I suppose the net-transfer gap doesn’t exist either.

    Dindus are already getting their reparations, and they don’t deserve a single dollar.

    If that money was going to the American nation it would be burgeoning in wealth and power.

    Instead, it’s getting given to blacks and Hipsanics at the bottom end, and stolen in fake government programs and boondoggles at the top end – primarily for the benefit of people of the Israeli persuasion, but also of course Indians and Chinese.

    If IQ doesn’t exist, why is there this huge net transfer gap?

    Can the people who dismiss IQ explain why it is that these natural conservatives and merely foiled doctors, lawyers, engineers and nuclear physicists and museum curators are so fundamentally useless and net negatives to a national economy on average?

    Could it be, that average IQ gaps are expressed in economic net transfer recipience differentiated by race? Who could possibly say.

    But that shit isn’t going to last, is it. And when the chimp out starts because the gibs stop, well I wouldn’t want to be in the cities. A lot of people like Jim Flynn who thought they knew how the world works are going to get eaten.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  228. @CanSpeccy

    Your sulkiness quotient is way up today, Canned Sulky.

  229. @CanSpeccy

    Don’t you think you’re protesting just a tad too hard there? (Hint: you are.)

  230. @onebornfree

    I don’t see why “tweaking fertility incentives” should require liquidating anybody.

    But, be honest, triggered as you were, you were never in the mood to respond to anything I actually said.

    Eugenics is the gift, the hope, the dream. It’s our best shot – perhaps our only shot – at creating a better future for our species. IQ-deniers, choke on it.

  231. @Twodees Partain

    How are involuntary sterilization, forced abortion and euthanasia “non-intrusive tweaking”?

    If you think euthanasia has anything to do with a serious eugencis program then – how should I put this – you’re probably not tall enough for this ride.

    The key to eugenic improvements is the creation of a fertility differential between the lower IQ segments of a population and the higher IQ segments of that population. If the stupid are breeding at a lower rate than the smart, then in time the population can be expected to grow more intelligent.

    Right now, we have an “official” dysgenics program, which incentivizes the stupid to breed at higher rates than the smart. But if we tweaked the incentives, we could potentially reverse that polarity – and earn the undying gratitude of subsequent generations.

    Of course, there’d be no need to use provocative terms like “stupid” and “smart.” I’m only doing that here to tick off the IQ-deniers, who are the scum of the earth. It’s not even necessary to invoke genetics. It’s enough to observe that when the poor have “too many” children, they merely pass on their poverty to the next generation. Solving poverty requires the poor to have fewer, not more, children.

    • Replies: @Cat Hierophant
  232. Dumbo says:
    @Pincher Martin

    He was good at creating some memorable phrases, I’ll give you that, perhaps only not as good or as popular as Mark Twain. I don’t know, I don’t doubt he writes well but he gives me an impression of someone who thinks everyone/everything sucks (except himself). But many satirists are like this. I read just some of his articles and that was many years ago, so I’m not really the best person to judge, it was just my general impression but I could be wrong. As essayists I prefer people like Montaigne, Pascal, Amiel, the French are good at this type of stuff.

  233. Isabella says:
    @Franklin Ryckaert

    That is impossible. It’s like “tells”, we are so imbued by our culture and its systems we cannot help but be affected.
    I read a recent article interviewing an ex KGB lecturer and trainer. He was asked “how was it during the Cold War years that almost no Russian agents were detected?” He replied “We studied every tiny aspect of the culture they were going to. For example, if his shoe laces come undone, a Russian man will just squat down on his thighs to tie them. An anglo- European will look for a ledge about 1-2 ft to rest his foot on”. I had just done exactly that 2 hours prior to reading it.
    I was bemused by the way so many American TV anchors were having hissy fits because there was a photo of President Putin, on clearly a hot sunny day in a remote region, removing his shirt. They labelled it ‘bizarre” etc. I was curious since in Britain and Australia men take their shirts off in summer all the time, so I asked an American friend “is it not done to remove your shirt in US”?. He replied “No. It used to be like Australia, but TV effects and California Homosexual crowd changed now. Now, no man would go bare chested out of his house but drunken wife bashing trailer trash”.
    You see, because it’s not done in America, they couldnt accept that Russia is different, and there it’s OK. Blinded by their own culture. You cannot have a culture free IQ test no matter how hard you try, because its in more things than you have the first idea.

  234. Isabella says:
    @joe2.5

    Not in the high level English Grammar school I attended. You clearly are not British. If you were, you would have been taught that the correct plural of a noun ending in “us”, is “i”. It is not spelled octopous, it’s spelled octopus.

    • Replies: @athEIst
    , @joe2.5
    , @Mike P
  235. athEIst says:
    @KenH

    do Mexicans just slaughter the other party?

    Mexicans do

  236. He was good at creating some memorable phrases, I’ll give you that, perhaps only not as good or as popular as Mark Twain. I don’t know, I don’t doubt he writes well but he gives me an impression of someone who thinks everyone/everything sucks (except himself).

    I’ve read three biographies on Mencken. He was a decent man who treated his friends and wife with generosity and kindness.

    And if we’re going to criticize writers for being egotistical, misogynistic, and misanthropic shitheads in their writing and character, I wonder who will survive to remain in the canon? I personally would prefer the company of Mencken over the company of Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Dreiser, Edmund Wilson, Cather, Henry James, Sinclair Lewis, Booth Tarkington, Wharton, etc. Mencken’s opinions would’ve been well-informed and peppery enough for his company to be interesting and stimulating, but he would’ve also had excellent manners as a host.

    Mencken worked all his life in a profession where he had to deal with everyone from Baltimore fire chiefs to local politicians to bartenders to heads of the Rotary Club. So despite being a remarkably well-informed and well-read man, with a scholar’s appetite for facts, he didn’t have the arid professorial air of someone who had spent all his life in a university. He played a musical instrument in a local band and wrote books on subjects as varied as Nietzsche and the American language.

    But most importantly Mencken knew how to write. He once told Albert Jay Nock that it didn’t matter what a writer wrote about, but how he wrote it, which of course is a truism almost every great writer knows. He was attentive to style, but also wanted to keep the audience laughing. And he did – and still does. Read any book by Mencken and you will laugh and laugh and laugh. The first time I read his essay on William Jennings Bryan, I was in tears I was laughing so hard. I still laugh today when rereading it. But it’s certainly not a kind piece

  237. athEIst says:
    @Isabella

    If it is Latin. Octopus is Greek(they have some declensions with -us endings). The correct plural is octopodes

  238. @athEIst

    No, Joe is actually right. It is not spelled “octopus,” of course, but the roots are Greek: octo for eight and pous for foot. In English spelling, however, the o is dropped. That’s just spelling. The plural form octopodes is basically never used; Webster’s accepts both octopi and octopuses. Of course, James Bond had yet another form …

  239. joe2.5 says:
    @Isabella

    No matter how high the level, that only applies to Latin -us endings, not to Greek pous. That’s exactly why writers of both British and American English who want to avoid looking pedantic use the good old English plural “octopuses”.

    That said, I’d like to have sat on that high-level teacher’s exam.

    Regards.

  240. @Isabella

    The symbols in tests like Raven’s Progressive Matrices have no meaning in our culture, thus they are “culture free.”

    But you’ll probably never be enlightened simply because you don’t want to be. Such is the curse of the IQ-denier.

  241. joe2.5 says:
    @Isabella

    “You cannot have a culture free IQ test no matter how hard you try, because its in more things than you have the first idea.”
    I have to thank you for wording it best. That’s the heart of the matter, even though I don’t know if we’re more or less correct in calling it culture.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  242. Mike P says:
    @Isabella

    If you were, you would have been taught that the correct plural of a noun ending in “us”, is “i”.

    Octopus is indeed Greek, but even in Latin, the suffix “us” appears in the nominative singular of several different declensions. For example:

    rusticus (s) rustici (pl)
    litus (s) litora (pl)
    genus (s) genus (pl)

    When writing in English, it is better not to bother with these niceties and just use the English way to form the plural.

  243. @Stochastic Determinist

    I meant to write, “It’s not spelled ‘octopous,’ of course….”

  244. @joe2.5

    It’s hilarious watching you and Isabella talk about the culturally bounded nature of all knowledge and how it affects IQ tests, while at the same time you struggle to explain to each other the plural of … wait, what was it? octopuses? octopi? octopussies? octopodes? Hahaha!

    The next time your blacks friends and acquaintances struggle with math, just tell them that it’s quite alright, as math, engineering, science, etc., are not part of their culture.

    As for culture-free tests, there are 1) Raven’s Progressive Matrices, and 2) reaction time tests (three different types), and all these tests show the same rank order among races 1) Asians, 2) whites, and 3) blacks.

    Go ahead and explain to everyone how reaction time tests are always culturally bounded in that particular order. Should be amusing.

  245. @utu

    What’s with libertarians? You cannot post a single comment without citing libertarians. What is it about libertarians-and I am not one-that has become a private obsession?

    • Replies: @utu
  246. utu says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Ceterum autem censeo Libertarianism esse delendam

  247. @joe2.5

    When he describes the group where a statement like “… do test higher. It’s called scientific” may be found unexceptional.
    That it’s not immediately obvious may be cause for concern.

    I am sorry but I do not understand your language. Who is he? Who “may be found unexceptional’? What may be found unexceptional? What is “it” that is not immediately obvious? Why may “it” be cause for concern? Concern to whom?

  248. @CanSpeccy

    Apparently you don’t understand what average is. Maybe I can help you. Average means that of all the people the average IQ is 85 (this is in the case of say black people in Africa or Hispanics in Mexico). -Does this mean that everyone in a group has an IQ of 85? No. It means that some have an IQ of 130 and some have an IQ of 70.

    You are kind of like Fred: reacting emotionally to the plain fact that average IQs are clear indicators of a race’s general capabilities and destiny. It explains fairly well why Africa has been plagued by the Big Man governments and rulers for the last 1000 years.

    But I don’t call Fred an outright liar, even though I do fault Fred (and you) for his fake observation. I just call Fred stupid not just because of this latest stupidity, but for the many many other stupidities that can be found in many of his writings.

    When he talks about military stuff he’s pretty good. Most of the other stuff is just stupid. This snarky putdown of IQ as a measure of a people is a perfect example.

  249. Anon[187] • Disclaimer says:

    If only Fred and Nassim Taleb could get together and have a child. Their grasp of psychometrics makes them a perfect match. Possibly their IQ scores (good, but not what they were hoping for) do the same.

  250. Not sure how much avionics the Colombos INVENTED. Little, I think. Check Ed Dutton The Jolly Heretic on YouTube for expiation and hilarity on the subject. His latest book is At Our Wit’s End which may be a spoiler.

  251. @Isabella

    You cannot have a culture free IQ test no matter how hard you try, because its in more things than you have the first idea.

    I think this is the biggest reason for results that are clearly absurd, like the average of 60 for Nepal. They try to make the tests culture-neutral, but the more the culture of the test designer differs from that of the test taker, the harder it is to make the right adjustments.

    Results like the Nepal number are evidence that our measuring tools are imperfect, not that the whole concept of IQ is invalid.

  252. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @restless94110

    You are kind of like Fred: reacting emotionally to the plain fact that average IQs are clear indicators of a race’s general capabilities and destiny

    There you go. The IQ-ist fallacy baldly stated. A false conclusion stated as a premise, making refutation of the error impossible.

    If there were any truth in the IQ-ist thesis, there would have to be an IQ-cutoff above which no one accepted the IQ-ist fallacy. But the staunchest IQ-ists, people like Jordan Peterson with his self-declared “in excess of 150” IQ refute that inference, thereby refuting the whole IQ-ist notion that IQ = intelligence.

  253. @restless94110

    “You are kind of like Fred: reacting emotionally to the plain fact that average IQs are clear indicators of a race’s general capabilities and destiny.” (emphasis mine)

    You are confusing fact and opinion. It is not a “plain fact that average IQs are clear indicators of a race’s general capabilities and destiny.” That is an opinion, one that some people, like you, are particularly convinced of. It’s important to distinguish between fact and opinion in order to know the difference between serious arguments and propaganda.

    • Replies: @whattheduck
  254. @Flint Clint

    Then answer this question: if on the same IQ test two adults, say, Joe and Fred, get scores of 118 and 123 respectively, does this mean that Fred is smarter than Joe? If so, why? If not, why not?

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  255. Then answer this question: if on the same IQ test two adults, say, Joe and Fred, get scores of 118 and 123 respectively, does this mean that Fred is smarter than Joe? If so, why? If not, why not?

    The correct answer is, no one should care.

    There’s so little difference between the two scores that it hardly matters. And since we only have one IQ test showing such a small difference (5 IQ points in your example) between just two adults (rather than groups or races), that the margin of error, the type of test given, and the lack of any reconfirmation of those scores all should give us some hesitation in making firm statements as to what we have found.

    Absent any other information, we would say that Fred is slightly smarter than Joe, but it would be the kind of tentative conclusion we should be willing to drop the first moment other information becomes available which contradicts it.

    But IQ scores matter much more for groups than they do for individuals. And a 10-point difference is significant when it is 1) reconfirmed again and again and again 2) over long periods of time 3) in many different parts of the world 4) on many different kinds of IQ tests and 5) when it fits with other information we have available.

  256. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Stochastic Determinist

    if on the same IQ test two adults, say, Joe and Fred, get scores of 118 and 123 respectively, does this mean that Fred is smarter than Joe?

    Absolutely. That’s why Jordan Peterson, who as an expert in the matter can be relied on when he says his IQ is “in excess of 150,” is clearly a lot cleverer than Richard Feynman and sundry other Nobel Prize winners with much lower IQ’s.

    Really they should give Jordo the Nobel just for having such a splendid IQ. Maybe they could create a special category: Nobel Prize in hand-waving bullshit.

  257. Aj7575 says: • Website
    @Adrian

    This was a very well done critical review of the book.

  258. @CanSpeccy

    Read my post above, Canned Sulky. You need to understand that IQ differences between groups are different than IQ differences between individuals.

    I told you this already, but clearly the lesson hasn’t settled in your thick but useless cranium.

  259. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Pincher Martin

    But IQ scores matter much more for groups than they do for individuals.

    Like all the IQ-ist clap-trap, you state as a fact what has to be proved. In particular, what has to be proved is how come the United States, with a mean IQ at the beginning of the 20th Century of, by today’s standard, a mere moron-level 70, became the worlds richest, most powerful, and technologically advanced nation, the “exceptional nation,” by the end of the 20th Century?

  260. @CanSpeccy

    Like all the IQ-ist clap-trap, you state as a fact what has to be proved.

    It is proved. I’ve provided you a source. Go read it.

    In particular, what has to be proved is how come the United States, with a mean IQ at the beginning of the 20th Century of, by today’s standard, a mere moron-level 70, became the worlds richest, most powerful, and technologically advanced nation, the “exceptional nation,” by the end of the 20th Century?

    You want IQ scores to be absolute throughout time by using the Flynn Effect to rejigger those circa 1900 American scores, but you still treat a country’s income standing in 1900 as relative only to its time?

    That makes zero sense. It makes as much sense as comparing the height of the Japanese in 1900 to Pygmies of today to prove that they are both approximately the same height.

    For example, the U.S. may have had the highest income in the world in 1900, but it was only about $5,000 per capita in today’s dollars, which would place it firmly in the sub-Saharan African range of today’s income levels, above the Ivory Coast but below Nigeria.

  261. @Pincher Martin

    Your answer’s not bad, at least for the first few paragraphs. You mention the margin of error. It is important to note that IQ is a statistic — a perhaps obvious point that no one has yet mentioned. Like all statistics, it necessarily has a degree of error. Likewise, statistical averages for any given population also have a degree of error. The statistics are drawn from samples, not the entire population, so we have m, rather than mu, and s, rather than sigma.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @res
  262. @CanSpeccy

    In particular, what has to be proved is how come the United States, with a mean IQ at the beginning of the 20th Century of, by today’s standard, a mere moron-level 70, became the worlds richest, most powerful, and technologically advanced nation, the “exceptional nation,” by the end of the 20th Century?

    I don’t want to let this go because my silence on this particular point might imply agreement with Canned Sulky’s rhetorical sloppiness.

    The U.S. was the wealthiest country in the world at the beginning of the 20th century, both in aggregate GDP estimates and, more impressively, in per capita income. (Both those stats are backdated, by the way, because the measurements did not exist at the time. But few people at the time would’ve disputed the contention that America was the wealthiest country in the world by the early twentieth century.)

    But the U.S. was NEITHER the “most powerful” NOR the “most technologically advanced nation” until after WW2. Both of those countries were still to be found in Western Europe among multiple contenders. The most powerful circa 1900 was probably the British Empire and the most technologically advanced was probably Britain or Germany.

  263. @Stochastic Determinist

    The statistics are drawn from samples, not the entire population, so we have m, rather than mu, and s, rather than sigma.

    Yes, but the same patterns are seen again and again and again, taken from different samples at different times and in different areas and from different populations and on different tests.

    At some point the power of induction matters, if you have any sort of scientific mindset at all.

    And if that doesn’t matter to you, if you are one of those statistical skeptics, then retreat to an honest skepticism about ALL science and not just the science you find it convenient to ignore.

  264. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    I suppose that demolishing IQ-ist BS is a bit like tearing the wings off a fly. A cruel sport, but for some, a sport that is hard to resist, especially for those with a respect for the truth and the integrity of the scientific enterprise.

    The IQ-ist fallacy is maintained and enforced in two ways:

    First, by endless repetition of the First Principle of IQ-ism:

    Intelligence is what the IQ-ist’s test measures

    Accept that, and you’re done. You’ll never be able to think intelligently about intelligence again.

    Second, the IQ-ist proceeds by relentless abuse of skeptics and critics:

    “you must be disappointed at scoring so poorly on an IQ test”

    or more directly:

    “you have a “thick” and “useless” cranium, cf. waterlogged IQ-ist crackpot above.

    So to grasp the IQ-ist fallacy, you need to begin with a clear understanding of what “intelligence” is.

    And for that, where to turn?

    To the Oxford English Dictionary, the ultimate authority on the meaning of words of the English language.

    What do we find:

    noun
    1 The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills.

    Wonderful. It’s what Einstein called an “operational definition,” by which he meant a definition that tells you how you could go about measuring the thing if you were so inclined. And that is precisely what the Oxford-Dictionary-powered Lexico definition just cited does.

    OK, so now we know what intelligence is, we can easily come to see that it is not one, but many different things. It is for that reason that IQ-ists hate the mention of idiot savants. These are people with IQ’s below 25, i.e., completely mentally incompetent except they are also geniuses in some restricted way.

    Thus, for example, Stephen Wiltshire, who can draw a vast cityscape from memory.

    This is a beautiful illustration of the three aspects of a particular form of intelligence at work: (1) the acquisition of visual information, (2) the application of visual information, and (3) the acquired skill in the application of visual information.

    And then there’s Derek Paravicini. He has no visually based intelligence at all. He’s blind. But if you play him a piano sonata he’s never heard before, he’ll play it back to you, transposing the key if you wish.

    Derek’s IQ is probably impossible to assess because his verbal skills are minimal, yet his musical skills provide a beautifully clear illustration of the three aspects of intelligence at work: the acquisition of information (in this case auditory), the use of information, and skill in the use of information. Thus, despite the IQ-ist calssification of idiot, Derek demonstrates high intelligence. But here it must be understood that Derek Paravicini’s intelligence is totally different from Stephen Wiltshire’s. Derek cannot assimilate visual information, use it, or show skill in its use, and there is no evidence that Stephen Wiltshire has any special ability in the assimilation or use of auditory information. These are distinct forms of intelligence, the possession of one being possible in the total absence of the other.

    And there are many, many others forms of savantism that greatly broaden the picture and confirm the multiplicity of the powers of intellect, a multiplicity entirely consistent with the structure of the brain, which comprises multiple nodes, lobes and ganglia, each with specialized function, each subject to a distinct set of genes and which can, therefore, vary in performance largely or totally independently of one another.

    So it is simply irrational to maintain that intelligence is ONE THING measurable by a single number. It means, furthermore, that the IQ-ist, poor dull creature that he may seem, could nevertheless possess intellectual talents one would not have suspected based on his sadly indoctrinated state.

  265. res says:
    @Stochastic Determinist

    Like all statistics, it necessarily has a degree of error. Likewise, statistical averages for any given population also have a degree of error. The statistics are drawn from samples, not the entire population, so we have m, rather than mu, and s, rather than sigma.

    Right. And that is an important point. But you omit what makes population IQs so much more effective than individual IQs. The error decreases by 1 / sqrt(n) with the sample size. So with a sample as small as 100 the error is already down by a factor of 10.

    Sample size also matters for the correlation of IQ with various outcomes (e.g. income). A single person with measured IQ 125 might be anyone from a bum in a gutter to Feynman. But once you start looking at large groups the relationship becomes much clearer.

    This idea is anathema to those who think “outliers disprove statistical correlations”
    though.

    P.S. A similar principle applies for multiple measurements. Which is why it is much wiser to look at multiple pieces of data (preferably over time) rather than staking all on a single test result. Or drawing outlandish conclusions from a single test result.

    • Replies: @utu
  266. @CanSpeccy

    First you want to judge the IQ of Africans in America by the performance of their IQ in Africa, which is really stupid as Jim Flynn observed.

    Now you want to judge operation of neuro-typical IQ by neuro-savantism.

    The whole point of IQ is to explain differences between individuals and groups.

    If McKinsey’s can report that in 2015 both blacks and hispanics are 3 years behind white students on average in literacy skills in the United States, what explains the discrepancy? Is it really poverty? Really culture? What more anti-white lies do you need? Should all classes be conducted solely in ebonics? Should we make sure there is only hip hop and rap chemistry?

    Maybe it isn’t IQ – but the mass of these kids are not ‘idiot-savants’ as these persons you describe used to be called.

    Nothing you are talking about has much relevance or salience to anything in particular.

    I am going to dig up the quote from a liberal Harvard scientist in the story that got archived when he intimated that Blacks are actually a different species based on genetics.

    That is actually a mainstream view – but it’s ruthlessly censored by ((them)) who want the gentiles to be idiot mud people in endless sleep, per the artwork under the eiffel tower.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  267. utu says:
    @res

    1/sqrt(n) does not apply to bias and sampling errors.

    • Replies: @res
  268. @Bragadocious

    I have a problem with your ignorant comment and your take on Mr. Reed’s attempt to bring some light to what the LeBaron family has been involved in. Mr. Reed posted various videos that clearly show that it could be something other then a Mexican Cartel that committed this horrible act, such as people who own ranches that are being denied water, people who have had someone murdered by the LeBarons, someone that the LeBarons stole land from, someone that the LeBarons owed money to or last but not least a false flag team from the US sent to create the type of situation that would bring in the US Military.

    It becomes very evident by your stupid response to Mr. Reed’s article that the MSM does a very good job promoting their agenda to the dumb masses. But, you can’t see someone else’s point of view because you have been soaking up the shit delivered by your news stations, you have no room left in that big, patriotic head, under that red MEGA baseball cap, to even consider a different scenario! The Lebarons are not Mormons, they moved here to practice polygamy and in some cases pedophilia as we saw when the Texas Authorities arrested Warren Jeffs for sexual assault of a 12 and 13 year old girls who he said were his wives.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10904019/The-evil-preacher-who-runs-his-cult-from-prison.html

    The Church of the Lamb of God is one of the names these people use and have a very dark past! They murdered 26 members of their own cult during the 1980’s including children, they believe in “Blood Atonement” take a look:

    https://www.insider.com/mormon-church-mexico-history-polygamy-lebaron-la-mora-2019-11

    These people believe in the “Pure Seed” that allows the father to have sex with his daughter in order to have “Pure Bread Children”! Watch the Clip!

    I have read your posts and find you to be a hateful, uneducated person that believes that Mr. Reed’s reasons for writing about the LeBaron’s fighting back against the Aztecs, what you called their worst sin! What do you think their worst sin is now, dumbass! The IQ portion of this thread is perfect…the LeBarons are known to have terribly low IQ scores and are “White”! It’s because they work on the ranches from a very young age and spend very little time receiving a proper education, the same as the Aztecs and African Americans while working in the fields.

    There, I solved the IQ question and race!

    I live in Mexico and I don’t watch MSM…

  269. @Twodees Partain

    You are right on the money, brother… I posted a couple of sites on a previous comment, that will give you a little information on the dark history of the LeBaron Cult. This one will take you to a website that has a letter at the end of the website, posted by a LeBaron serving 4 life sentences for murdering his own family members. He writes about his murder spree, drug dealing and bank robbery. Take a look:

    https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/cultbustersgalactica/church-of-the-lamb-of-god-ervil-lebaron-t126.html

  270. @J. Gutierrez

    Thank you, beaner supremacist. Might I suggest you find an editor and trim your logorrheic screeds down to a manageable size? And how funny is it that a scumbag like yourself charges others with kid fiddling? Half the beaners in U.S. prisons are there because they couldn’t keep their hands off the neighbor’s 8 year old daughter. You do indeed “have a problem,” you’re a fucking bore.

    • Replies: @J. Gutierrez
  271. @CanSpeccy

    I suppose that demolishing IQ-ist BS is a bit like tearing the wings off a fly. A cruel sport, but for some, a sport that is hard to resist, especially for those with a respect for the truth and the integrity of the scientific enterprise.

    If I were you, I’d find another sport, Canned Sulky. The flies are kicking your ass. That can’t be good for your fragile ego.

  272. res says:
    @utu

    True. Those have to be minimized by appropriate sampling and selection of unbiased measurement tools.

    For comparison we might also consider how much bias and sampling error are introduced by focusing on outliers ; )

  273. If the IQ tests are administered in the US to students of “White” ancestry are they sub-categorizing the students into places of origin? White-Anglo, White – Russian, White – German, White – Spanish, etc.

    I believe there may be certain “Whites” that have a higher IQ score than others and the others are benefiting from their brother’s higher scores! While the higher scoring “Whites” might be loosing out to the Asian students because of it. If that makes any sense to you guys.

    The same could be said about Mexican students, but with a different twist. It is a well known fact that people from Mexico that migrate north are basically the less educated or rural type, the field workers, construction laborers, ranch hands, etc. These people’s children become the Mexicans that are tested in the US and their IQ scores documented. What about the Mexican students in Mexico that are the offspring of Mexico’s intellectual society, Doctors, Lawyers and Owners of Corporations. Are those students listed as Mexican along with the Mexicans in the US?

    Or, are they on a separate list as Mexican – US, Mexican – Mexico or what about Mexican – Spanish or Mexican – Indigenous? Mexicans from Mexico could be facing the same unfair situation as I earlier mentioned as “Whites” from different places of origin.

    I just thought I’d throw it out there for you guys to think about…Here in Mexico it was reported that the largest collection of Mammoth bones were discovered during construction excavation. The site has been described to be a form of trap, by the archeologist investigating. The bones show signs of cut marks like those found on animals that were eaten by humans. They were surprised by the ingenuity involved in creating such a successful trap, since over 12 sets of bones were found…I wonder what the IQ score on those early humans would be and can a High IQ human today, replicate that work.

    Education today is missing or doing away with 2 key studies essential in creating an overall productive citizen. Art and Music have been slowly eliminated from a student’s education in the US. Art has been replaced by violent video games that simulate war situations creating violent and aggressive individuals that worship weapons and military hardware. Music has been replaced by hard rock and rappers totally the opposite to music in the classical sense.

  274. pdxr13 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    A fairly primitive population can “use” most consumer technology, when trained and provided with that technology by an Overclass. This is the South African situation, with a few percent of overworked Whites keeping the advanced or advancing parts going.

    When the last non-Blacks are driven from ZA, it will revert to Africa. It will depopulate to the normal level, unless a new master race like Han, arrive to keep the lights on and sewer flowing.

  275. @anonymous

    “If you were going to do a proper comparison of Aboriginal children’s IQ’s to White children’s IQ’s, you would need to raise them in the same environment”

    How about a real world example. My parents from Eastern Europe were raised on subsistence farms and had up to two years of formal schooling learned how to read and write English after a few years in the USA. BTW Peasants were freed in that part of the world in the year 1800 so essentially their great, great, great, grandparents were serfs which was a form of slavery.
    Into the present time I and my brothers have advanced college degrees and my three children have an average score of 30 on the ACT test and one of them took the SAT and scored 1450. They are first generation in the USA. The Africans have been in the USA for up to 300 hundred years and yet their average ACT test score is somewhere in the vicinity of 17. You can look in all of the cities where they are the dominant population and in control Democratically and judge the world that they have created. This is the world they create where the average IQ is around 80.

  276. @Isabella

    “I was curious since in Britain and Australia men take their shirts off in summer all the time, so I asked an American friend “is it not done to remove your shirt in US”?. He replied “No”

    In the USSof A it seems that some men do not remove their shirts off even in outdoor beach and swimming environments. I suspect it is because there are many overweight men and they do not want to display “bitch tits”. The “bitch tits” look unseemly and maybe some women might get offended that there are males out there with larger mammary glands than they have. It could be intersexual jealousy of some type I suppose. What with all the thin females and overweight males. A sad state of affaires to be sure but then again the USSof A is in a state of evolution. The future is beginning to look like science fiction.

  277. @Stochastic Determinist

    He’s only convinced of the IQ theory is because he falls into higher IQ group. If he fell into one of the races whose “average IQ is 85” then he would have different opinion about the whole theory.

    • Agree: AaronB
  278. AaronB says:
    @whattheduck

    I clicked the agree button by accident. Not that I particularly disagree, but obviously many people who belong to high IQ groups don’t buy into IQ theory. My self, for instance.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  279. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @whattheduck

    He’s only convinced of the IQ theory is because he falls into higher IQ group.

    For some, that is the key thing, whether their group, white, Chinese, Jewish or whatever is superior to others.

    For others, there is personal pride in having achieved a perfect SAT score, or some comfort in persuading others that one achieved a high IQ test score even if, perhaps, you are not quite so much above average as you claim. But whatever the motivation to believe in the validity of IQ as a measure of intelligence, there is no doubt it takes intelligence of a kind to get a high score on an IQ test.

    The thing is, IQ tests measure just one particular set of cognitive capacities out of a vastly greater potential range. And since the test yields just a single number score, it means all abilities are lumped together thus concealing huge variation in specific abilities among individuals with similar IQ test scores. Further, all the cognitive capacities tested are more or less modifiable according to education and culture, so IQs tell much less about about innate ability than the IQ-ist will generally acknowledge.

    It is also the case that the design of the test determines what kind of educational and cultural background raises scores the most, meaning that the test can be, and is, rigged.

    The conclusion, it seems to me, therefore, must be that IQ tests are liable to give an unwarranted sense of superiority to some, while giving an unwarranted sense of inferiority to others. In the former case, the likelihood is that it discourages hard work and honest scholarship at school while encouraging foolish arrogance. In the latter case, perhaps it is useful, providing the inferiority complex that drives individual achievement. But overall, it seems to me that IQ testing is just a futile distraction, and the sooner people get over it and get down to the hard work of necessary to “accomplish sump’n,” as Thomas Eddison put it, the better.

  280. @whattheduck

    He’s only convinced of the IQ theory is because he falls into higher IQ group. If he fell into one of the races whose “average IQ is 85” then he would have different opinion about the whole theory.

    And yet, ironically, we have countless highly-intelligent people in the high-IQ groups, including the highest IQ group of all (Jews), who DON’T believe in the stratification of races by average IQ. Certainly, in my experience, they make up a majority of educated people in the West.

    So perhaps the motivation of people, depending on what group they identify with, is irrelevant. Perhaps you ought to focus more on the science.

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  281. @AaronB

    Aaron vividly proves here the validity of how someone can belong to a high-IQ group without possessing a high IQ.

    I clicked the agree button by accident. Not that I particularly disagree, but obviously many people who belong to high IQ groups don’t buy into IQ theory. My self, for instance.

    Q.E.D.

  282. @Pincher Martin

    “…So perhaps the motivation of people, depending on what group they identify with, is irrelevant…”

    No, in the case of Whites who accept the IQ idea, the motivation would be ordinary ethnic pride, but in the case of Jews who reject the idea of IQ, the motivation is ethnic strategic interest. Jews promote the idea of “equality” in order to attack Whites. If Blacks perform on a lower level, then “racial discrimination” can be adduced as the cause. Besides, Jews don’t want public attention be drawn to their own higher intelligence, since that would confirm their reputation as cunning schemers. Among themselves they boast about their own intelligence, but they feel incomfortable when others mention it.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  283. Yet more blather from the semi retired bloviator who has yet to do anything in his life. (Fred)

    Counting personal experience, I actually HAVE managed work crews of Nepali workers. Also Indians, Sri Lankans, Djiboutians, Indians, Filipinos, and Pakistanis.

    Average IQ of a country matters. Example the Filipinos, there are smart people here, but they are a minority. I can go 500 meters from my front door and find giant nests of lazy low IQ types squatting everywhere. Try to hire one of them, and they are either incapable of work, or too lazy to show up cause they was drinking the night before. When asked something in English, they will simple mindedly exclaim “nosebleed!!!” and laugh like loons while making insults in Tagalog.

    When I first went here, i was like, oh hey cheap labor! then reality set in, when I was unable to hire anyone, even offering double min wage.

    My experience with Djiboutians (look up the country) Was a people so dumb they could not grasp the concept of bathing. We had a crew of around 30 of them to sort the garbage for recycling. We then had to import a Hungarian named Nick to keep them from eating the garbage like pigs.

    My experience with Nepalis was that they thought it was no problem to run a diesel pump with the spark arrest removed and shooting sparks while pumping gasoline from the bag farm.

    Indians used to fight among themselves constantly.

    Same with Sri Lankans.

    Sure as hell IQ matters.

    • Replies: @Alexandros
    , @CanSpeccy
  284. @abba zabba

    IQ matters, but if it is not paired with moral character the results can be devastating.

    It is clear that there is in the human species some biological strain of either atavism or degeneracy that manifests itself in a hatred of mankind and a list for evil for its own sake. It produced the Thugs in India and the Bolsheviks in Russia (cf. Louis Zoul, Thugs and Communists, Public Opinion, Long Island City). It appears in such distinguished persons as Giles de Rais, who was second only to the king of France, and in such vulgar specimens as Fritz Haarmann, a homosexual who attracted some attention in Germany in 1924, when it was discovered that for many years he had been disposing of his boy-friends, as soon as he became tired of them, by tearing their throats open with his teeth and then reducing them to sausage, which he sold in a delicatessen. And it animates the many crypto-Communist who hold positions of power or influence in the United States.

    It is probable that this appalling viciousness is transmitted by the organic mechanisms of heredity, and although no geneticist would now even speculate about what genes or lack of genes produce such biped terrors, I think it quite likely that the science of genetics, if study and research are permitted to continue, may identify the factors involved eventually — say in two or three hundred years. I know that we most urgently and desperately need to know now. But it will do no good to kick geneticists: The most infinite complexity of human heredity makes it impossible to make such determinations more quickly by the normal techniques of research. (Of course, a brilliant discovery that would transcend those methods is always possible, but we can’t count on it.)

    It is quite likely that at the present rate, as eugenicists predict, civilization is going to collapse from sheer lack of brains to carry it on. But it is now collapsing faster and harder from a super-abundance of brains of the wrong kind. Granting that we can test intelligence, we must remember that at or near the top of the list, by any test that we can devise, will be a flock of diabolically ingenious degenerates. And even if we could find a way to identify and eliminate the spawn of Satan, we should still have problems.

    What causes genuine “liberal intellectuals”? Many are pure Pragmatists. They have no lust for evil for its own sake; they wouldn’t betray their country or their own parents for less than fifty dollars — and not for that, if they thought they could get more by bargaining. Others are superannuated children who want to go on playing with fairies and pixies, and are ready to kick and bite when disturbed at play; but they have the combination of lachrymose sentimentality and thoughtless cruelty that one so often finds in children before they become capable of the rational morality of adults. But all of our “liberal intellectuals” were graduated from a college of some sort, and many of them, I am sure, have a fairly high “intelligence quotient” by modern tests. I do not claim or suggest that they are the result of hereditary defects; I merely point out that we do not know and have no means of finding out. We can’t be sure of anything except that our society now has as many of those dubious luxuries as it can endure. And yet we are going to encourage them to raise the intellectual level.

    Come to think of it, my friends, I guess we’d better postpone our coup d’etat for a couple of centuries.

    -Revilo Oliver

  285. @J. Gutierrez

    City boy’s and Connecticut Yankees have no clue how water to a rancher/farmer is more valuable than gold, and will never understand how many people have died in “water wars”.

    Before the ranch attack, El Barzón claimed that the LeBarón family planned to drill 50 new wells on the property for the irrigation of walnut trees, which require significant amounts of water.

    The farmers’ group has long claimed that the LeBarón family’s illegal use of water resources will leave communities without any. The family denies any wrongdoing.

    https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/dispute-over-water-fuelled-attack-on-lebaron-family/

    • Replies: @J. Gutierrez
  286. @Franklin Ryckaert

    No, in the case of Whites who accept the IQ idea, the motivation would be ordinary ethnic pride…

    What possible ethnic pride could any whites have in scoring higher on IQ tests than blacks?

    There’s nothing there to be proud about. It’s not an accomplishment.

    You want something to be proud about? Consider how Western Europe created the structure of the modern world, a world in which both Jews and East Asians had to adapt, despite those whites having lower IQs than both of those groups.

    Now that’s an accomplishment.

    … but in the case of Jews who reject the idea of IQ, the motivation is ethnic strategic interest. Jews promote the idea of “equality” in order to attack Whites.

    Forgot Jews. Most GENTILE whites do NOT believe their higher IQ scores are inherent in the quality of their genes. Most CONSERVATIVE whites do not believe in it.

    And by “most” I mean the vast majority.

    You don’t believe me on that last point? Go to the average conservative website, one not known for the extremist views of its commentators, but where nearly everyone still comments under the cloak of anonymity, and raise the issue of racial IQ scores. See what happens.

    Most of those anonymous conservatives will be either hostile or silent to your idea They don’t buy that genes stratify the world.

    So this has nothing to do with Jews. Most people of all ethnicities in America are hostile to the idea.

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  287. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Pincher Martin

    The human brain has around 85 billion neurons. Each neuron has multiple branching dendrites connecting it with other neurons, the dendrites being divided into a multitude of small sections that each process information before it is sent to other neurons. The brain thus has the potential for, not billions, but trillions if not quintillions, of simultaneous logic operations. That’s assuming that the 10 ^ 11 microtubules per neuron are not, as Roger Penrose has proposed, the elements of neural logic operations, in which case the brain may have something like 10 ^ 22 information processing elements, a number vastly greater than has generally been assumed.

    But however much information the brain can store and process, and however the components of the brain are organized into lobes and networks, modules and ganglia, its capacity can, so the IQ-ist insists, be defined by a single number between zero and 200, or slightly more if you’ve been educated at Harvard. Does that not seem more than a little bit silly?

  288. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @abba zabba

    My experience with Djiboutians (look up the country) Was a people so dumb they could not grasp the concept of bathing.

    That was true of the English for most of their history, despite the fact that in recent times they became the makers of the modern world.

    Even in the days of my own youth, there were country dwellers, our neighbors in the backwoods Devonshire, who never bathed. And, indeed, it was difficult for the vast majority of the British population to bath, since 90% of homes, whether in town or country, had no bathroom, just an outhouse, usually in a tiny back yard, where often, just several paces away, drinking water was drawn from a well (cf. H.G. Wells, An Experiment in Autobiography).

    In those days most people smelled and sometimes stank, like cattle, pigs or sheep, a species-specific odor, that was just a normal feature of existence.

    In fact our house had no bathroom, although since it was on a farm, the outhouse was a decent distance from the well. I recall being bathed in a tin tub, but that was nothing important in my life.

  289. @Pincher Martin

    Quod erat demonstrandum sed non demonstratum est.

    Really, you should stop insulting people’s intelligence. It just seems silly, especially given your vehement insistence on the validity of IQ.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  290. @Pincher Martin

    “…So this has nothing to do with Jews. Most people of all ethnicities in America are hostile to the idea…”

    They have been taught by the Jews to be hostile to that idea. Some relevant names : Franz Boas, Ashley Montagu (real name : Israel Ehrenberg), Stephen Jay Gould, Jared Diamond…

    The idea of “equality” has been forced upon Western societies so that even “conservatives” subscribe to the idea. Jews themselves don’t believe in equality, they consider themselves vastly superior to all of humanity, but they use that idea to undermine the power of Whites whom they consider as their most dangerous competitors in their quest for world dominance.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  291. @CanSpeccy

    IQ scores don’t do justice to the complex realities of the human brain, but for practical purposes they give a working indication of human intellectual talents. They don’t claim more than that.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  292. @Bragadocious

    Thank you, beaner supremacist.

    You are very welcome, Archie Bunker.

    Might I suggest you find an editor and trim your logorrheic screeds down to a manageable size?

    This one will make you happy, since writing something you can never understand is a waste of time.

    And how funny is it that a scumbag like yourself charges others with kid fiddling?

    Scumbag? OK, whatever makes you feel like you have balls!

    Half the beaners in U.S. prisons are there because they couldn’t keep their hands off the neighbor’s 8 year old daughter

    You lie like a “cheap rug” Archie Bunker! Mexican pedophiles in prison, as you say, if true there would be a bunch of dead pedophile Mexicans in prisons.

    They couldn’t keep their hands off the neighbor’s 8 year old daughter.

    American white males over 50 years of age travel to Thailand, Philippines, Vietnam, Haiti, Colombia and numerous other third world countries to do the hanky panky with little girls and boys. They go by the thousands and it is very commonly known by people all over the world. Anglo/Zionists scumbag like you outnumber any other group when it comes to kid love! There are numerous investigations involving men from the British, Australian, US, Canadian and New Zealand countries.

    You do indeed “have a problem,” you’re a fucking bore.

    My last comment to you wasn’t boring, but they censored it, I wrote a very strong comment, just like your bitch ass likes!

  293. Anon[285] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pincher Martin

    For a brief and “pointless” (the latter at least according to you, but how would you know if you refuse to read it?) comment which you have openly admitted you have made no effort to comprehend, it’s inspired a lot of verbal outflow on your part. I’m wondering if this pattern of incomprehension followed by verbal spew is your general pattern; this would explain a lot.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  294. Anon[285] • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I wouldn’t say dogmatically that he’s an idiot, he just has no idea or no care about how to argue in an intelligent way.

    He has some appreciation of good literature but doesn’t seem to understand that either.

  295. @silviosilver

    Good response, silviosilver. There is no necessary connection between eugenics and forced sterilization or forced anything else. Behavior is always subject to outside influence in loads of ways, especially financial. As of now the influence goes the wrong way. Society encourages the intellectually and morally inferior to breed more, by supporting their bad choices. They are entitled to welfare benefits and a domestic army of social workers to lift their burdens. Leftists display their compassion by reassuring dysgenic breeders that they are special people, heroically defying white “bougie” norms.

    If turned around, society’s subsidization and messaging could as easily reward voluntary actions in the service of a better gene pool. There should be no “right” to have kids and send the bill for raising them to others who may be struggling just as much to stay afloat.

  296. @Johnny Walker Read

    You couldn’t be anymore right, than that my brother! I truly have a problem when these nitwits calling out someone for giving an honest opinion on what may have a lot to do with this terrible incident. There is a lot more that is going on in Mexico that these people are not aware of, brother. The new President stopped the theft of PEMEX and changed the Mexican constitution so we can prosecute past Administrations for corruption. Until he did that, Mexico couldn’t do anything! And these people think it was because everyone in Mexico is corrupt! They were cuckold to the American government and did as they were told.

    Americans have nothing to say when it comes to corrupt governments, one just has to look at 9-11 and the bullshit wars they allowed their government to get away with. They are cuckold to the Zionists that tell them what to do! We did something about our situation, but the US citizens are going to elect another Zionist puppet! We canceled the oil contracts with the US Oil Corporations, and recently signed deals with Russia and China.

    Mexico just signed a deal that will move cargo from the Atlantic to the Pacific faster than using the Panama Canal. Singapore is investing over 850 million dollars and more investors are signing up. This inter-ocean corridor was built in the early 1900’s but abandoned due to the Panama Canal. But now with global trade at it’s highest levels, the need for another route is necessary in order to move products without the delays caused by the Panama Canal.

    Mexico is building a new high speed rail system from the coast of Cancun to the coast of Chiapas and Carlos Slim has signed on with Mexico already secured 60% of the money. The train will open up tourist sites not easy to accessed now and will grow the area into a popular method to get to those sites. Here is a clip detailing all the projects already started by the new Administration:

    While the US fights trade wars Mexico is getting ready to compete in the global trade! I bet nobody has even heard of these projects! You guys need to be looking south, like Fred! He’s way ahead of any of his critics! I bet he laughs at the dumb asses calling him a traitor, or the ones that call Mexicans stupid because I do!

    • Agree: Johnny Walker Read
  297. People who disparage IQ tests should be required to disclose their own, and on what scale. One suspects many who don’t like them have an ulterior reason.

    I was tested years ago on a scale for which 140 was “genius.” I recall my score being 137; my mother tells me it was 139, so she must have been disappointed. Either way, I feel competent to represent the non-genii of the world.

    Mr. Reed repeatedly confuses the idea of a society with a mean IQ of say 65 with the idea of a person with an IQ of 65.

    One suspects either his own IQ or his intellectual honesty.

  298. @CanSpeccy

    Canned Sulky,

    All the world is complicated. It’s not just the human brain. The scientist’s job is to simplify the world by finding patterns in it that are interconnected, predictable and testable.

    If you want more than that, find a religion.

  299. @Franklin Ryckaert

    They have been taught by the Jews to be hostile to that idea. Some relevant names : Franz Boas, Ashley Montagu (real name : Israel Ehrenberg), Stephen Jay Gould, Jared Diamond…

    Well, none of those Jewish fellows were around in the mid-19th century when radical American protestants were debating the Civil War and the immigration of Chinese, and I can guarantee you that those Protestants at the time were talking the same way as progressives do today. And it wasn’t because they were being influenced by Jews, who were hardly around and of little consequence at that time in American history.

    If anything, I think that American Jews later picked up on that chord of radical Protestantism and found it to their liking. You can blame the Jews for making that strain of American thought far more robust than it would otherwise be or ought to be, but you can’t blame them for inventing it.

  300. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Franklin Ryckaert

    IQ scores don’t do justice to the complex realities of the human brain, but for practical purposes they give a working indication of human intellectual talents.

    LOL
    A simple idea for simple minds to refute all arguments, as for example, here, and here, here, and here.

  301. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Flint Clint

    Nothing you are talking about has much relevance or salience to anything in particular.

    certainly that seems to well describe your own rambling comment.

    For example:

    If McKinsey’s can report that in 2015 both blacks and hispanics are 3 years behind white students on average in literacy skills in the United States, what explains the discrepancy? Is it really poverty? Really culture? What more anti-white lies do you need? Should all classes be conducted solely in ebonics? Should we make sure there is only hip hop and rap chemistry?

    Why is this addressed to me? I’ve said nothing about black white academic performance differences. And why is it an anti-white lie to raise the possibility that black academic performance relates to inner city black culture. Further, since we’re testing your IQ now, what is the explanation of the Flynn effect, the increase in US white IQ of 30 points over two generations. James Flynn says it reflects a cultural change. Is he an anti-white liar too? Or is it only a lie when it is suggested that the Flynn effect affects black school performance?

    My own assumption is that blacks would perform better academically if subject to strict school discipline, which apparently American schools are not allowed to dispense, and exposed to a demanding program under the direction of competent teachers. As it is they are educated under the direction of such as the Detroit School Board, headed by an illiterate with, one may therefore assume, no idea of what education consists in.

    Whether better school discipline and better teaching would reduce or eliminate the black white school performance difference I doubt, since cultural and other differences would still remain.

  302. @Stochastic Determinist

    Really, you should stop insulting people’s intelligence.

    What do you care? Are you the thread nanny? I insult posters who I think deserve to be insulted and who most of the times times have either insulted me directly first or at least insulted me indirectly.

    I’ve been called “fascist,” “white nationalist,” and all kinds of other vile crap. I have a thick skin, so I don’t whine about it. But I sure as hell ain’t laying back and taking it.

    Have I insulted you yet? No, I have not. So why don’t you worry about your own arguments and stop worrying about policing a situation you aren’t even fully following?

    It just seems silly, especially given your vehement insistence on the validity of IQ.

    That’s a non sequitur. I can both insult people *and* believe in the scientific validity of IQ. I can both insult people *and* demonstrate my arguments. I can both insult people *and* write so well that the angels weep in heaven.

    There’s no contradiction in any of those statements.

    Understanding the science of IQ is easy; it doesn’t take a particularly high IQ to get it. Most people choose not to understand it because it threatens their world view. Most of the people here who become so emotional at the mere mention of inherent racial differences in IQ haven’t read two books on the subject. Nor will they.

  303. CanSpeccy says:

    All the world is complicated. It’s not just the human brain. The scientist’s job is to simplify the world by finding patterns in it that are interconnected, predictable and testable.

    But you want the manifold potential of the most complicated thing we know of in the universe, namely, the human brain, reduced to a single number.

    LOL

    That’s not a rational call for simplification. It’s mere simple-mindedness, the signature intellectual trait of the IQ-ist.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  304. @Anon

    For a brief and “pointless” (the latter at least according to you, but how would you know if you refuse to read it?) comment which you have openly admitted you have made no effort to comprehend, it’s inspired a lot of verbal outflow on your part.

    I can write that much in between two quick sneezes. So don’t flatter yourself.

    You on the other hand are having a great deal of trouble writing out anything other than a brief and intermittently whinging complaint that reads a lot like an old man trying to softly clear his throat without urinating his trousers.

    If you have a serious point, write it out. If you have trouble writing, have someone else do it for you. But for God’s sakes, man, stop these little burping noises. They don’t do anyone any good.

    • Replies: @Anon
  305. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Pincher Martin

    I can both insult people *and* believe in the scientific validity of IQ.

    Absolutely. Anyone can. And it shows you to be as obnoxious as you are obtuse.

  306. @CanSpeccy

    But you want the manifold potential of the most complicated thing we know of in the universe, namely, the human brain, reduced to a single number.

    The human mind is not the most complicated thing in the universe.

    But even if it were, it’s still subject to the same scientific analysis as is everything else.

    Your problem, Canned Sulky, is that you get religious when looking at this particular scientific question. Leave your religion out of it. Secular religion or otherwise.

  307. @Pincher Martin

    “That’s a non sequitur.”

    That’s not true. See if you can construct an argument that would show that what I wrote was not a non sequitur.

    Also, maybe you haven’t insulted my intelligence — and why would I care, as you say? — but I see a lot of insults of posters’ intelligence going back and forth among the IQ true believers. You don’t see why that would be ironic?

    Maybe I’ll leave it to someone else to explain it.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  308. @Stochastic Determinist

    That’s not true. See if you can construct an argument that would show that what I wrote was not a non sequitur.

    Is this a parlor game where I’m supposed to guess at all the possible permutations of your meaning and then construct an argument in your favor and against my own position?

    No thanks. That doesn’t seem like a fun game at all.

    You wrote a non sequitur. There’s no relation to my insults and the IQ of the person I’m insulting, if only because I really don’t know what anyone’s IQ is here, even when I suspect the worst.

    I also call people “idiots” and “morons” and “imbeciles” when I’m well aware that they don’t technically drop to those levels of IQ.

    But most importantly, as I have already pointed out in numerous posts, there are countless smart people who argue against IQ, even without knowing the first thing about the science. They are stupid in the idiomatic sense; they are not literally stupid.

    Maybe I’ll leave it to someone else to explain it.

    Let’s hope they are better at it than you are.

  309. “I also call people ‘idiots’ and ‘morons’ and ‘imbeciles’ when I’m well aware that they don’t technically drop to those levels of IQ.”

    Well, why? And you say you are “thick-skinned”? You’re just hurling insults at people. That hardly advances the discussion — or even your own argument. Not that I care, but you’re undermining your own points. It does seem, however, that you are actually thin-skinned if you feel the need to insult people. I’m not trying to say we all have to get along, but if your arguments have any intellectual or academic value, they should stand on their merits without your having to indulge in ad hominems, which, as I’m sure you are aware, are considered fallacious.

    And no, it’s not a parlor game. I suppose you never consider counter-arguments to your own point of view. What should I infer from that? Hmm …

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  310. old farta says:

    It is not impossible for a collection of morons to build a three story building. with poured concrete. In fact nearly ever structure is built by people of less intelligence than those directing, overseeing and planning the work. This article stinks.

  311. @Stochastic Determinist

    Well, why?

    Because they *are* idiots. Not literally, but in the idiomatic sense of the word. Their arguments are stupid, uninformed, and not deserving of the “compliment of rational debate,” as Oscar Wilde says.

    What do you call someone who comes into a thread on intelligence, calls his opponents “fascists” and “racists,” shows he clearly has no idea what IQ is about (as he has read nothing on it), makes up what he does know about the topic as he goes along, and doesn’t respond to the reasonable objections of his interlocutors?

    Your mileage may vary, but I call him a fucking idiot. That doesn’t mean he can’t score well on an IQ test. Their idiocy is self-imposed, not genetically informed.

    And you say you are “thick-skinned”?

    Saying I’m thick-skinned doesn’t mean I turn the other cheek. It simply means that in a verbal firefight, their fire doesn’t bother me. I can keep my temper and return fire with precision.

    I’m not trying to say we all have to get along, but if your arguments have any intellectual or academic value, they should stand on their merits without your having to indulge in ad hominems, which, as I’m sure you are aware, are considered fallacious.

    You missed my H.L. Mencken quote earlier: “One horse-laugh is worth ten thousand syllogisms. It is not only more effective; it is also vastly more intelligent.”

    You must know nothing about Western literature and philosophy to hold your view on insults. There’s a rich vein in the West that shows some the greatest rhetorical joys and effectiveness comes when ridiculing your opponents who are deserving of it.

    • Agree: SeekerofthePresence
    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  312. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    What is an IQ-ist?

    From the discussion thus far it seems reasonable to conclude the following:

    An IQ-ist is a person who believes that:

    (1) If you are smart enough to come up with the theory of relativity, then you are smart enough to have (a) written Hamlet; (b) composed Fuer Elise, Einer Kleine Nachtmusic, and the Blue Danube Waltz; (c) Painted the Mona Lisa; and (d) fried an egg while balancing on a wire over Niagara Falls.

    (2) That a kid raised on the streets of what IQ-ists seem invariably to call a “shithole country” (e.g., San Francisco, USA) is generally less adept in the manipulation of words and numbers than a graduate of Exeter and Harvard or Eton and Oxford solely because of an inferior genetic potential.

    (3) The best way to deal with critics is by: (a) unsubstantiated assertion; (b) unsubstantiated negation; or (c) argumentum ad vericundiam, ignoratium, nauseam, or hominem.

    These modes of debate are characteristic of the unscientific mind. The mind of the individual unaware of the logic of scientific discovery, and in particular, the need for testable hypotheses and the rejection of those inconsistent with empirical evidence.

    They are, in fact, the modes of thought of what may be a majority of psychologists, adherents of a “discipline” that has brought the world Freudian psychiatry, the behaviorist’s denial of the existence of mind, and, today, IQ-ism, so dear to the heart of the racial supremacist and of those committed to a fascistic social order.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @Pincher Martin
  313. @Pincher Martin

    Satire was an honored literary form among the Greeks, Romans, and English, three of the brightest peoples.

    It has little place in today’s woke society, where equality is god,
    except with regard to whites, who are guilty of the original sin of whiteness.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  314. Anon[314] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I can write that much in between two quick sneezes. So don’t flatter yourself.

    Yes, you write verbal effluvia, very like sneezing.

    In that case, why don’t you take an allergy pill and write something intelligent instead?

    I get that you think you’re the second coming of Evelyn Waugh and GBS, but I’m not seeing anything Wavian or Shavian in your writing. Where’s The Loved IQ and Major CanSpeccy?

    We’re waiting.

  315. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    These modes of debate are characteristic of the unscientific mind.

    And, of course, of the scoundrel.

  316. @Anon

    In that case, why don’t you take an allergy pill and write something intelligent instead?

    My posts are filled with bon mots and intelligent asides, but the audience for them is selective. The porcine portion of the peanut gallery doesn’t appreciate pearls, my piggy friend.

    • Replies: @Anon
  317. @SeekerofthePresence

    Satire was an honored literary form among the Greeks, Romans, and English, three of the brightest peoples.

    You would think that Stochastic Determinist would’ve noticed the thread in which he was having this discussion.

    Is Fred Reed in his essay above attempting to start a serious discussion about IQ as a science? Of course not. He’s making fun of the people who take IQ seriously. Reed’s doing it in a light manner, of course, but he’s still using a common literary form in which you try to win the argument by making fun of your opponents. He’s presenting them – not fairly, not objectively, but by highlighting their flaws. You pick a person’s weakest arguments and interpret it in the most absurd fashion – say, that the Nepalese are retarded – and then run with it for as long as you can.

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  318. Tony Ryals says: • Website

    William Shockley,Stanford University IQ Test and Dinosaurs

    by Tony Ryals

    [MORE]

    In the 1970’s William Shockley claimed his university’s Stanford IQ test, Proved blacks were inferior and whites were best, In the 1980’s when an Atlanta paper thought he sounded like a Nazi, He sued them in the name of biology; little biological proof was presented in court, But he did win a dollar from the paper for his legal tort, How can a man who challenges the rights of others speech, Himself be allowed to teach, Lies about biology, That puts Stanford on a par with the Church of Scientology, Nature itself has proven that successful genes don’t count on quantity, Survival is much more dependent on quality, At a time when dinosaurs and other complex organisms died, Bacteria with less genes survived and multiplied, Yes the dinosaurs did have more genes, But the more adaptable bacteria had the means, Even Mr. Shockley’s field of electronics that won him a Nobel, Experienced the same fate as the dinosaurs tale, His former colleagues at IBM, Thought Apple and others were just a whim, And made computers too big to compete with them, A cell a brain or a computer in operation, Is no better bigger when it’s filled with mis-information, It’s precisely students produced by universities like his, That has made the world the industrial mess that it is, Toxic waste dumps lining the nation, Are greatly a product of Mr. Shockley’s white higher education, The chlorofluorocarbons colliding with the upper atmosphere’s ozone, Are products of university chemical engineering gone wrong, Toxic wastes in Silicon Valley, Are not the products of some drunk in some alley, Asia has copied the western education of industrialization, And scoring higher on western IQ tests is the latest sensation, If Shockley takes his IQ test so seriously, Asians industrialists are the best men literally, So Shockley should withdraw the sperm he deposited at the bank, Thaw it and pour it down the drain until it has sank, Because in the ’80’s the Asian industrial man has moved up in rank, But copying western industrialization by burning more fossil fuels, Only increases the danger of us all joining the ranks of the fossil fools, Regardless of or thanks to Stanford-like schools,

  319. @CanSpeccy

    An IQ-ist is a person who believes that: [Sulky then lists three elaborate points filled with his poorly-written fiction.]

    Let me deal with Sulky’s errors and animadversions.

    1) Do IQ-ists, as he calls them, believe that “(1) If you are smart enough to come up with the theory of relativity, then you are smart enough to have (a) written Hamlet; (b) composed Fuer Elise, Einer Kleine Nachtmusic, and the Blue Danube Waltz; (c) Painted the Mona Lisa; and (d) fried an egg while balancing on a wire over Niagara Falls.”

    Nope, not a word of this is true. And Sulky has already been told this.

    Informed IQ-ists know that IQ is a crude measure. The tests have a rough value for the individual, but they are best used in aggregate. When looking at individual IQ scores, we simply have no way of judging which test-takers who score high will be geniuses, failures, or (most likely) just better than the average bear.

    2) Do IQ-ists, as Sulky claims, believe that “(2) That a kid raised on the streets of what IQ-ists seem invariably to call a “shithole country” (e.g., San Francisco, USA) is generally less adept in the manipulation of words and numbers than a graduate of Exeter and Harvard or Eton and Oxford solely because of an inferior genetic potential.”

    Not true. At least not in the slanted way Sulky describes.

    Informed IQ-ists know that “shithole countries” (San Francisco not included among them) provide environmental deficits that contribute to IQ gaps. The difference in the gap is thus not “solely” a result of inferior genetic potential. The IQ gap between sub-Saharan Africa and the West, for example, is not solely because of genes, but only partially because of genes.

    Even when comparing populations which are both well-fed and adequately educated (blacks and whites in America, for example), the gap is not solely because of genes. Some of the difference is not explainable. It’s not genetic in nature, but it’s also not environmental, at least not in the way that most educated people thinks of the environment.

    3) Do IQ-ists, as Sulky claims, believe that “(3) The best way to deal with critics is by: (a) unsubstantiated assertion; (b) unsubstantiated negation; or (c) argumentum ad vericundiam, ignoratium, nauseam, or hominem.”

    Only in Sulky’s case, I’m afraid.

    Sulky came into this discussion (in another thread) with his six shooters blazing, calling IQ-ists “racists,” “fascists,” and “KKKers.”

    Then when they shot back and hit their marks on the large inviting target of his dunderheadness, he pleaded for gun control.

    I have no sympathy for him. He’s getting what he deserves.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  320. @Pincher Martin

    Fake satire sprays out chaff, a cloud of nonsense.

    Real satire hits its mark with substance, like the arrow of Odysseus.

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  321. Anon[314] • Disclaimer says:
    @Pincher Martin

    If you had used better French I might be a little more confident in the truth of your statement. But I really wish you would pick up my gauntlet. The field lies open– go in and labor.

  322. If you had used better French I might be a little more confident in the truth of your statement.

    Oh, woe is me. Another pearl wasted because I tossed it front of my swinish stalker.

  323. Third, if the above grass hut in Nepal was built by people with a mean IQ of sixty, then the Australian aborigines, at sixty-four, could build something at least as elaborate and perhaps a bit more so.

    Damn straight they don’t live in mud huts. They live in precariously stacked tenements accessed by congested alleyways that are crisscrossed overhead with loosely bundled electrical lines like the rest of the third world.
    Riding in Kathmandu is INSANE!

    Good thing they can dress themselves though. I wouldn’t want them to get cold when the power goes out in winter.

    Kathmandu suffers from 14 hours a day of power outages in early January and is projected to rise to 18 hours a day in the coming weeks

    Bonus totally-as-smart-as-us Nepal fun:

    [MORE]

    Cholera in Nepal

    Every year Kathmandu valley sees a little over 100 cases of Cholera, except some years when there is an epidemic with larger number of cases.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @CanSpeccy
  324. @SeekerofthePresence

    Fake satire is to Real as Johnny’s draw is to Doc’s…

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  325. Anon[314] • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Btw, thanks for the advice.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  326. @SeekerofthePresence

    Hilarious scene. That movie has so many great lines in it that I lost count.

    • Agree: SeekerofthePresence
  327. @Anon

    You were slow to take it, my swinish friend, just as the fellow who offered the advice can’t keep to it, either.

    • Replies: @Anon
  328. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Kathmandu suffers from 14 hours a day of power outages in early January and is projected to rise to 18 hours a day in the coming weeksNot good, but not so bad as California’s week-long outages.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
  329. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Every year Kathmandu valley sees a little over 100 cases of Cholera

    Colera is rare in California, but bubonic plague is a threat, and Leprosy Could Be The Next Public Health Crisis To Hit Los Angeles

  330. @CanSpeccy

    The power outages in California are new and mandated simply to prevent fires at the end of the dry season. And everyone in California is up in arms about it.

    The power outages in Kathmandu are done because the locals can’t figure out how to provide power for 24 hours a day. And in Nepal, that’s just life.

    As for basic health information …

    Life expectancy in Nepal is just a little over 70 years. In the U.S. it is over 78.

    Nepal’s infant mortality rate is 27.8 death per 1,000 births. In the U.S. it is 5.8.

    The U.S. stats are not impressive for a developed country, but most educated people already know that. Still, no one would ever confuse the situation with Nepal’s. Except you, Sulky.

  331. Davidcito says:

    Your Nepal numbers are inaccurate. You curate them from an “IQist” who heard them from someone else? Also, Ive spent years in latin america studying ancient and modern culture. A tiny fraction of a percent of them could write, though they never invented paper or books, most of their cultures did NOT ever invent a wheel, and a “5 story building with concrete” was more like a mud and rock hill with holes in the side. Keep in mind, europeans had alright built palaces and cathedrals at the time. Its laughable to compare the two. Also, colombia is not modern. The tourist areas somewhat are on par with some american inner cities, but were founded by and are ran by european spaniard white latinos. And no quotes from Murray or Flynn? IQ is paramount, and impoverished latin america is coming to a neighborhood near you. I hope no one paid you for this article.

  332. Factorize says:

    Time for a psychometric quiz:

    Question 1: Compare and contrast psychometric features of the two figures below. Also provide other psychometrically relevant comments evoked by the figures below.

    • Replies: @Factorize
  333. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Anon

    I’m not seeing anything Wavian or Shavian in your writing. Where’s The Loved IQ and Major CanSpeccy?

    Speaking of things Shavian, have you seen the 1938 film version of Pygmalion with Wendy Hiller as Eliza. Chosen for the role on the insistence of Shaw, it earned Hiller the first ever Oscar nomination for a British actress. In comparison with that performance, her Major Barbara (1940) was anticlimactic. Her son was a classmate of mine at school.

    • Replies: @Anon
  334. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Anon

    I’m not seeing anything Wavian or Shavian in your writing. Where’s The Loved IQ and Major CanSpeccy?

    Speaking of things Shavian, have you seen the 1938 film version of Pygmalion with Wendy Hiller as Eliza. Chosen for the role on the insistence of Shaw, it earned Hiller the first ever Oscar nomination for a British actress. In comparison with that performance, her Major Barbara (1940) was anticlimactic. Her son was a classmate of mine at school, not that I was aware of the fact — he used his father’ name, as did his mother, in private life.

    Wendy Hiller

  335. @restless94110

    Retard admits it didn’t get the joke, and then fails at trying to justify not getting an obvious right-in-your-face joke that wasn’t about “science” nor anything else but how stupid retard is.

  336. Anon[314] • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    In parts only, but they were good parts, so it’s as least as good as the famous curate’s egg. Much prefer it to My Fair Lady. One of these days I’ll have to see it properly.

    In comparison with that performance, her Major Barbara (1940) was anticlimactic.

    To be fair, there was a war on…

    he used his father’ name, as did his mother, in private life.

    Wise.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  337. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Anon

    Beside the war, the problem with Major Barbara is that it is too political. Shaw, it seems to me, was close to being an idiot savant. His political ideas, which he insisted on inserting into his plays–for example in Pygmalion, in the appalling and tedious character of Eliza’s father–were both crackpot and thoroughly evil. Yet he had a Tolstoyan gift for creating compelling scenes of human interaction.

    • Replies: @Anon
  338. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Pincher Martin

    Informed IQ-ists know that IQ is a crude measure…

    Are intelligence tests really “a crude measure?” Depends on which test and which measure you are referring to. But if someone gets a perfect score on the SAT Math, then you can be sure they have exceptional knowledge of, and facility in use of, numbers. We can say, therefore, that in such cases the intelligence test provides something much better than a “crude measure” of a particular form of intelligence. In particular, it indicates, with high probability, the intelligence necessary to succeed in, for example, completion of university level courses in math, physics, or other subjects highly dependent on quantitative analysis.

    The tests have a rough value for the individual … When looking at individual IQ scores, we simply have no way of judging which test-takers who score high will be geniuses, failures …

    But that is not what the tests are about. Genius is a matter of creativity. The SAT test, Math or Verbal, are not tests of creativity, neither are any of the general IQ tests.

    Moreover, creativity — itself a complex characteristic with many facets — is just one of many aspects of intelligence that intelligence tests do not test. That would not be a problem if it were generally acknowledged. But instead the IQ-ists propagate the misconception that intelligence is just one thing, namely g, or general intelligence, underlying all aspects of thought and action.

    From that premise it follows that the result of a broad-ranging IQ test provides a reliable measure of this underlying determinant of every manifestation of intelligence, and hence of all the abilities that IQ tests do not test: from visual creativity to musicality, to the insights of a productive scientist, to the judgement of a battlefield commander, to the hand to eye coordination of a sculptor, and to the position and strategic awareness of the soccer player.

    But g is hoax. It’s existence is based on the observed correlations among separate cognitive capacities. Such correlations, however, are trivial. On average, performance on particular components of an IQ account for less than 10% of the variation in performance on other components of an IQ test. Such correlations can be explained wholly or in part as the result of the common substrate of cognition, i.e., neurons, mitachondria, heart, liver and lungs. So effects of mitachondrial efficiency, or the supply of oxygen to the brain via the cardiovascular system, for example, will influence overall mental performance. But different cognitive functions depend on different components of the brain and these distinct functional modules each have their own genetic determinants and are each subject to specific types of experiential input.

    So no, IQ tests do not measure general intelligence because there is no such thing as general intelligence. The human mind is in fact a congeries of independent cognitive systems the intelligence of which is subject to independent variation. Moreover, intelligence is not a static, determined at birth feature of mind, but something that develops throughout life according to physical environment, cultural environment, and education.

  339. Jensen actually noted that low IQ didn’t seem to stop a black boy socialising well. He had scored the boy very low, perhaps 70 or below but then saw him with playmates, all of whose names he knew, interacting well with them etc. So he tested the boy again and yes, his first score was accurate.

    It seems that IQ is not quite the indicator of ability in certain areas of life at least as has been thought.

    As regards populations with low mean IQs building multi-storey structures and organising societies: in these populations there will be intelligent people , just not as many of them as a percentage of the whole.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  340. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Tim Heydon

    As regards populations with low mean IQs building multi-storey structures and organising societies: in these populations there will be intelligent people , just not as many of them as a percentage of the whole.

    And their low mean IQ and the scarcity of people of high IQ may not hold them back. After all, it did not hold back the US of A at the beginning of the last century when the population mean IQ, by today’s standard, was not much different from that of today’s Nepalese population.

    Indeed, given the trends one sees in American society today, one has to wonder whether a high mean IQ could be an indicator of impending social collapse.

  341. @CanSpeccy

    Are intelligence tests really “a crude measure?” Depends on which test and which measure you are referring to. But if someone gets a perfect score on the SAT Math, then you can be sure they have exceptional knowledge of, and facility in use of, numbers. We can say, therefore, that in such cases the intelligence test provides something much better than a “crude measure” of a particular form of intelligence. In particular, it indicates, with high probability, the intelligence necessary to succeed in, for example, completion of university level courses in math, physics, or other subjects highly dependent on quantitative analysis.

    But that’s a crude analysis.

    What an 800 on the math section of the SAT can’t tell us is whether that person is the next Carl Gauss or Terence Tao. It can’t even tell us whether he will major in STEM in college. Or if he’s interested in STEM.

    And if we discover this student is interested in math, his facility at higher math still needs to be tested. A lot of people who go into math at the better schools get 800s on the math section of the SAT. They don’t all go on to much greater things in the subject. The average SAT scores in math for ALL accepted students at the top schools, no matter what their declared major, are in the mid-700s. I would be surprised if there were more than a handful of undergrad math majors who didn’t score an 800 in any of the math departments at the top ten to fifteen U.S. universities.

    But even with that likely information, what’s the difference in math ability between a guy who scores 780 on the math section and someone who scores an 800 on the same test?

    Probably nothing. It’s certainly possible that the fellow who scores 780 or even lower has a greater aptitude for pure mathematics than the fellow who scores 800.

    Like I said, IQ tests (and their proxies, like the SAT) are a crude measure. They aren’t crystal balls or astrological charts. They are rough measures that are used because they have great value if used properly.

  342. @CanSpeccy

    But that is not what the tests are about. Genius is a matter of creativity. The SAT test, Math or Verbal, are not tests of creativity, neither are any of the general IQ tests.

    No one claims IQ tests measure creative genius. The flip side of that argument, however, is whether creative people do well on IQ tests – and to the degree we can reach a consensus on what is creative genius, I think that’s true.

    I occasionally like these discussions with people who share some commonalities in discernment with me, but once we get into these areas which aren’t quantifiable and testable, we enter an area which is just a matter of taste and opinion.

    There are people who think Alice Walker is a genius. I disagree. There are people who believe John Cage was a genius. I disagree. There are people who think Andy Warhol was a genius. I disagree.

    I don’t believe any of these people were even that creative except in how far they were willing to push the legends of their own geniuses. They were productive self-promoters.

    If we could narrow down this question of creativity to those people in which there’s wide and enduring agreement as to their accomplishments, I think we’ll find that most of them would’ve done quite well on IQ tests. That doesn’t mean IQ tests measure creative genius; it just means that creative geniuses are pretty smart.

  343. @CanSpeccy

    But g is hoax. It’s existence is based on the observed correlations among separate cognitive capacities…. So no, IQ tests do not measure general intelligence because there is no such thing as general intelligence.

    Well, you’re just wrong here.

  344. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    Well, you’re just wrong here.

    Says you. LOL.

    Let us know when you figured out an argument for the existence of g.

    Meantime, for those interested, below is a correlation matrix showing how one cognitive test result corresponds with another. You’ll see that most values of r, the correlation coefficient, are zero point one, to zero point three or four. To get the percentage of variation in y determined by variation in x, you need the coefficient of determination which has the value of r squared. So between no more than 1 and 25% of the variation in y is attributable to variation in x.

    https://canspeccy.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-uses-and-abuses-of-iq-testing-and.html

    So much for g.

    • Replies: @AaronB
    , @Pincher Martin
  345. Pls says:
    @johnm33

    >Thus age at menarche should be a reliable proxy for iq levels in a population.

    It’s not.

    The key fact is that while AGE at menarch varies all over the place,
    BODY WEIGHT at menarche is nearly constant.

  346. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    25% is an incredibly high number, fully justifying thinking of g as just shorthand for intelligence.

    Ask res. He’ll explain it to you, you just don’t understand

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  347. @CanSpeccy

    Meantime, for those interested, below is a correlation matrix showing how one cognitive test result corresponds with another. You’ll see that most values of r, the correlation coefficient, are zero point one, to zero point three or four.

    zero point one = a small correlation.

    zero point three = a modest correlation.

    The fact they’re all positively correlated is what matters. And it doesn’t have to be that way.

    Recognizing sound patterns, for example, could be negatively correlated to picture recognition. Being good at one might make you bad at the other. But it doesn’t.

    And what you say in your blog about the Darwinian view of intelligence is just made-up horseshit.

  348. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @AaronB

    25% is an incredibly high number

    Are you joking?

    Anyhow, I said 1 to 25%. In fact the mean r squared value is less than 10%.

    • Replies: @AaronB
  349. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    And what you say in your blog about the Darwinian view of intelligence is just made-up horseshit.

    LOL. Like all your pronouncements, a conclusion without an argument.

    But after more than 50 years beneath the briney, what can one expect from a sodden piece of dreck but sour, nonsensical gurglings.

    The fact they’re all positively correlated is what matters.

    What kind of a argument is that. I’ve already explained why one would expect some correlation if only because things like nutrition, cardiovascular health, infectious disease, insomnia and many other things will affect the functioning of the entire brain, just as it will affect the functioning of most if not all other organs. Such minor and general effects will result in a general but normally trivial correlation among cognitive capacities.

    Recognizing sound patterns, for example, could be negatively correlated to picture recognition.

    Yes, could be, might be, but why should it be? You don’t know, can’t think, and anyway it isn’t, so really it’s just more meaningless gurgling. Here is the correlation matrix for those who think that IQ reflects ability across the board. As can be seen, it doesn’t.

    • Replies: @Pincher Martin
    , @res
  350. AaronB says:
    @CanSpeccy

    I am joking, yes.

    I had an exchange once with res where he agreed g explains less than half of variance, but insisted that this is huge and justifies g being shorthand for intelligence. It was quite amusing.

    I think that was when I stopped arguing about IQ. IQists are like the Black Knight (?) in the Monty Python the Holy Grail…

    • Replies: @res
  351. @CanSpeccy

    LOL. Like all your pronouncements, a conclusion without an argument.

    Well, that was a throwaway line to my general comment and not really pertinent to it. I just noticed in your blog that you talk a lot of crap about the Darwinian view of intelligence without actually citing any Darwinians, and I thought I would make note of it.

    That’s all. Just grist for future discussions.

    What kind of a argument is that. I’ve already explained why one would expect some correlation if only because things like nutrition, cardiovascular health, infectious disease, insomnia and many other things will affect the functioning of the entire brain, just as it will affect the functioning of most if not all other organs. Such minor and general effects will result in a general but normally trivial correlation among cognitive capacities.

    Yes, I read your explanation. And I laughed. There’s zero evidence that the kids in the developed world who being tested are suffering environmental neglect that corresponds to the correlations we see. Where’s the physical evidence for that?

    This is science. You need more than just a plausible idea.

    Besides, it doesn’t really sit well with the rest of your argument, which is that the various correlations are all over the place. So are the correlations meaningful and in need of a physical explanation like the lack of nutrition or heart disease? Or are they not meaningful because g doesn’t exist?

    Like most people who can’t stand the idea of some science, whether it’s evolution or the heliocentric view of the solar system, you are throwing as many criticisms as you can against psychometrics in the hope that something sticks.

    Yes, could be, might be, but why should it be?

    In and of itself, there’s no reason to make a big deal out of a single positive correlation. But when you combine it with every other measurement on your table, it’s hard to dispute.

    Most of the intelligent critics of g who I’ve read just claim it’s a statistical artifact of test construction, which sounds quite plausible. But when I ask them, “Okay, then make a test with all those factors and show there are multiple negative correlations,” I don’t get any takers. So it must not be as simple as just test construction or it would be easy to make a bunch of IQ tests which show negative correlations all over the board.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @CanSpeccy
  352. CanSpeccy says:
    @Pincher Martin

    I am joking, yes.

    Phew! I was worried for a moment. Thought maybe I was really missing something. I guess dead-pan is more difficult to be sure of over the Internet.

  353. res says:
    @AaronB

    I had an exchange once with res where he agreed g explains less than half of variance, but insisted that this is huge and justifies g being shorthand for intelligence. It was quite amusing.

    You have obviously spent no time doing numerical analysis of multiple variables if you think explaining 50% of variance is not a big deal. For reference, in the bivariate case explaining 50% of variance corresponds to a correlation of 0.7.

    I think that was when I stopped arguing about IQ.

    Yes, we can see quite clearly how you have stopped arguing about IQ. If only.

  354. CanSpeccy says:
    @Pincher Martin

    Most of the intelligent critics of g who I’ve read just claim it’s a statistical artifact of test construction, which sounds quite plausible.

    Yeah, well I didn’t say it and I see no reason why such a claim would be true. Sounds to me, not intelligent, but nuts.

    The effect you are calling evidence of g is trivial and it’s inconsequentiality is proved by the discrepancy between the modest IQ test scores of people such as Feynman, Shockley, Alvarez and J.D. Watson, and their revolutionary scientific achievements.

    But to a sodden IQ-ist, such discrepancies are apparently insufficient to raise the slightest question about the IQ-ist narrative.

  355. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Let’s follow up on that graphic a bit. You referenced it in
    https://canspeccy.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-uses-and-abuses-of-iq-testing-and.html
    and further linked to
    http://humanvarieties.org/2013/04/03/is-psychometric-g-a-myth/

    Following up on that page, we see this graphic for a 10 factor model of that data:

    Along with this explanatory text:

    Loadings on the g factor range from a low of 0.279 (Visual Closure) to a high of 0.783 (Applied Problems). The g factor accounts for 59 percent of the common factor variance, while the other nine factors together account for 41 percent. This is a routine finding in factor analyses of IQ tests: the g factor explains more variance than the other factors put together.

    In particular, notice how steep the falloff in %CCV is from the first factor (g, 59.33%) to the second factor (7.70%).

    For reference, the data in that graphic is from Table X-5 in
    http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Carroll2003.pdf
    There is a more nicely formatted version (the graphic above) at Libgen under DOI 10.1016/B978-008043793-4/50036-2

    I find it interesting that the g loadings for each subtest tend to be larger than the inter-test correlations. In other words, the subtests tend to resemble g more than they resemble each other. This is probably why Canspeccy only presents the intercorrelation matrix here.

  356. The effect you are calling evidence of g is trivial and it’s inconsequentiality is proved by the discrepancy between the modest IQ test scores of people such as Feynman, Shockley, Alvarez and J.D. Watson, and their revolutionary scientific achievements.

    Shockley and Watson would disagree with you about the scientific importance of IQ.

    Only Feynman would probably be on your side. (I have no idea about Alvarez’s views on IQ.)

    Yeah, well I didn’t say it and I see no reason why such a claim would be true. Sounds to me, not intelligent, but nuts.

    Tell me how “nuts” and unintelligent this reads.

  357. Anon[314] • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Shaw’s political genius (I agree, not a good genius) was, I think, the impetus behind much of his work. We owe to it the wonderful scenes which too much direct impingement of that sort of spirit would have destroyed– and sometimes did destroy.

    I’m reminded of Kipling, one of my favorite poets and story-writers, whose material, often “ripped from the headlines”, so to speak, has in some cases grown very stale. On the other hand, some of the political poems of the moment –“Gehazi”, for instance– are still very good reading.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  358. Ian Smith says:
    @iffen

    They were American citizens, in a country with a large land border with our own country. I’d say that deserves more attention than Israel and Iran snarling at each other on the other side of the world.

  359. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Anon

    Shaw’s political genius (I agree, not a good genius) was, I think, the impetus behind much of his work.

    Yes, an instructive approach to understanding an author’s work. And to understanding one’s own literary preferences. Or do one’s literary preferences shape one’s politics? In youth, to a large extent, they surely do, although with the passage of time, one makes, by the light of one’s experience, better choices. Then memory begins to fade and it is possible to re-read one’s favorites, Boswell, Macaulay, Waugh, Muggeridge, Rex Stout with as much enjoyment as on first acquaintance.

  360. Factorize says:
    @Factorize

    Developing a psychometric sensibility can provide profound insight into the world around us.

    Consider the top figure in this post’s parent. From a psychometric perspective, one would note that there is a near absence of g density. Indeed the farm animals and other features of nature present are significantly contributing to the totality of intelligence in the environment. When one scrutinizes the scene carefully, it is difficult to find much evidence of high end g. After about a week of touring the bridges and buildings, one might want to explore the region more fully in order to search for whatever high level g might exist. In a rural setting such as this with a population of perhaps 1,000, there might be a few people with IQs over 130. In this environment, there is a harmony with nature and human nature that almost compels people to interact with others in a friendly, human centered way.

    Now consider the bottom figure from the previous post. The downtown core of the city is saturated with g. Farm animals and nature have been entirely relegated to the margins of human consciousness. It would be difficult not to find evidence of very high g throughout this environment. The technology present is overwhelmingly fascinating to me and would completely displace my perception of the social landscape. People have created a built environment in which human scale has been overturned. In a modern city of 30 million people, there would be millions of people with high end g and the community becomes organized by intelligence. While in the previous rural scene a people’s uprising against the elite does have plausibility, in the context of modern urban reality such a revolt is far less intuitive: the environment that has been created is so extremely complex that the very intelligent people who created it are needed to maintain it.

    Beyond the largely pointless arguments, psychometrics can be seen instead as an integral part of our life and as an important tool to make our lives better if we apply these insights wisely.

  361. Sya says:

    Straight outta 1890 Yiddish ghetto…..

    I’m Moroccan
    IQ 116

    Which isn’t something to brag about…..in the real world

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Fred Reed Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Not What Tom Jefferson Had in Mind
Sounds Like A Low-Ranked American University To Me
Very Long, Will Bore Hell Out Of Most People, But I Felt Like Doing It
It's Not A Job. It's An Adventure.
Cloudy, With Possible Tidal Wave