The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
"Global Ancestry and Cognitive Ability"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Here’s a brand new study of racial admixture and IQ scores. From Psych:

Global Ancestry and Cognitive Ability
Jordan Lasker, Bryan J. Pesta, John G. R. Fuerst and Emil O. W. Kirkegaard

* Correspondence: [email protected]

Received: 8 June 2019; Accepted: 28 August 2019; Published: 30 August 2019

Abstract: Using data from the Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort, we examined whether European ancestry predicted cognitive ability over and above both parental socioeconomic status (SES) and measures of eye, hair, and skin color. First, using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis, we verified that strict factorial invariance held between self-identified African and European-Americans. The differences between these groups, which were equivalent to 14.72 IQ points, were primarily (75.59%) due to difference in general cognitive ability (g), consistent with Spearman’s hypothesis. We found a relationship between European admixture and g. This relationship existed in samples of (a) self-identified monoracial African-Americans (B = 0.78, n = 2,179), (b) monoracial African and biracial African-European-Americans, with controls added for self-identified biracial status (B = 0.85, n = 2407), and (c) combined European, African-European, and African-American participants, with controls for self-identified race/ethnicity (B = 0.75, N = 7,273). Controlling for parental SES modestly attenuated these relationships whereas controlling for measures of skin, hair, and eye color did not. Next, we validated four sets of polygenic scores for educational attainment (eduPGS). MTAG, the multi-trait analysis of genome-wide association study (GWAS) eduPGS (based on 8442 overlapping variants) predicted g in both the monoracial African American (r = 0.111, n = 2179, p < 0.001), and the European-American (r = 0.227, n = 4914, p < 0.001) subsamples. We also found large race differences for the means of eduPGS (d = 1.89). Using the ancestry-adjusted association between MTAG eduPGS and g from the monoracial African-American sample as an estimate of the transracially unbiased validity of eduPGS (B = 0.124), the results suggest that as much as 20%–25% of the race difference in g can be naïvely explained by known cognitive ability-related variants. Moreover, path analysis showed that the eduPGS substantially mediated associations between cognitive ability and European ancestry in the African-American sample. Subtest differences, together with the effects of both ancestry and eduPGS, had near-identity with subtest g-loadings. This finding confirmed a Jensen effect acting on ancestry-related differences. Finally, we confirmed measurement invariance along the full range of European ancestry in the combined sample using local structural equation modeling. Results converge on genetics as a potential partial explanation for group mean differences in intelligence.

… The purpose of the present study is to conduct an admixture analysis capable of addressing the aforementioned problems with previous studies. We focus on African and European-Americans because the former represent a population substantially admixed with the latter. Generally, African-Americans have around 20% European DNA [37,59–62]. Provided that our African-American sample is sufficiently variable in terms of European admixture, we should be able to detect whether an association exists between cognitive ability and admixture from the two parent populations (i.e., Africans and Europeans) and, if so, to what degree genetic admixture mediates the observed mean difference between the groups. Moreover, if the samples are representative of their respective populations (and statistical power is sufficient), a finding of no association would indicate that an evolutionary-genetic explanation of the gap is unlikely [26,63].
The present work uses a population-representative Philadelphia-based sample, the Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort (PNC), otherwise known as the Trajectories of Complex Phenotypes study (TCP).

This is an amazing fairly new database of 9498 people from 8 to 21 years old in the Philadelphia area for which they have genetic data, cognitive test results, and much else, such as parents’ education levels. For 1000 folks, they even scanned their brains.

They’ve got self-identified race. This study looked at 5183 non-Hispanic whites, 3155 non-Hispanic blacks, and 242 non-Hispanic biracial white-blacks (by self-identification).

They’ve also got the genomes of the sample, so they can calculate genetic racial ancestry, which mostly lines up reasonably well with self-identified racial ancestry. Self-identified blacks averaged 19% white by genetic ancestry, self-identified biracials averaged 80% white, and self-identified whites averaged 98.6% white.

The whites’ IQ scores were set to 100. The biracials averaged 98 and the blacks 85.3 on a scale where the standard deviation was set to 15.

The IQ gap between whites and blacks is the same old same old one standard deviation. The gap between whites and biracials is only two points. If the 15 point gap between whites and blacks, who are about 80% black, is purely genetic in origin, then the gap between whites and biracials (who are 1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks) should be around 3.75 IQ points. Instead, it’s 2.0.

Did I do the arithmetic right? I’m falling asleep, so please put corrections for this and the rest in the comments.

It would be interesting to compare upbringings of biracials. Is there an IQ difference depending upon whether they are raised by the white or black parent?

They wound up with an r = 0.41 for the correlation of the general factor of intelligence and percent of genetic European ancestry:

However, as I’ve been pointing out since the early 2000s, there just aren’t all that many non-Hispanic Americans in the intermediate range between, say, 40% white and 90% white, due to the workings of the One Drop Rule. There are more than there used to be (we just elected one President), but we’re still not looking at a very satisfactory scatterplot.

The Missing Mulatto issue is that the American social system traditionally didn’t generate a lot of Malcolm Gladwell-looking people who are mostly white but a kind of a little bit black. As Gladwell explained in the last chapter of his 2008 book Outliers, middle-class mulatto Jamaicans (e.g., Kamala Harris’s economist dad) had to work really hard to keep their descendants’ genetics similar to their own.

In the U.S., the One Drop Rule tended to mean that descendants over the generations of mulattos tended to drift toward one pole or the other.

The correlation within the self-identified blacks between IQ and European ancestry is positive but quite small (r = 0.09). On the other hand, that correlation is large enough to account for 60% of the one standard deviation white-black gap because the standard deviation in European ancestry among self-identified whites is so small that the gap between whites and blacks in standard deviations is quite large.

So their estimate of roughly 60% genetic are in line with mainstream realist thinking over the last few decades.

They don’t have the looks of the sample, so, and this part is kind of wild, they calculated what it ought to be from a federal law enforcement algorithm for estimating skin color and the like from genes:

The data did not include measures of appearance, so we opted to impute these based on genotypes. We used the HIrisPlex-S web application to do this (https://hirisplex.erasmusmc.nl/). This application was developed by the U.S. Department of Justice for use in forensic investigations. It imputes skin, hair, and eye color probabilities with a high degree of accuracy based on 41 SNPs (with overlapping variants; 6 for eye color, 22 for hair color, and 36 for skin color). This tool has been validated on thousands of people from diverse regions of the world[79].

The goal is to distinguish between two explanations for the IQ gap. Black academics often argue that our society has a colorist bias that privileges fairer-colored blacks. Whites tend to have a hard time believing that, since it contradicts the One Drop Rule by which most whites categorize most blacks. If you could find people who, due to randomness, look blacker or whiter than their actual ancestries could predict, you might make some progress on answering this question.

One confounder of that could be high IQ all black immigrants from Africa:

Recent immigrants from Africa in the sample may have affected the scores reported here as migrants may have been selected for cognitive ability when they emigrated from their home countries. As such, we conducted a robustness test by rerunning the analyses excluding individuals with one percent or less European ancestry. This exclusion did not substantially affect the results (reported in the R notebook, Model 17b). Thus, confounding due to migration likely did not influence our findings.

Overall, they come up with results pretty similar to what scientific realists have been converging toward over the last several generations.

Here’s a good thread offering a quick first-day critique focusing on the “colorist” part of the paper:

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity, Science • Tags: IQ, Race and Iq 
Hide 304 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. dearieme says:

    “if the samples are representative of their respective populations”: that’s always a potential weak point of sampling. But there’s another that may be more important: did the ancestors of the mulattos studied comprise representative samples of their populations?

    For instance, might a plantation owner who shagged a slave girl be from a higher IQ family than the average white? Might the slave girl who caught his eye be from a higher IQ family than the average black?

    Maybe we should consult Tom Jefferson?

  2. Anon[591] • Disclaimer says:

    OT:

    This is really funny, Dave Chappelle in a recent extended riff on Jessie Smollett:

  3. Anon[591] • Disclaimer says:

    The IQ gap between whites and blacks is the same old same old one standard deviation. The gap between whites and biracials is only two points. If the 15 point gap between whites and blacks, who are about 80% black, is purely genetic in origin, then the gap between whites and biracials (who are 1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks) should be around 3.75 IQ points. Instead, it’s 2.0.

    I think your math is off here.

  4. Anon[591] • Disclaimer says:

    Rounding …

    African ancestry solves for an IQ of about 81 for a pure African ancestry black American.

    White is set at 100.

    For self-identified blacks: 0.8 x 81 + 0.2 x 100 = an IQ of 85.

    For mixed, on average: 0.2 x 81 + 0.8 x 100 = 96+, so your math is right on.

    That still is so close that it’s hard to put it on environment. You have the same problems as with the post-War German mixed kids, black American dads, white German women, where there are so many questions about whether the parents were typically smart for their group.

    In the case of this new study, you have a mixed population that has a considerably lower black admixture than blacks, so it’s recent admixture, not a century or three ago admixture. In such cases would the blacks who married whites tend to be … smarter than the average black? Dumber? Would the whites tend to be dumber? Jewish? Highly educated, unbigoted, and cosmopolitan? Uneducated trailer trash? You mention that education level is known for parents: without reading the study I wonder what else they know.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
  5. I highly doubt that by the year 2100 these differences will persist. I observe high levels of miscegenation , no matter where I go, Whether it is Colorado, New York or Southern California.
    Miscegenation seems to be at an all time high and I see more White women indulging in it. Moreover, the ((media)) depicts Heidi Klum, Kylie Jenner and Lindsey Vonn in such a positive light that it seems that this is the pinnacle of what a White woman can achieve.
    Statistically, white men are more likely to indulge in miscegenation but the empirical evidence seems to indicate otherwise.
    Mr. Rushton’s studies are a must read.

  6. JimB says:
    @Steve Sailer

    .75 x 100 + .25 * 85 = 96.25. Delta = 3.75

    (Shrug)

  7. Realist says:

    The IQ gap between whites and blacks is the same old same old one standard deviation. The gap between whites and biracials is only two points. If the 15 point gap between whites and blacks, who are about 80% black, is purely genetic in origin, then the gap between whites and biracials (who are 1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks) should be around 3.75 IQ points. Instead, it’s 2.0.

    This is a new one to me. The data I have seen in the past is blacks (no white admixture); average IQ=70 and black/white admixture; average IQ=85. This of course does not take into account the per cent of admixture. The data appears to assume, on average, and admixture of 50%

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  8. Bruno says:

    If 98,6% white = 100
    81% black and 19% white = 85

    Then
    1% white is 0.986 IQ points
    1% black is 0.818 points (as white is the référence score)

    So a 80% white and 20% black should be 78.88 + 16.36 = 95.24.

    So for the biracials who are one fifth (not one fourth) black the gap should be even more : 4.75 points with whites.

    • Replies: @Bruno
  9. Bruno says:
    @Bruno

    If you affect all 100 IQ points to whiteness, then it would give each white % 1,014 IQ points and would reduce the expected gap to around 3,5 points.

    • Replies: @Bruno
  10. Bruno says:
    @Bruno

    And if you simplify, stating the white norm is for 100% white, so each % is 1 IQ points, then the expected difference would be slightly above 4.

    —-> in all three cases it means whiteness would be environementally helpful I suppose (because diluted blackness does less harm)

  11. Tiny Duck says:
    @Anon

    Punching down is never funny. Only a moron wound find this “joke” amusing.

    If they are right (despite method problems like like self-reported ethnicity), then 20-25% of intelligence may be genetic. It is important to do everything we can to maximize the remaining 75-80%, right?

    Charles Murray build a career trying to defund the social welfare

    It’s an awful paper. It’s very clear there wasn’t anyone trained in genetics on the author list

    the hereditarian thesis is empirically untenable

    https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/07/why-is-charles-murray-odious

    There are dozens, if not hundreds, of scientific articles that shred Murray. That you seem unaware of them is troubling

    why does Murray only cite charlatans and non-scientists who publish in pseudojournals, yet pretend to be astonished when people call him a white supremacist?

    • LOL: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Faraday's Bobcat
  12. Anon[591] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Apologies, you were right: Did my followup comment disappear? Briefly, my middle school algebra determined that an unadmixed black American would have an average IQ of 81, and a typical mixed race American with one-fifth African would have an IQ of a little north of 96, as you said. But I gave some reasons why I wouldn’t read too much into the higher IQ found in the mixed group.

    OT

    via Philip Greenspun
    https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2019/09/04/low-fertility-among-middle-class-whites-explained/

    A new fertility study in a forthcoming paper:

    Here’s a nice graph from the paper, and others are posting additional graphs in the comments. They used a statistics trick worthy of La Griffe du Lion to figure out fertility rates, which weren’t readily available. The graph from the paper shows fertility rate white vs. non-white by income, and the second shows percentage of population by income band. Whites are only at replacement level (2.1) at incomes below $25,000, and nonwhites are well above replacement level at the same income. The 1 percent are at replacement level, and the non-white top 5 percent or so are at or above replacement level.

  13. Anon[591] • Disclaimer says:
    @dearieme

    For instance, might a plantation owner who shagged a slave girl be from a higher IQ family than the average white? Might the slave girl who caught his eye be from a higher IQ family than the average black?

    Exactly. The house slaves would at least not be the dumbest, just as WWII black soldiers in Germany would have been above average simply because of the military’s test that disqualified half of blacks from service.

    But that era’s genertic contribution is probably pretty well distributed among all U.S. blacks by now. The question is are blacks who contributed to the one-fifth of the ancestry of the average mixed race person, which would have happened in the 20th century, representative of U.S. blacks, or dumber, or smarter. You have Malcolm Gladwell’s mom, John McWhorter, and many other examples of blacks in recent mixed marriages who are smarter than the norm by far. But you see the other end of the scale also, the dull-witted mixed couple barely managing to survive.

    • Replies: @Lloyd1927
  14. Black academics often argue that our society has a colorist bias that privileges fairer-colored blacks.

    I think it’s a more case of blacks themselves having a bias in favor of fair-skinned mulattoes. In most cases, the whites don’t seem to care much one way or the other. As you noted, because of the one-drop rule, they’re all black to us.

  15. Nope says:
    @dearieme

    It occurs to me that the darkest outcome of this kind of research would be the discovery that the african admixture in American blacks was genetically predisposed to be less intelligent than their counterparts in africa. That would be a ‘legacy of slavery’ that would actually be terribly disabling and permanent.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
  16. There are some of Malcolm Gladwell lookalikes in Louisiana they could measure. Also shrinking percentages them scattered across the gulf coasts of Texas, Mississippi and Alabama too.

    A lot of Creoles are either getting absorbed by either whites or blacks as time goes on.

  17. @Steve Sailer

    I doubt the admixture effect on IQ is linear. It would be interesting to see the study’s curve of admixture vs IQ.

  18. There is already a *mountain* of evidence that come to the same conclusion. Has that shifted the debate even an inch? Not that I can see.

    While I welcome science for science’s sake, I think we have to come to terms with the reality that some facts are simply unwelcome and no amount of evidence-gathering will change that. Doesn’t mean we should stop gather evidence, but I am long past the delusion thinking that the cultural/social impasse is due to “misunderstanding” or “lack of knowledge”. The suppression of this research is intentional and will only increase if there is ever a sense of the status quo letting up. See Angela Saini’s promotion through the media and how Watson was demonised. The fact that Warson has a Nobel prize and Saini is an amateur only good at hurling invective is of no consequence. This isn’t about merit. It is about political outcomes.

    What I’m saying is that we are no longer at the point where science can help us. Social forces, cultural warrior, need to pick up the battle axe. They should have done so yesterday.

    • Replies: @Trond Andresen
  19. Svevlad says:

    There’s one thing I’m interested in: someone should do a study to see the cognitive difference between a WMBF mixed-race man and a BMWF one. I have a suspicion that the WMBF ones are smarter than the BMWF…

  20. The Z Blog says: • Website
    @dearieme

    Well, we can probably guess. Ed Dutton has looked at this in Finland. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3n63oLKp-g

    In America, black women are at the very bottom of the sexual status hierarchy. Therefore, the most likely source of European genetics is from low status whites.

    As Steve pointed out, the mixed race people in the sample were 80% European on average. My guess is that sample is not very good, as it includes a number of people with one non-white ancestor more than three generations ago.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  21. OFF TOPIC from usni.org —

    Funds for Navy Repair Facilities, European Defense Initiative Shifted to Border Wall

    By: Sam LaGrone

    September 4, 2019 6:57 PM • Updated: September 4, 2019 10:34 PM

    Navy repair facilities in Virginia and Washington State, planned port improvements for U.S. ships in Spain and a new treatment center for working dogs in Guantanamo Bay are among the military construction projects that will have their funds rerouted to build $3.6 billion in barriers along the U.S.-Mexico border.

    On Tuesday, Secretary of the Defense Mark Esper presented Congress a list of 127 military construction projects at U.S. and overseas bases that would have funding deferred to build additional border barriers.

    Esper “has determined that such construction projects are necessary to support the use of the armed forces, and, therefore, DOD will undertake 11 border barrier military construction projects on the southern border pursuant to section 2808 of Title X, U.S. Code,” according to Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman.

    The funds will be transferred to the Army Corps of Engineers, which will oversee the construction of a total of 175 miles of border barriers.

    🙂

  22. anon[414] • Disclaimer says:

    What I got out of it is we have been changed to European American, rather than American. Africans had never wanted to be Americans and wanted that distinction. Just like they never wanted to be drafted for a white man’s war because they after all aren’t American. Only whites could be drafted until Vietnam, right around the time of Civil Rights. They didn’t call themselves African Americans until later. The left always believes if they are treating whites the way blacks or other people of color whites will have empathy for them, except their facts about all aspects of history and individuals history is always wrong.

    • Replies: @Don't Look at Me
  23. res says:

    Emil’s blog post about this paper.
    https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/?p=7995

    Any idea what is going on with all of the “biracial” subjects right around 100% European ancestry?

    Some thoughts about the smaller gap for biracial subjects than one would expect based on the genetic admixture.
    – Perhaps smarter blacks ended up mixing more with whites?
    – Arguably “biracial” is a more sophisticated notion than white vs. black (especially the gyrations necessary to translate ~100% European to biracial ; ). Is it possible higher IQ individuals are more likely to identify as biracial? I think the fairly large coefficients for SIRE:EA (SIRE:AA is almost the same as the base case of European) in Table 7 support this idea.

    The paper authors propose the second idea.

    Comparing Model 2 and Model 3b, biracial status had a significant effect independent of European ancestry. This could be due to selective patterns of self-identification, whereby choosing to report that one is a European-American, regardless of one’s genetic ancestry, is associated with greater cognitive ability. This appears to have been the case as evidenced by Figure 3, which shows the relationship between European ancestry and cognitive ability. Being above the regression line was associated with a greater likelihood of biracial African-European self-identification regardless of one’s actual ancestry.

  24. Alfa158 says:

    I wonder what the socioeconomic break down is of the test subjects. Are the test subjects likely to be more successful? I can see where it is possible that Blacks from the upper end of the bell curve, who are more likely to be educated and successful, would be more likely to interact with Whites and intermarry. Here in my particularly affluent Whitopia by the Sea there are only two Black people living in the general neighborhood, and they are educated professionals married to White women. That might explain why Black/White biracial people are closer to the White average of 100. Their parents are self selected for higher intelligence and are likely raising them in better environments.

    What about filtering for socioeconomic achievement? The standard trope is that White women having biracial babies are from the loser end of the spectrum. Is that really valid and therefore you would see a bigger biracial gap if you did that?

    How much self selection is involved in this study? Frankly I don’t see how people willing to participate in a study like this that involved overs IQ and DNA testing aren’t a self-selecting sample.

    In any event you have to congratulate the researchers for their courage in publishing a study with these results.

    • Replies: @Lurker
  25. istevefan says:

    The IQ gap between whites and blacks is the same old same old one standard deviation. The gap between whites and biracials is only two points. If the 15 point gap between whites and blacks, who are about 80% black, is purely genetic in origin, then the gap between whites and biracials (who are 1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks) should be around 3.75 IQ points. Instead, it’s 2.0.

    In a previous post you were trying to predict the next big thing that will follow the tranny issue. Maybe the answer to your question is in the above passage. Despite the untold billions or trillions spent over the past 50 years, the Gap remains. However, it appears from the above passage that the Gap can be narrowed dramatically by another way.

  26. @Steve Sailer

    If the black parent has 80% black ancestry than their child with a white parent would have around 40% black ancestry… “1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks” would be 20%.

    It’s a pretty surprising result tbh. It was pretty obvious that biracials would be shifted a bit more towards the white mean but 2 points difference is interesting. I’m pretty sure I have seen similar results elsewhere(UK and Germany IIRC) with a slightly larger gap but still shifted more towards the white mean.

  27. cmpx says:

    “The Missing Mulatto issue is that the American social system traditionally didn’t generate a lot of Malcolm Gladwell-looking people who are mostly white but a kind of a little bit black.”

    I think that is changing. Where I live outside Nashville I see increasing numbers of these types, mostly in their early 20s or younger. Like yesterday at O’Reilly’s I saw a cashier who looked almost totally white, except for something relatively subtle in his facial features that betrayed his admixture. He had a super black name like Quadarious or something.

    Or I’ve seen older black women at the grocery store with what look to be their grandkids, and the kids look almost white.

  28. Farenheit says:

    It looks like keeping your groups IQ 1 SD below another groups takes some serious effort. Looks like any kind of intermarriage washes out the 1 SD difference fairly quickly.

    I’d be curious to know if these results holds true in societies that have massive numbers of whites, blacks and mixed race. Perhaps replicating this study in Brazil would solidify these findings.

  29. Whiskey says: • Website

    Forbidding White people to have sex with each other and potentially kids unless they are gay or lesbian has already been proposed.

    It will be law under President Warren.

    • Replies: @Oddsbodkins
  30. @Steve Sailer

    But, you read their chart right… the mean percentage of European ancestry for self declared biracials was 79.6%… which is twice what you’d expect.

  31. BB753 says:

    Is there such a thing as an unadmixed African American, barring the Gullahs and recent African immigrants?
    Could the fact that Africans are heavily mixed with Whites and Amerindians explain the good IQ results of biracial Americans? Not to mention the preselection factor: Blacks who father Mulattoes would be smarter and less African to start with.

  32. @Anon

    Where does the 1/4 figure come from?

    • Replies: @Anon
  33. dc.sunsets [AKA "Astonished"] says:

    If 40% of the gap is NOT genetic, then by my math if “we” “invest” 250% of what we spend on white people’s development into black people’s development then equality should result, right?

    Or “we” could simply stop investing anything at all in white people’s development, a la This Perfect Day logic, right?

    Political policies begin to make much more sense now.

  34. eah says:

    OT

    link –> There is no “leaky pipeline” in the STEM bachelor to Ph.D. anymore in the U.S., meaning that men and women drop off at same rates on the academic trajectory from bachelor to Ph.D

  35. Alfa158 says:
    @Steve Sailer

    I think he is questioning the validity of doing a linear interpolation rather than the arithmetic itself.
    1. The IQ results need to be adjusted for the environmental effects on IQ.
    2. Without knowing the exact effects of which genes effect IQ and how, it is tough to say that making someone x% more White raises their IQ by y%.
    3. Even if there is a purely linear correlation between racial mixtures and IQ, you still need a baseline for pure Africans who are not self-selected by emigration to the US, and somehow grew up in the same developmental environment as average Whites.
    Africans in Africa supposedly average an IQ of around 70. What would it be if they were pulled randomly into the US as infants and raised here? No one knows. Let’s assume it would 80. Then if the relationship was linear, mixing them to same 20% average White level as African-Americans would give you an average IQ figure of 84. IF all that is true it kind of fits but:
    It still doesn’t include environmental effects.
    If those 20% Whites interbred with Whites their offspring would be 60% White and you would expect an average IQ of 92 instead of 98.
    We are starting to get some insights, and know there is a strong genetic component to intelligence, and that there is a racial correlation. This study is further confirmation, although the researchers would be unemployed fools to say so bluntly. With a ton more genetic research we can start making more precise predictions of exactly how genetics affect cognitive ability.

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
  36. @dearieme

    For instance, might a plantation owner who shagged a slave girl be from a higher IQ family than the average white? Might the slave girl who caught his eye be from a higher IQ family than the average black?

    I think you are likely right about some mulattoes, at least older mulatto families, being mixed with higher caste whites. The current group is likely the opposite.

    The thing that is often missed, and I think Steve missed it in a recent article he wrote about the competing influences of men like Andrew Jackson and John C. Calhoun in the South, is that the average white Southerner was often no better than a serf himself. Lower class white women probably consorted with upper class white men more than black women, and are more likely to carry the genes of men like Jefferson, though the average plantation owner was no Jefferson, and was more of a local big man.

  37. @Alfa158

    It is generally assumed that both environmental and genetic factors influence intelligence.

    Environmental factors could be whether the mother drinks or takes drugs during pregnancy. It could mean whether a kid is exposed to lead or other heavy metals. It could mean if the parents are together. It could mean if the kid reads a lot or not. It could be the level of parental involvement in the kid’s development. It could be if the kid gets beaten up for studying.

    What irks me is that the assumption among the great and good is that all of the black/white gap could be narrowed by somehow magically fixing the schools. Except that rarely if ever works.

    If every black kid were given birth by a white middle class surrogate mother, then raised by a white middle class family, perhaps we could see exactly what the genetic differences are.

  38. Joe James says:

    Are the results linear or does IQ start to increase at a greater rate at a point where you’d anticipate blacks become more white looking or having one parent of a “white” culture?

  39. anon[992] • Disclaimer says:

    It will be interesting to see how the universities respond to the predictable outrage.

  40. I am a bit fascinated with a number of mixed-race societies in this country. Some are, or at least used to be, isolated cultures, such as the tri-racial isolates, most notably the Lumbee and the Jackson Whites. Others, both bi-racial and tri-racial, are found in areas where the various races congregate, but these groups often intermarry.

    The most famous example of this group being the New Orleans Creoles. The light skinned blacks who lived in New Orleans for a long time, tending to intermarry neither with dark skinned blacks nor whites. The famous paper bag test came from this group.

    There were other examples in the old Indian Territory in what is now eastern Oklahoma, although the light skinned Indians would often intermarry with whites, producing even lighter skinned Indians. These groups still exist. I have heard stories from Indians about paper bag tests among light skinned Indians.

    One reason the light-skinned mestizo population would intermarry was because of college. Go back in time to the early 1900s. At that time, few whites and almost pure Indians went to college. However, in the Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma, it was extremely common for light skinned Indians to attend college. People often found their mates in college, which was a way for light skinned Indians to meet other light skinned Indians.

    Consider my grandparents. My grandmother was a light skinned Indian from the former Indian Territory. She was a descendant of prominent Cherokee chiefs, as well as some white traders and plantation owners. Her family was not rich, having lost everything in the War. My grandfather’s family also lost everything in the War, but his father was a self-made businessman, and was doing OK. My grandfather was NOT from the old IT, and his Cherokee ancestry was of the Elizabeth Warren variety. Meaning, there were family stories, but no actual proof. My grandmother, of course, had the pick of all the finest sororities. My grandfather, being well-to-do but not Indian, had trouble getting into a fraternity, but made the grade.

    So even when folks who were not of the elite light-skinned white/Indian mix got into college, they had trouble getting into the right frats and sororities.

    This way, the light skinned mix race kids would either meet their mates in town in the former Indian Territory, or they would meet their mates at OU, especially at the frat parties and the like. Thus, the community was preserved.

    • Replies: @Faraday's Bobcat
  41. eggplant says:

    There is bound to be a difference whether the mother is African-American and the father White. I would expect the IQ’s of those children to be higher than the reverse – ie White mother and African-American father. The same for biracial children raised by White grandparents/relatives.

  42. “Global ancestry” sounds like the spawn of Tiger Woods and Rae Dawn Chong.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  43. Kronos says:
    @Paleo Liberal

    “What irks me is that the assumption among the great and good is that all of the black/white gap could be narrowed by somehow magically fixing the schools. Except that rarely if ever works.”

    Hey it’s good money. I’ve been around family friends who made it big in school administration. Very generous pension and healthcare plan. (Though I’m fairly certain the Gen Xers and Millennial teachers will never collect.)

    “Total expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools in the United States in 2015–16 amounted to $706 billion, or $13,847 per public school student enrolled in the fall (in constant 2017–18 dollars).”

    https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=66

    Keep in mind where “the great and good” physically reside. Both LA and New York still have a very high (and violent) black population. Politically, they’ll keep running such programs/research until either the problem is solved (closed the gap) or a major political upheaval makes this silly dance unviable. The threat of “riot ideology” in these regions is still high and pose a big risk to lives and property alike.

    They say science progresses at one funeral at a time. I don’t think anything is going to change until the vast majority of the education-industrial complex is retired and/or long gone. Also, they’ve politically configured it so that the chances they’ll face retaliation for running the greatest scientific con in human history (education determines IQ) is very low. Though in 15-25 years you’ll have truly enraged Millennials who looking back became student debt-serfs for essentially nothing in return. That students (the sheep) existed for the benefit of teachers (the boarder collie) not the other way around.

  44. @Anon

    One of the better take-downs of a public figure that I’ve seen in awhile. Bravo Mr. C.

  45. anon[195] • Disclaimer says:

    If every black kid were given birth by a white middle class surrogate mother, then raised by a white middle class family, perhaps we could see exactly what the genetic differences are.

    Huh?
    The kid would still be genetically Black, and extremely likely to grow up to be a complete no hoper.
    Here’s a better idea:
    Why don’t you experiment with hand feeding lentils to Tiger Sharks , and see if you can convert them to Veganism?

  46. dc.sunsets [AKA "Astonished"] says:
    @Paleo Liberal

    The answers to your conjectures exist.

    Until the College Board stopped publishing them, that is, due to Inconvenient Truth-itis.

    Here’s an analysis of the last time the College Board let the truth slip into the wild.
    http://lagriffedulion.f2s.com/testing.htm

    Unless wealthier and/or well-educated black people eschew the trappings of wealth and education when it comes to raising their kids, these data are clear. Unfortunately, no amount of information can convince a zealot of the falsity of their premises. Imagine trying to talk a Heavens Gate member out of their beliefs in an ill-fated attempt to get them to not commit suicide. That’s why none of this stuff changes minds. Humans aren’t constituted that way. We adopt a belief (most often whatever the herd around us believes) and then stick to it with defensive rationalizations to the bitter end.

    It seems that “debate” is not a means for determining truth. The only repeatable way is for falsehood to come with a significant burden on survival, and then just wait to see whose descendants show up for the future. Given human generation times, this can take a really, really long time. In the meantime, the debate is like a circus parade…always more clowns stepping in the elephant poop.

    • Agree: davidgmillsatty
  47. @Steve Sailer

    Steve, your math is fine–as you’re no doubt aware. A 3.75 point depression for bi-racials is the correct simple linear model number.

    I think res nails a big factor in his comment below. And apparently the paper itself comes up with the explanation:

    … This appears to have been the case as evidenced by Figure 3, which shows the relationship between European ancestry and cognitive ability. Being above the regression line was associated with a greater likelihood of biracial African-European self-identification regardless of one’s actual ancestry.

    ~~

    So the more interesting question would be what about *actual* ancestry.

    Do mixed people who are in that 40-80% white “ancestry-gap”, tend to be smarter than a simple linear model would have them? Just eyeballing the graph … that looks like it might be the case.

    One might think that having one complete or near complete “white” set of genes might be quite beneficial. That there were a lot of variants that developed in the Middle East, the Mediterranean basin or in Europe during the rise and consolidation of civilization, that just never developed in sub-Saharan Africa. And getting even one copy of these in your genome may be way more beneficial to cognitive ability than simple additive variance.

    • Replies: @Anon
  48. @Reg Cæsar

    “Rae Dawn Chong”

    Given his hobbies, Tommy Chong was inclined to name his daughter Rae Bong Chong, then decided against it. He was thinking about Dong for Dawn, then changed his mind again. Weed smoking can make one indecisive.

  49. @Paleo Liberal

    If every black kid were given birth by a white middle class surrogate mother, then raised by a white middle class family, perhaps we could see exactly what the genetic differences are.

    Except for the pregnancy part, we now actually have a lot black kids (including some 100% African kids) air-dropped into (mostly Christian do-gooder) white families. The results are what an HBD aware person would suspect. It’s much better to be raised by white middle class Christians–resulting in better behavior–but it doesn’t give them white middle class brains.

  50. The plot line on Fig. 3 seems to show a smooth IQ correlation from 100% African ancestry (-1.1 SD) to 100% European ancestry (Mean = 100). Isn’t that the headline?

    It’s not quite the “same old, same old” because the smooth correlation between IQ and degree of European ancestry tends to negate the PC argument that the binary of being designated “black” somehow suppresses IQ due to “systemic racism” etc, etc.

    On the other hand, the study’s attempt to map people’s subjective choice about how to “self-identify” on to this genetic cline seems like a totally separate sociological issue. It may be interesting to ponder why people identify as they do. But it’s never going to yield any objective scientific truth. That part seems like a big distraction.

    With that said, injecting this sociological issue makes the politics of discussing the study interesting. The Left, of course, just loves diversity and racial admixture. So talking about IQ data in connection with racial admixture may be a “creative” way of mainstreaming IQ gap data without being a “white supremacist.” (Is “Mulatto Supremacist” even a thing?) The self-identification angle will also cause confusion on the Left because it ties in with their belief that “race is a social construct.”

    Intentional or not, these nuances will trigger cognitive dissonance among good thinkers.

    Right now somebody at the New York Times is furiously trying to figure out how to spin this study as supporting their narrative — Perhaps: “Study shows Biracial Americans also Victims of ‘White Supremacy.’” If they can’t make it fit they will just ignore it.

    • Replies: @davidgmillsatty
  51. J.Ross says:
    @dearieme

    Brazil exists and implies this not to be the case.

  52. J.Ross says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Chinese (but not Japanese or Korean) teachers have to do things like this. Mexico has Western ideas of dignity and revering children which this probably ran into.

  53. midtown says:

    OT: Why are marriage rates down? Study blames lack of “economically attractive” men.
    https://newsroom.wiley.com/press-release/journal-marriage-and-family/do-unmarried-women-face-shortages-partners-us-marriage-mar

    Something tells me they didn’t ask the men for their thoughts on this.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  54. The correlation within the self-identified blacks between IQ and European ancestry is positive but quite small (r = 0.09)

    When you look at things like this, you need to test whether or not this is statistically significant from zero; it likely is not.

    When r<= 0.3, a linear correlation is generally considered to not exist. There may be a nonlinear correlation, or there may by a confounding variable that needs to be taken into account. In any case, correlation cannot safely be assumed to imply causation.

  55. Anon[109] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    Maybe the type of black person who marries/dates a white person is smarter than the average black person. Like is attracted to like…

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
  56. @Anon

    David Chapelle: “Youssée Small-Eay (= small egg/DK) is a famous actor, gay and black, not just French! This is a crazy story!” – LOL!

  57. @Anon

    Simple explanation, but not necessarily wrong – (cf. Occam).

  58. @Anon

    A couple of observations. The Atlanta audience was at least 60% Black. I say the Atlanta audience as the city has a sizable middle class to elite Black population. It wouldn’t have been a cheap ticket. During this piece, Dave stated most Blacks knew this was a fraud, the audience was laughing, howling and nodding knowingly.

    • Replies: @Charon
  59. this is exactly the kind of investigation i’ve called for several times. or at least, part of it.

    “If the 15 point gap between whites and blacks, who are about 80% black, is purely genetic in origin, then the gap between whites and biracials (who are 1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks) should be around 3.75 IQ points.”

    why do we assume this. the assumption seems to be that these two things move together in a smooth and steady way, as if the ratio of european genes to wechlser performance were linear, but that’s not necessarily the case. it could be hyperbolic. it could be the case that once you replace a lot of african genes with european genes, the brain starts doing better than you expected faster.

    so instead of using self identification from a database, what you would want to do is test people at the laboratory, then take people who are like 99% african, and find out what they can do on the wechsler. they will probably do something like 80. so really, pure blooded africans in the US are doing something more like 80 than 85.

    add some european genes, 19% on average for the ‘african’ people in the PNC database, and you get mean wechsler capability up to 85. but add more european genes, and performance starts increasing more quickly. so by the time a person is 80% european and 20% african, they are pretty close to having performance similar to people who are 98% european.

    what is the mechanism? as i’ve ventured before, i assume the mechanism is, european genes instruct the body to produce less bone, and more neurons. so what you want to do is radiology on all the people, comparing genetic profile, wechsler, and brain volume. and what you’ll probably find is this hyperbolic model of increasing european genes leads to bigger, but thinner skulls with greater internal volume, which the growing body then fills with neurons in the frontal cortex, instead of with inert, useless bone. the genes instruct the body to create a larger, thinner container, and fill it with nervous tissue. this is additive, gene by gene, as we’ve discovered thru GWAS, but probably once it gets rolling, it ramps up fast.

    as it is now, you only have 2 data points, 19% european versus 80% european. and you don’t see a straight line, so immediately you wonder the age old question: racism? when it could easily be just the way additive mutations work.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  60. “One confounder of that could be high IQ all black immigrants from Africa”

    but like i’ve hypothesized, the africans who made the journey across the Atlantic, were probably less smart on average than the africans who avoided that and stayed in africa. i guestimate 5 points less on the wechsler as a starting point. so african immigrants would be smarter than africans already in the US, even if they were general population people and not upper class people and merchants.

    it was the less smart people who got trapped and sold by the smarter people who did the trapping and selling.

  61. there’s complicating factors for skull volume, like different parts of the brain might be different sizes for humans around the world, so there’s that to control for. africans might have bigger parts of the brain not in the frontal cortex, which take up more space in africans than europeans, but the instructions for building those parts of the brain start getting changed as the aggregate genome starts accumulating more mutations from the putative thousands of years of european selection for how not to die when it’s 0 degrees in the winter. so when you have these people with genes from around the world, you can’t automatically assume all the change was in the frontal cortex.

    also, there is the not correct assumption that europeans in the US ‘average’ 100 on the wechsler. that’s an ok assumption in this study just to get things moving. but technically that’s not accurate. there’s actually a range of 7 or 8 points between different europeans in the US, based on their state by state high school performance, which we have a lot of data on, yearly. the difference is even bigger than that in europe, where there is at least 10 points difference between the smartest europeans and the least smart ones, and while it’s true in the US those differences get smaller, they don’t disappear.

    even within european groups, the US military found that hair color predicts ASVAB performance. i’ve posted this before from their 1980 study, where they tested just european women, and converted the ASVAB scores to wechsler scores. the averages were:

    yellow hair 103
    brown hair 102
    red hair 101
    black hair 100

    so the Rushton/Lynn style stereotypes hold, barring the dumb blonde jokes. the further north you went, the fairer you got, and the smarter. presumably again to avoid dying as the winter got longer and colder the further north you went, and because there were less photons hitting the earth for vitamin D synthesis.

    more confounding stuff is like, which europeans in Philadelphia? Philadelphia proper? because the smart people mostly left Philadelphia. the cleansing is not as complete as in Baltimore for instance, where the average european person who lives in Baltimore today is performing at like 90 on the wechsler, definitely not 100. these are the people who were left behind, and can’t afford to move out or were too old to leave.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  62. @Tiny Duck

    Team Tiny has at least two members, one with an IQ of about 80 and one with an IQ of about 100. Today Mr. 100 has the ship.

    • Agree: Charon
    • Replies: @Anon
  63. @Paleo Liberal

    It goes back further than that. Surnames like Bunch and Goins appeared in multiple mixed-race groups in the upland South in the 1800s. These could be rather rural, isolated communities, separated by many days’ travel, yet the same names would pop up. Some of the groups had different names, like Melungeons or Ramps, but the group members sometimes shared surnames with those in other groups.

  64. @Realist

    This is a new one to me. The data I have seen in the past is blacks (no white admixture); average IQ=70 and black/white admixture; average IQ=85. This of course does not take into account the per cent of admixture. The data appears to assume, on average, and admixture of 50%

    Realist, 85IQ–or more generally one SD below whites on pretty much any cognitive test–is indeed standard in the US. And that’s a population that is about 20% admixed.

    The 70 you sometimes see is from studies of black Africans in Africa.

    So there are two questions:
    1) How good are the tests cross culturally?
    2) How much of the difference is from the poor environment in Africa?

    A lot of us have developed a rough SWAG on this:

    70 — mean IQ black Africans, in the African environment they create (though with Western technology/medicine)

    80 — mean IQ of black Africans in the West–i.e. in societies with white created and run economies, infrastructure, food availability, medical care, school availability (though blacks may be running the actual school) (I.e. 10 pts of the IQ gap between black Africans and Euro whites is simply living in Africa with all that implies.)

    85 — mean IQ of US blacks (20% mixed)

    87-90??? — mean IQ of US blacks adopted into white middle class homes

    But that’s just a SWAG. And whenever you say X% genetic it’s always in the context of the environment. If your environment is “raised by wolves” then perhaps very little of your poor IQ test performance is genetic. Whereas if it’s “raised in Shaker Heights” most all of it is.

    • Agree: Lot
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @res
    , @Aft
  65. Intelligence aside, blacks and whites don’t fit together very well, and when you add in all the historical baggage, it makes trying to live together in the same society stupid. The same would be true if blacks were the more intelligent group.

  66. 80 — mean IQ of black Africans in the West–i.e. in societies with white created and run economies, infrastructure, food availability, medical care, school availability (though blacks may be running the actual school) (I.e. 10 pts of the IQ gap between black Africans and Euro whites is simply living in Africa with all that implies.)

    How are lower class whites who are more apt to live around blacks affected by being around blacks? Are their IQs lowered? They don’t get AA, so it’s an important question to ask?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  67. @Argentine American

    In what alternate reality is your anecdotal delusion a form “empirical evidence”? I live in a diverse city and I can count the number of white females with black males on one hand. I see white men with Asian women and Latinas every day. You probably live in a slum.

    Logically most miscegenation should be white males with nonwhite females just based off demographics alone. White people’s median age is almost 60, while nonwhites are 11-27. Older men and younger women have the advantage in the social market, whereas after age 30 women pretty much crash hard and if they aren’t taken by then, they’re cat ladies. White men have a tremendous advantage over white women just based off the fact that so many whites are older than any given nonwhite.

    • Replies: @Neoconned
  68. @prime noticer

    i guestimate 5 points less on the wechsler as a starting point. so african immigrants would be smarter than africans already in the US, even if they were general population people and not upper class people and merchants.

    PN, i see little justification for this thought.

    Basically the slaves came from tribal warfare. Are the winning tribes on average smarter than the losers … probably. But it can be pretty random. The Germans have lost a bunch of wars–and could have been sold off as slaves. Are they particularly stupid? incompetent? And 5 points is a huge divergence. That’s the kind of thing you get from widely separated tribes/races. Not “the people north of the river.”

    No, once the Atlantic slave trade got rolling the coastal tribes got money, supplies and better weapons to kick the slave raiding up a notch … and that they did.

    And the march to the coast and passage across the altantic would have killed maybe 30%, mostly from the bottom half in health, which tends to correlate with IQ. (Overall good physiological functioning.) That would push in the other direction. But in general these not very selective one-off events just don’t move population IQ much. You need generations.

  69. gcochran says:
    @The Alarmist

    Nonsense. Go read many books.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  70. @prime noticer

    there’s complicating factors for skull volume, like different parts of the brain might be different sizes for humans around the world, so there’s that to control for. africans might have bigger parts of the brain not in the frontal cortex, which take up more space in africans than europeans, but the instructions for building those parts of the brain start getting changed as the aggregate genome starts accumulating more mutations from the putative thousands of years of european selection for how not to die when it’s 0 degrees in the winter. so when you have these people with genes from around the world, you can’t automatically assume all the change was in the frontal cortex.

    I’m curious as to what makes you think Africans may have a smaller frontal cortex. I mean, just based on the preponderance of blacks who seem to have huge bulging high foreheads, as well as the historical anthropological description of “Negroids” having larger, some said “feminine” foreheads, it only seems logical that their frontal cortex is larger than whites.

    And sure enough that’s what the new science is telling us:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2964318/

    Black people have an “absolutely” larger frontal cortex than white people. The inhabitants of northern Europe (and Northeast Asia) have low, flattened, backwards sloping, less bulbous foreheads than other groups. The region of the brain that was most important to the survival of northern inhabitants during the ice age was the posterior region of the brain that controls for visual-spatial reasoning. This was also the morphology exhibited by Neanderthals, who had enlarged occipital and temporal lobes, reaulting in an “en bombe” morphology.

  71. Mark M. says:

    If the 15 point gap between whites and blacks, who are about 80% black, is purely genetic in origin, then the gap between whites and biracials (who are 1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks) should be around 3.75 IQ points.

    This doesn’t follow. Male IQ is more closely correlated with the mother’s IQ than with the father’s. This is because intelligence genes are more likely to be derived from the X chromosome, which a male only receives from his mother, than other chromosomes. A biracial couple is far more likely to be black male and white female than the reverse. Thus, the IQs of the male offspring of such couples are more likely to approach the average for whites than the average for blacks or the midpoint between whites and blacks.

    Let’s see what happens if the pattern of blacker male/whiter female biracial couples holds up over two generations and we assume that all genes associated with intelligence are derived from the X chromosome.

    Black father (85 IQ)-White Mother (100 IQ)
    Biracial male offspring (50% white-50% black): 100 IQ
    Biracial female offspring (50% white-50% black): 92.5 IQ

    Biracial father (50% white-50% black) (100 IQ)-white mother (100 IQ)
    Biracial male offspring (75% white): 100 IQ
    Biracial female offspring (75% white): 100 IQ

    If all biracial individuals had such ancestry and all genes for intelligence were derived from the X chromosome, you would see no IQ difference between 75% white biracial individuals (less white than the 80% white biracial group in the study) and 100% white individuals. Of course, life doesn’t perfectly follow this pattern: Not all biracial couples involve the black male/white female or blacker male/whiter female arrangement; white women who mate with black men may have a lower IQ than the average white; and not all genes associated with intelligence are derived from the X chromosome. However, it doesn’t follow from the discrepancy between the 2-point IQ difference found between the 80% white biracial group and the white group in the study and the 3.75 IQ difference you would expect to find by multiplying the black percentage of each group that the differences in IQ found between the white group, the biracial group, and the black group in the study are anything other than 100% genetic.

  72. @The Z Blog

    In America, black women are at the very bottom of the sexual status hierarchy. Therefore, the most likely source of European genetics is from low status whites.

    Adjusting for bodyweight, the sexual status hierarchy in America is as follows:

    Latina women (average 170 pounds) (Top of the sexual hierarchy)
    Asian women (average 135 pounds)
    Black women (average 187 pounds)
    White women (average 163 pounds) (botttom of the sexual hierarchy)

    Data for desirability was taken from:

    There’s really no comparison between today’s obese black women and the women of the 1700s-early 1900s, when most of the admixture took place. Black women may have been considered more attractive than white women in the 1700s-early 1900s when their average bodyweight was more on par with white women.

  73. @Anon

    All of those sexual selection issues are valid. On the other hand, regression to the mean would also tend to dampen out any of these effects.

    This might be even more of a dampening effect given the substantial difference in the population means, but I don’t know the math.

    If any statistic mavens have some time, here’s an extra credit math problem that might shed some light on it:

    Person A has an IQ of 80 and is from a group with a mean IQ of 80 and a SD of 12. Person B has an IQ of 100 and is from a group with a mean IQ of 100 and a SD of 15.

    1. What is the expected mean IQ of their offspring?

    2. What would the answer be if Person A still had an IQ of 80, but was from the same group as B (Mean = 100, SD = 15)?

    3. What would the answer be if Person B still had an IQ of 100, but is now from the same group as Person A (Mean = 80, SD = 12)?

  74. @Anon

    There’s the answer to population replacement – Whites just have to start making more than $300K per year while they are still young enough to have kids.

  75. @Nope

    Why is that a terrible legacy?
    The slavers took the dumbest Africans and gave their descendents a better life than other Africans.
    How is that a bad thing?

    • Replies: @Charon
  76. J.Ross says:
    @OilcanFloyd

    Some of them embrace the worst black behaviors, visibly jaywalking.

    • Replies: @OilcanFloyd
  77. Anonymous[319] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    The replies are world-ending levels of DR3.

    • Replies: @Lockean Proviso
  78. Travis says:
    @Anon

    54% of Hispanics self-reported as white only on the 2010 census, so millions of the whites in this study are actually white hispanics.

  79. OT: Steve has European soccer Ultras a few times, but here’s an ESPN piece soft-pedaling Antifa soccer fans in Portland and Seattle.

    https://www.espn.com/soccer/major-league-soccer/story/3935417/mls-takes-on-portlands-most-passionate-fans-over-protests-whats-this-feud-about

    The writer thinks the soccer league’s ban on political flags is “a solution in search of a problem:” after all, Antifa are just anti-Fascist, what could possibly be wrong with that? They should be able to wave the ‘Iron Front’ flag, because Iron Front was banned by nazis ergo the Iron Front are good!

    Okay, so Antifa dress in all black and wear masks and tactical gloves and beat the hell out of little Asian journalists who dare to cover Antifa’s ‘protests,’ but again, they are anti-Fascist, therefore anyone they are beating up is a fascist. And anyone who has a problem with that is a fascist, too.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  80. @prime noticer

    I think he is referring to recent emigres from Nigeria or something like that. I don’t think he’s talking about the slave trade in this instance. He’s probably not wrong either because Nigerian American immigrants outperform American Blacks substantially

  81. Malcolm Y says:

    Looking at this in a naive way, we could say that we have W – whites, X – blacks (a little mixed), M – mixed, and B “pure” blacks. So taking these as linear combinations of Gaussian rvs we might say:

    X = 0.19 W + 0.81 B and since muW = 100, sigmaW = 15
    we have muX = (0.19)100 + (0.81) muB = 85.3 , sigmaX = ?, sigmaB = ?

    or muB = 81.85 and muX – muB = 3.45

    Similarly M = 0.20 B + 0.80 W and muM = (0.2)81.85 + (0.8)100 = muM = 96.37
    The mu of M measured was 98 = muMM muMM – muM = 1.63 sigmaMM = ?

    FWIW

  82. Anon[591] • Disclaimer says:
    @Henry's Cat

    The 1/4th threw me also, but I got the same result using another calculation, so I went back and thought about it, and I think Steve divided the 20 percent of the mixed into the 80 percent of the blacks, the percentaged being African ancestry, on average for each group. This is right and you can get the same results in another way, as I discovered.

  83. @Ghost of Bull Moose

    OT: Steve has European soccer Ultras a few times, but here’s an ESPN piece soft-pedaling Antifa soccer fans in Portland and Seattle.

    A century ago, Portland and Seattle both went to the Stanley Cup finals, before Boston, New York, or Chicago had a team in the sport.

    How things have changed!

  84. Anon[591] • Disclaimer says:
    @Faraday's Bobcat

    This comment was plagiarized from the Twitter comments of other people to the original tweet announcing the preprint. If you reread Tiny’s comment, it doesn’t really flow smoothly, because he’s just pasted together unrelated comments next to each other. Each individual comment seems to make sense in isolation, which gives the impression that there is an IQ 100 Tiny.

    Literally plagiarized comments are a case where I think Steve should exercise his rarely used moderation power.

    Copying comments and adding links is a common spam technique for black hat SEO link building. You can hire cheap non-native speakers and they can produce comments that pass the sniff test because they are legitimate comments that someone else made a week previous.

    • Agree: 95Theses
  85. @dearieme

    Maybe we should consult Tom Jefferson?

    You could, but it was Randolph that fathered the mulattos. But hey, thanks for libeling one of our founders. What would we do without you?

  86. @Svevlad

    someone should do a study to see the cognitive difference between a WMBF mixed-race man and a BMWF one.

    Might have a hard time getting a large enough sample size for the WMBF case; historically, it’s a lot less common than the other.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  87. Can you give a fake name to ancestry.com or 23andMe? Can you shield your identity when submitting your DNA? I’m a little curious but a little more self-protective.

  88. Charon says:
    @Bill Jones

    How is that a bad thing?

    Well, it could hardly be worse for the rest of us…

  89. Charon says:
    @George Taylor

    Black people NOW pretend they all knew it was a fraud. That’s called saving face. And please note that the piece triumphs (and draws its biggest cheers) by calling Kanye anti-black because we all know dat true.

    • Agree: Herbert West
  90. @midtown

    OT: Why are marriage rates down? Study blames lack of “economically attractive” men.
    https://newsroom.wiley.com/press-release/journal-marriage-and-family/do-unmarried-women-face-shortages-partners-us-marriage-mar

    Something tells me they didn’t ask the men for their thoughts on this.

    Midtown i think this is spot on–

    Immigration wage suppression and general feminization of education and labor has suppressed male earnings, especially male relative to female earnings as government creates, subsidies and mandates lots of pink collar b.s. employment. So young men–despite the fact that men continue to do pretty much all the critical socially useful outside the home labor–are indeed less useful to women.

    But … that’s only half the story.

    The other half is that current young women–usually some combination of slutty, overweight, tatooed or pierced, careerist, full of themselves (their career, their friends), always on their phones, then on the market hitting the wall at 30–aren’t very attractive to men. Even if they aren’t physically replusive or sub-par, they do not radiate a “great to have as companion, wife, mother of my kids” vibe.

    In short, compared to the past:
    — young men are less masculine and have less relative earning power
    — young women are less feminine and less physically attractive

    not exactly a surprise to see less marriage.

    • Replies: @John Regan
    , @Neoconned
  91. Lloyd1927 says:

    There was no universal “one drop rule” law. States varied. Do you think that a white family in South Carolina would instantly agree to become “Negroes” if they moved to Virginia? Why do you imagine that the U.S. government took pains to classify nearly all Hispanics and Arabs as “white” regardless of their skin color or lineage? Also, the “one drop” myth is maintained by the enthusiastic support of blacks and black-identified mulatto elites. Without their support, it would die. If whites were the ones trying to force “tarbrushed” whites into the black race, then Hispanics and Arabs would be “black.” The “one drop rule” is a racial idea honored more in the breech than the observance.

    PASSING FANCY

    In the Jim Crow South, courts understood that rigidly enforcing the rules against mixed marriage would have been a disaster—for whites.

    http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/September-October-2003/story_sharfstein_sepoct03.msp

    Daniel J. Sharfstein, The Secret History of Race in the United States, 112 Yale L.J. (2003).
    Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylj/vol112/iss6/3

    https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylj/vol112/iss6/3/?fbclid=IwAR1CLe879Tx4-aLgbKA0Web5fk7i8bEm7JhlqVHMtJJYEO0Mz61ftGbwUmY

    Legal History of the Color Line: The Rise and Triumph of the One-Drop Rule

    MELUNGEON POPULATION
    https://dnaconsultants.com/melungeon-population/?fbclid=IwAR0z0GB3mrEU3PZ58bfJxtmeddCLm8cOv4HIzqLRL7WCFMf4tCL-oy7NlZo

    The Invisible Line Between Black and White
    Vanderbilt professor Daniel Sharfstein discusses the history of the imprecise definition of race in America
    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-invisible-line-between-black-and-white-335353/

  92. @Whiskey

    You don’t need a law for that. You just need to make sure that all the affordable school systems are filled with hoodlums.

  93. @istevefan

    However, it appears from the above passage that the Gap can be narrowed dramatically by another way.

    Not again!

    This particular Lo! has been endlessly declaimed since, well, since when? Goes back to the “New Soviet Man” and Boaz, 1920s – 1930s era.
    And in all that time, the money has been spent, gone. The only solid result thus far has been the effort to reduce gap between races by reducing the amount taught in schools. As La Griffe du Lion pointed out years ago, if test questions become simpler, then all racial test scores approach equality. By the same token, if less is taught, then racial outcomes (in terms of knowledge) lessen.

    So: feel free to pursue this with your own money and time. Right now, the cities are failing and taking the rest of society down with them.

    Counterinsurgency

  94. Brewer says:

    I have a minor problem with this type of analysis.
    What exactly does IQ measure? Does it have an inbuilt bias?
    If one is lost in the Simpson Desert, is it a Harvard graduate with an IQ of 142 one would prefer to encounter or an aboriginal who knows how to find water?

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  95. @The Alarmist

    In any case, correlation cannot safely be assumed to imply causation.

    I’m generally in agreement

    Correlatin can suggest causation, but
    (a) not at the r= 0.09 level, as you say
    (b) causation isn’t established until a causal chain has been demonstrated.

    The phrase has, unfortunately, been misused to that correlation implies no causation, ever.

    Counterinsurgency

  96. Lurker says:
    @Alfa158

    I’m sure it’s been noted at iSteve before – that WM+BF couples tend to be higher social class than BM+WF couples. And, anecdotally, I’ve noticed that myself.

  97. @prime noticer

    it could easily be just the way additive mutations work.

    Exactly. Linear relations are are easy to calculate, but there is no reason to expect them to have fidelity here. It _might_ be like saying that a person with two legs should be able to run half as fast after losing one leg.

    Counterinsurgency

  98. @gcochran

    Your comment has less signal-to-noise than a correlation with r=0.09.

  99. JosephB says:

    Would one interpretation of the study be an estimate of West African IQ after accounting for the FLynn effect? It would suggest West African IQ will be circa 82 points given benefits of better nutrition and education. Normally extrapolation scares me, but going from a fair amount of data around 81% black (IQ 85.3) and extrapolating to 100% black (IQ 81.9) seems less scary than usual.

    Has anyone advanced an argument that slaves were selected for intelligence? Or that higher IQ blacks were more likely to reproduce relative to those in West Africa? There is also the 150 years post slavery, which could have had a selective effect. But these effects, if they exist, seem unlikely to be large. The estimate of 82 is rather different than the scores in the 60s usually tossed about.

  100. Whitewolf says:
    @Argentine American

    “Statistically, white men are more likely to indulge in miscegenation but the empirical evidence seems to indicate otherwise.”

    The statistics are right when Asian women are around. Sex tourism to Asia by White men is a big thing and many end up in relationships with their bar girl/prostitutes.

  101. @AnotherDad

    The other half is that current young women–usually some combination of slutty, overweight, tatooed or pierced, careerist, full of themselves (their career, their friends), always on their phones, then on the market hitting the wall at 30–aren’t very attractive to men. Even if they aren’t physically replusive or sub-par, they do not radiate a “great to have as companion, wife, mother of my kids” vibe.

    I’d emphasize the point that the big problem isn’t the horror shows with tattoos and piercings and blue hair. They are the extreme cases, of course, but they’re also still fairly rare on the whole. And the same is true for the extremely promiscuous women that have become a meme on the PUA/Men’s Rights sites. They certainly exist (and they are more numerous now than they used to be), but there always was the town whore and the village slut.

    Most young women aren’t either of these types. Contrary to what TV tells us, women as a rule don’t want endless brief relationships without commitment – in fact, this lifestyle is emotionally unhealthy for them (and for men, too, if apparently not quite to the same extent). This makes sense from the evolutionary viewpoint (spousal bonding promoting parental investment, important to both sexes but women especially) as well as millennia of cultural background which half a century of Hollywood has made big dents in but hasn’t yet managed to destroy. The true dream of most young women is and remains to be married and have children.

    The major problem for society in general in this respect is the lowering of the spousal quality of average women. That is, the ones that don’t turn into pointy-haired Trigglypuffs or Sex in the City rejects, but nonetheless are relatively looser, more careerist and more feminist than previous generations. Such women probably will still marry eventually (“probably” as in more often than not), but will do so later, be more likely to divorce and be worse mothers to their children. By varying degrees, in all cases, but the trend is clear. With them, the effects are less immediately obvious, but drastically more important, since they affect the population as a whole rather than small fringe groups.

    The same, of course, is true for men. The stereotypical soyboys and PUAs and basement-dwelling losers aren’t the issue (though they remain individual tragedies), but rather that young men in general are less confident, less attractive and less able to support a family in today’s bizarre, manipulated economy and postmodern culture.

  102. Neoconned says:
    @AnotherDad

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/308135/

    The economy itself is becoming more feminine…..as in the types of jobs being created…..think food service crap and services crap in general…..healthcare etc all pretty much female dominated.

    How to solve this? Multi fold: stop.having Republicans being afraid of welfare. Just take it from illegals and minorities and give it to whites.

    Re-segregate everything but in smart ways.

    Segregate for instance insurance companies. Allow them t ok segregate pools of payout capital and say this is the pools whites pay into, blacks pay into, Hispanics etc.

    Allow other companies to do the same. Federalize the entire prison system. When black prisoners act a fool in whitopia like Portland or SLC then send them to a penitentiary in a majority black area like Alabama or Louisiana. Send white prisoners to prisons in say Minnesota etc.

    Black inmates coat more so send them to low cost prison regions etc

    And last as Whiskey and others have pointed out bankrupt the services sector.

    Profit margins at fast food joints is razor thin….

    The taxpayer subsidizes fast food companies indirectly the same way it does Walmart and Amazon etc……by providing govt benefits to underpaid food industry workers.

    Say hey if I’m providing welfare to say a certain percentage of your workers because they are on food stamps etc then we will hit those companies with a targeted tax to compensate the expense to the taxpayer

    And if their business model cant cut it then too bad so sad right…..just means fewer female workers and fewer female overpaid managers etc living off taxpayers largesse either directly or indirectly….

  103. J says: • Website

    The study in question produced no new information. All that has been known for centuries. For some reason the West does not dare to aknowledge that we have a problem here. Neither do I.

  104. @JosephB

    I don’t remember the exact IQ scores, but there was one paper published on the average IQ increase in one village in Kenya where everything had gone right over the 15 or 20 years between all the youths being given IQ tests: electricity had come to the village, and with it cell phones, television, and the Internet; primary schooling had become universal; the food supply had expanded and young people were taller; vaccinations were now standard; and lots of other good things had happened.

    A quite sizable increase in IQ was observed from the first test to the second.

    I’ve argued since 2002 when I reviewed Lynn and Vanhanen’s “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” that the lower IQs seen in Africa than the U.S. would appear to be clear evidence of environmental problems depressing IQ in Africa.

  105. Neoconned says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Err….vi the south sometime….BM/WF pairings are so common I’d say they’re probably 25 to 35% of the pairings black dudes engage in…..dunno about white women..

    Black dudes seem to be falling over themselves to date ANYBODY but their own women

    Another solution: import lots of young SINGLE WOMEN with NO KIDS from Europe, Asia, the Arab world, Latin America etc….by threat of law they must get married to a single male American within say 5 years or they face deportation immediately.

    • Replies: @Richard B
  106. Blankaerd says:

    I would be more interested in the relation between East-Asians and Europeans/whites. The fact that there is a significant gap between white and black has been proven over and over again, this study only confirms what has already been proven a dozen times over. I understand that in science being able to replicate results is important, but that doesn’t make it newsworthy.

    I wonder if biracial east-asians/whites would be smarter than their parents on average, or perhaps dumber than their asian parent and smarter than white, the reverse, or dumber than both. We know that biracial children have a higher rate of mental issues (as well as a higher rate of identity crisis) than monoracial children, so it wouldn’t be a stretch to suggest that the child may be dumber than both. Having said that, according to a genetic distance study performed by Cavalli-Sforza, us whites (I assume most people on unz are white?) are genetically more related to East-Asians than any other ‘major race,’ meaning that if we were to procreate with East-Asians our children would look more like us / both of the parents than if we were to procreate with blacks, pygmies or aboriginals.

    Biracial whites/blacks I often find very ugly. Just look at Robert Deniro’s children as one example. Meanwhile I’ve seen among the most beautiful biracial white/East-Asians females. Not that I would encourage miscegenation by the way, but it’s something to think about.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  107. Blankaerd says:
    @Steve Sailer

    I’ve argued since 2002 when I reviewed Lynn and Vanhanen’s “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” that the lower IQs seen in Africa than the U.S. would appear to be clear evidence of environmental problems depressing IQ in Africa.

    This is most likely the flynn effect. General intelligence is highly heritable, and I cannot imagine that this would’ve gone up since blacks lived in the United States, at least not by the amount that would explain one SD difference between blacks in Africa and black in the US. What could explain is, is the fact that a modern industrialized nation has a much higher demand for specialized abilities such as short term memory. These abilities do relate with general intelligence, of course, but they can be trained to a significant extent, so they’re highly environmental. You need to remember passwords and you need a decent short-term memory to effectively navigate the internet/social media as well, thus short-term memory is definitely increasing in the West (or at least until the anti-flynn effect was traced beginning in Germany in 1997) and that can be shown as an increase in IQ if short-term memory is tested.

    Since there is no modern black industrialized nation, this effect would be far more pronounced in blacks living in the West than in Africa.

    • Replies: @John Regan
  108. @Anon

    Let E denote “European” and A denote “purebred African” and BR denote biracial. Recall that we assume that Europeans are purebred with IQ of 100 and that African-Americans are 80%/20% mix with average IQ one standard deviation (15 points) below Europeans. The implied IQ gap between Europeans and Biracials with 20%/80%mix, under a linear model, is 3.75 IQ points.

    E=100 Europeans are purebred with average IQ of 100

    .8A+.2E=100-15=85 African-Americans are 80%/20% mixture with average IQ of 85

    A=65/.8 = 81.25 Implied IQ of purebred Africans is 82.15

    BR= .2A+.8E=.2(81.25)+ .8(100) = 96.25 Implied IQ of biracials is 96.25 given assumed 20/80 mix

    E=BR = 100 = 96.25 = 3.75 Average IQ gap between Europeans and biracials is 3.75 IQ points.

  109. @The Alarmist

    Sorry but the following statement is false: “When r<= 0.3, a linear correlation is generally considered to not exist." I do not know where you heard such a claim but it is wrong or at least half a century out of date. Even an estimate like r=0.005 can represent a substantively and statistically significant relationship. It depends upon the context. With modern datasets (sometimes hundreds of thousands of observations) no sensible researcher would impose a cutoff of r=0.3. That was back in the 1960s when datasets had fifty observations or less. Perhaps change this rule to r<=0.001 and it might be acceptable. Or better, drop this very obsolete "rule of thumb."

  110. Realist says:
    @AnotherDad

    But that’s just a SWAG. And whenever you say X% genetic it’s always in the context of the environment. If your environment is “raised by wolves” then perhaps very little of your poor IQ test performance is genetic. Whereas if it’s “raised in Shaker Heights” most all of it is.

    I think, as do many others, that IQ is influenced at least 80% by genetics.

  111. @Blankaerd

    Remembering passwords is far less difficult than memorizing verses or whole chapters of the Koran (or the Bible, for that matter), which is relatively commonplace even in less developed countries. Not those stuck in permanent savagery, obviously, but even literal illiterates often train their memories more in traditional cultures than Westerners in this society, who all too often need electronic gadgets to tell them not to forget to turn off the gas for the stove.

    The far more reasonable explanation for potentially depressed IQs of Africans (relative to genetic potential, which to all seeming still falls well short of the American “White” gold standard) is that starvation and infectious disease still take their toll on children there as they grow up. Education and such other variables probably play some part as well, but a much inferior one to these basic biological limitations.

    The same factors (mainly the near elimination of chronic low-level malnutrition, previously endemic among the poor) will also have been behind most of the observed “Flynn Effect” (actually the Lynn Effect) in Europe and America in the postwar years. In more dramatic terms, they likewise provide the explanation for why present-day descendants of Poles and Italians score higher on the IQ tests than their ill-nourished grandfathers from Sicily or the Kresy did when Brigham and Yerkes tested them a hundred years ago.

    In the Western world, the “Flynn Effect” has now definitely been superseded by dysgenic degeneration (as psychometricians like Lynn always predicted it would). In Africa, there may still be significant improvements in this respect, though the projected future developments in that continent make that an uncertain prospect at best.

    • Replies: @Toy
    , @Blankaerd
  112. John Rosales : ” The RACIST beginnings of standardized testing . From grade school to college ,students of color have suffered the effects of biased testing.” as published in the NEA Today Magazine .
    “The appalling history of IQ tests reveals the RACISM of formerly distinguished scientists …Eugenics is on the rise again…” Pete Shanks BioPolitical Times .

    • Replies: @annamaria
  113. @Peter Johnson

    drop this very obsolete “rule of thumb.”

    Drop something. Fishing for low but positive r values doesn’t seem to work. The Haxx appear to be taking over science, analyzing much and producing much, but very little useful and true.

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

    https://neuroneurotic.net/category/replicability/

    In Physics, things work differently. Grand Universal Theories (GUTs) are pursued that can’t be tested.

    If, as Kuhn said, there are two different kinds of science, then reliance on low but positive r and untestable GUTs are indicators that routing science in these fields is played out. Like an exhausted art form, inching forward has eaten up all the novelty. Sometimes this is a stage for revolutionary science (e.g. AD 1900), sometimes it isn’t (e.g. Euclid in c.a. AD 300 writing the capstone to Greek mathematics).

    Counterinsurgency

  114. On your main page a yellow star appears next the to the title of this post, but once you click on it, the star disappears.

    • Replies: @Toy
  115. @Peter Johnson

    drop this very obsolete “rule of thumb.”

    Drop something. Fishing for low but positive r values doesn’t seem to work. The Haxx appear to be taking over science, analyzing much and producing much, but very little useful and true.

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

    https://neuroneurotic.net/category/replicability/

    In Physics, things work differently. Grand Universal Theories (GUTs) are pursued that can’t be tested.

    If, as Kuhn said [1], there are two different kinds of science, then reliance on low but positive r and untestable GUTs are indicators that routing science in these fields is played out. Like an exhausted art form, inching forward has eaten up all the novelty. Sometimes this is a stage for revolutionary science (e.g. AD 1900), sometimes it isn’t (e.g. Euclid in c.a. BC 300 Alexandria writing what turned out to be the capstone of Classical Greek mathematics).

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

  116. @Peter Johnson

    drop this very obsolete “rule of thumb.”

    Drop something. Fishing for low but positive r values doesn’t seem to work. The Haxx appear to be taking over science, analyzing much and producing much, but very little useful and true.

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

    https://neuroneurotic.net/category/replicability/

    In Physics, things work differently. Grand Universal Theories (GUTs) are pursued that can’t be tested.

    If, as Kuhn said [1], there are two different kinds of science, then reliance on low but positive r and untestable GUTs are indicators that routing science in these fields is played out. Like an exhausted art form, inching forward has eaten up all the novelty. Sometimes this is a stage for revolutionary science (e.g. AD 1900), sometimes it isn’t (e.g. Euclid in c.a. BC 300 Alexandria writing what turned out to be the capstone of Classical Greek mathematics).

    Counterinsurgency

    1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions

  117. Did I do the arithmetic right? I’m falling asleep, so please put corrections for this and the rest in the comments.

    No, you did not. It’s a bell curve, not a bell straight line. At the top of the curve, the slope is zero, and at a short distance from the curve, either – or +, the curve slopes ever so slightly, + or – respectively.

    Redo the math using algebra, aka al-jabr.

    • Replies: @res
  118. @Counterinsurgency

    The hacks use a 0.8°C change over 150 years to determine the planet will be doomed if we don’t do something.

    Never mind that 0.8°C is not statistically significant in a fair sample. In @Peter Johnson world, you just get a lot of data points so you can have a very low but “statistically significant” correlation coefficient.

    Yeah, I’m old… I can still use a slide rule to calculate an orbit. I didn’t have the luxury of false precision.

    • Replies: @gcochran
  119. @Charles Erwin Wilson 3

    Is this sarcasm? Y-DNA analysis links the “mullata’s” descendants to Thomas Jefferson.

  120. Richard B says:
    @Anon

    DC’s a gifted comedian and Sticks and Stones had some funny moments.

    But there was a dark and sinister creepiness to the whole thing.

    In any event, the point of the “takedown” of JS was that they supported him anyway, “with our silence.”

    At another point in the show DC revises the old line that blacks are the savior of America, which has been making a comeback lately.

    After watching Sticks and Stones I had to splash some cold water on my face and go for a walk to shake off the depressing effects.

    The USA is finished. And not just the USA.

  121. @Blankaerd

    We know that biracial children have a higher rate of mental issues (as well as a higher rate of identity crisis) than monoracial children

    What? No “we” don’t, “we know” that biracial children have an elevated rate of mental illness than monoracial children of whatever parental race that had a lower incidence of mental illness than the other parental race. Biracial children fall between the norms just like in IQ, on average.

    so it wouldn’t be a stretch to suggest that the child may be dumber than both

    Not only a stretch, but retarded. Actual IQ data places them above whites and Asians.

    • Replies: @Blankaerd
  122. @Counterinsurgency

    I agree that the replication crisis needs to be addressed, particularly in social psychology where it was endemic. Other fields have some of this problem as well. There was even the “candidate gene” problem for a very short period in genetics — but it was addressed and resolved quickly and forcefully. I insist however that reinstating that mid-twentieth-century rule of thumb that “r <=0.3 is not a relationship" is a very poor solution.

  123. Richard B says:
    @Neoconned

    Black dudes seem to be falling over themselves to date ANYBODY but their own women

    Funny you say that.

    Had a co-worker from the 90’s who was a light-skinned black guy (the ones who tend to be militant cause they’ve got to prove they’re black enough). He was true to type.

    He married a very black woman, they had a daughter and that was that. I left the company and didn’t see him until a few years ago, with his wife and daughter. He looked serious and not all there.

    Then just yesterday I literally bumped into him and there he was with a somewhat attractive but mostly chunky White woman. The two of them simply beaming. It was surreal.

    • Replies: @Neoconned
  124. Toy says:

    Who gives a damn about all this navel-gazing over muh IQ–the white version of muh dik?
    You see, God is the Supreme wisdom from which all intelligence is derived. Abandon him and your high IQ couldn’t possibly matter any less. You will still succumb to the moral rot and all the genetic and material pollution and waste that entails. And it will go on, until you are the nothing you willfully degraded yourself into. An atheistic and consumerist white race of spiritual jews is not worth preserving, and the evidence on that fact speaks volumes for itself. Wanna know the fertility rate of Britons, the white race’s most productive and intelligent ethnic group?
    Care to even guess?
    I rest my case, fools.
    When you turn back towards God and the purpose he embodies, he will restore everything. And even if this material plane is one minute before midnight, he will just reincarnate you onto a higher plane of your Aryan ancestors. Ancestors who did not act like a bunch of acquisitive backstabbing jews.
    Being a bunch of indulgent materialistic pigs works out for the jews, now at least, because they worship the god of this material world; Satan. And they faithfully produce the blood sacrifices he demands. And he rewards them accordingly.
    Know of any shrewd white people who slaughter kids in Pizzagate rituals for Passover?
    Didn’t think so. And don’t even bother. Satan has already chosen his people. You cannot out-jew the jews. Best stick with the real Aryan God–Krishna. He will elevate you. But nothing is free. You had better start devoting yourself to him in prayer and meditation every day if you want to win this kosmic struggle. Krishna will win. It’s just a question of whether you will be there beside him. Stop being a Judas caught in the middle you avaricious boomer traitor.

    • Replies: @Realist
  125. Richard B says:
    @Argentine American

    Miscegenation seems to be at an all time high and I see more White women indulging in it.

    Not a lot of that going on in Argentina.

    In fact, I’ve come to the conclusion that the Globalists want to leave Argentina alone for the most part.

    It looks like they’d prefer to save it for themselves as a Go To Getaway for when TSHTF.

  126. Toy says:
    @ScarletNumber

    Oh no! How shocking and devastating… if ur autistic LMFAO!
    Go easy on those vaccines Tonto, and… relaxxxx…….
    Now count to 10.
    NO! Slowly!

  127. Toy says:
    @Counterinsurgency

    After relativity and string theory, physics has spent all its credibility. We can just sit back and laugh at you magik negro white labcoat cargo cultists starwars fans.
    For the rest of us, we know that heavy objects fall and we have the knowhow to build an aircraft carrier. Until we need more, just STFU nerd! Stay in the corner and do your weird and exotic multidimensional discreet calculus. We will call you when we need you.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  128. Toy says:
    @John Regan

    Interestingly, the same logic holds for height. Take a short scrawny starving third worlder, bring him to America and feed him burgers and fries, and miraculously his children grow to 6 feet tall!
    White people have a bizarrely obstinate, but dated, fetish for Darwinian determinism. I guess you really need that sort of theology in order to justify starving millions of Indians to death while walking aeay from it all with a clean, white bread conscience.

    • Replies: @BengaliCanadianDude
  129. Realist says:
    @Steve Sailer

    I’ve argued since 2002 when I reviewed Lynn and Vanhanen’s “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” that the lower IQs seen in Africa than the U.S. would appear to be clear evidence of environmental problems depressing IQ in Africa.

    What environmental problems would that be?

    • Replies: @GermanReader2
  130. Article: [[Recent immigrants from Africa in the sample may have affected the scores reported here as migrants may have been selected for cognitive ability when they emigrated from their home countries.]]

    Exactly: “migrants may have been selected for cognitive ability when they emigrated from their home countries”, but not in the time-frame he implies!
    …… migrants may have been selected for cognitive ability when they emigrated from their home countries” ___ when they migrated as slaves three hundred or so, years ago!
    The people who ended up as slaves were the dumbest of the bunch. African families traditionally sold unwanted family members to the Arab slave traders. And they still do, to this day!

    And BTW, it also depends on WHICH African country they migrated from. For example: Nigeria has the highest GDP and highest average income, and highest average IQ in Africa. The difference between IQ in Nigeria(84) and Equatorial Guinea(59) is stunning! https://brainstats.com/average-iq-by-country.html

    • Replies: @res
  131. @J.Ross

    Some of them embrace the worst black behaviors, visibly jaywalking.

    It’s a real and serious question for many white kids who attend schools with more than a few blacks, or public schools at all. Most of those kids don’t adopt black behaviors or dysfunction, but are definitely underserved at best. What about them? They don’t choose their schools or neighborhoods.

  132. padre says:

    I simple don’t see any purpose of such studies!And I.Q. by itself doesn’t count much!

  133. Blankaerd says:
    @John Regan

    Increase in short-term memory is just one of many examples of specialized abilities. Increase in specialized ability has masked the decline of g in Western nations at least until 1997. g-factor is highly heritable, while specialized abilities are typically highly environmental (though they may be strongly or weakly associated with g.) I do not think the Italians of 100 years ago would’ve scored much lower on the g-loaded parts of the IQ tests as the Italians of today would, in fact they may have even scored higher. While I won’t fight you on the idea that nourishment plays a role in IQ, I think the real reason why the Italians and blacks of today score so much higher on IQ tests is due to the increase in specialized abilities. Italy back then and Africa now had little demand for these specialized abilities, so people naturally did not develop them.

    • Replies: @John Regan
  134. danand says:

    “In DOUBLE DOWN, the Twins lay down the eight principles they used on their paths to Emmy Awards and corner offices. From “Don’t Emulate, Originate” to “Don’t Hedge, Take the Risk,” the Twins reject the Status Quo’s conformity and conservatism, instead showing you how to identify your unique superpowers, locate your White Space (where superpowers meet opportunity), and play the Long Game by planning well, aiming high, and going far.”

    The twins say it’s all really simple, just combine your IQ & EQ; and off you go! (@ ~ the 1 min mark)

  135. @Argentine American

    I agree that “miscegenation seems to be at an all time high.” At least, that is the impression I get from watching news shows and commetcials on national television. Many news hosts and guests are African-American (Black, Negro) and nearly all commercials have mixed couples and African-American children.

  136. 95Theses says:
    @dearieme

    I wonder when this rumor will have finally run its course. Thomas Jefferson did not father any children of Sally Hemings, and only of her last child, Eston, was there ever any suggestion of paternity. Disputes will, of course, continue to linger – but the matter is mostly settled; the final nail in the coffin being the book which was the product of the Scholars Commission, written in 2011.

    The Jefferson-Hemings Controversy: Report of the Scholars Commission

    Perhaps most significant is the contribution of the late, great historian, Forrest McDonald (no great admirer of Jefferson) because of McDonald’s inclination to believe the worst of him. Randall University Professor of History Steven Byas summed it up thusly:

    Noted historian Forrest McDonald, who was a devotee of the greatness of Jefferson’s arch-nemesis, Alexander Hamilton, was once inclined to believe the rumors, but after carefully reviewing all the evidence, including the 1998 DNA findings, concluded, “I’m always delighted to hear the worst about Thomas Jefferson. It’s just that this particular thing won’t wash.”
    https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/25489-libel-against-thomas-jefferson-continues

    Here also in PDF is the Table of Contents, Preface, and catalogue of the Scholars:
    https://cap-press.com/pdf/1179.pdf

    The senior scholars give a discussion of their then recently published book on C-SPAN:

    The Jefferson-Hemings Controversy
    2011, September 01 | C-SPAN

    The Jefferson-Hemings Controversy Members of the Scholars Commission on the Jefferson-Hemings Issue held a press conference to present evidence that contradicts arguments that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with his slave, Sally Hemings. The commission, made up of historians, lawyers, scientists, and genealogists, released the book The Jefferson-Hemings Controversy: Report of the Scholars Commission, edited by Professor Turner. Professors Turner and Traut used some charts during their presentation and responded to questions from members of the audience.

    This book release event of the Scholars Commission on the Jefferson-Hemings Issue and the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society was held at the National Press Club.

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?301339-1/jefferson-hemings-controversy

  137. Abstract: Using data from the Philadelphia Neurodevelopmental Cohort, we examined whether European ancestry predicted cognitive ability over and above both parental socioeconomic status (SES) and measures of eye, hair, and skin color.

    LOL, you can’t say that in CURRENT YEAR! Burn the heretics!

  138. Chinaman says:

    Would be interesting to see a study like this done between chinaman and white. There are enough chinese biracials now that we can actually run such correlations to see who is actually corrupting the other’s bloodline and who is dragging the other down.

    I doubt such a study will ever be done in the West though.

    • LOL: niceland
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Anon
  139. @istevefan

    In a previous post you were trying to predict the next big thing that will follow the tranny issue. Maybe the answer to your question is in the above passage. Despite the untold billions or trillions spent over the past 50 years, the Gap remains. However, it appears from the above passage that the Gap can be narrowed dramatically by another way.

    ISF, you might be on to something here.

    The amount of miscegenation–specifically black on white–propaganda that is pushed by Hollyweird’s the-people-who-don’t-like-us is stunning. And seems to have crossed the Atlantic as well. AnotherMom and i will pull our chairs in front of the TV and settle in for some British mystery schlock … and there it is–even if completely anachronistic.

    I could see a campaign where white women are basically told if they are dating white men they are racist and worse the engine perpetuating racism and “white supremacy”.

    I think you’re right. This could is probably coming and could well be the next big push.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  140. If I submitted this graph and claimed correlation, the manuscript would be booted out of any respectable journal in no time. But this is “social science”, whereas I work in real science, thank goodness.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  141. nsa says:

    There is something really squishy about an article using statistics and pseudo-science to prove what everyone already knows: blacks are dumb and physically aggressive….whites are brighter but wimpy and subservient……missing the main problem: THE JOO ARTFULLY PLAYING BOTH OFF AGAINST EACH OTHER. Get rid of or at least curtail the conniving joo…….blacks and whites would self-segregate and eventually find a way to coexist peacefully. Unfortunately, the vile joo won’t be disappearing any time soon so the future will just be more racial stupidity and mayhem.

  142. res says:
    @Svevlad

    There’s one thing I’m interested in: someone should do a study to see the cognitive difference between a WMBF mixed-race man and a BMWF one. I have a suspicion that the WMBF ones are smarter than the BMWF…

    I don’t understand this. Do you mean male children instead of man? The BMWF male children will have a single X chromosome from the WF. Do you think the average IQs will be different enough between the couple types to overcome that? I suppose that is plausible…

  143. res says:
    @AnotherDad

    I largely agree with that, but think you at least need to note the influence selective emigration might have on “mean IQ of black Africans in the West” observed (cf. the hypothetical “if all black Africans grew up in a Western level environment”, where I think you make a good estimate).

  144. I like posts related to IQ discussion. Shame they aren’t posted as much

  145. Miro23 says:

    Maybe there’s too much emphasis on IQ. There are a mass of African Americans and European Americans 1-2 standard deviations below the white mean.

    The US also has a mass of jobs entirely manageable by people in this IQ range, so maybe it’s just a question of getting them into these jobs (and respecting their work). The high IQ people can do the high IQ jobs, and feel thankful that there are other to do their gardening and deliver their mail.

  146. res says:
    @James Speaks

    That’s a really patronizing comment. Especially since it looks like you are wrong. How about you do the math and come back and show us your result?

    • Replies: @James Speaks
  147. res says:
    @Professional Stranger

    Nigeria has the highest GDP and highest average income, and highest average IQ in Africa. The difference between IQ in Nigeria(84) and Equatorial Guinea(59) is stunning! https://brainstats.com/average-iq-by-country.html

    How sure about that Nigerian IQ of 84 are you? Because I clicked through to one of the references they gave and searched for Nigeria and it said 67: https://books.google.fr/books?hl=fr&id=KQ4rLiAbHQQC&q=nigeria#v=snippet&q=nigeria&f=false

    David Becker has a detailed database on country IQs and the numbers he gives (including the L&V numbers) cluster around 70.
    https://www.researchgate.net/project/Worlds-IQ

    And as far as highest average income, did South Africa get taken out of Africa?
    https://www.worlddata.info/average-income.php

    You are at least right about GDP (well, as long as one does not invoke the dreaded “per capita”):
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)
    I guess that is one case where having so many people is a good thing.

    • Replies: @Professional Stranger
  148. @95Theses

    Except Y-DNA evidence already proved Jefferson is the father.

    • Replies: @res
  149. Realist says:
    @Chinaman

    Would be interesting to see a study like this done between chinaman and white. There are enough chinese biracials now that we can actually run such correlations to see who is actually corrupting the other’s bloodline and who is dragging the other down.

    I doubt such a study will ever be done in the West though.

    I think it is accepted by many whites that the average Chinese IQ is about 105 and the average white IQ is about 100…therefore it is implied that the white component of a biracial, Chinese/white would negatively effect the IQ. On average of course.

    • Replies: @Anon
  150. Realist says:
    @Toy

    Look everybody one of our newest fucking idiots.

    • Replies: @Toy
  151. Blankaerd says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    What? No “we” don’t, “we know” that biracial children have an elevated rate of mental illness than monoracial children of whatever parental race that had a lower incidence of mental illness than the other parental race. Biracial children fall between the norms just like in IQ, on average.

    Not what I’ve come to learn from Dutton and Macdonald. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s3U64VUYg4 though Dutton did remark on a reverse trend between asians and whites as it pertains to mental instability.

    Not only a stretch, but retarded. Actual IQ data places them above whites and Asians.

    Source of that study? Did it discriminate between East Asians and South Asians? Seems to me East Asians are more likely to procreate with whites than other asians, thus the IQ of biracial white/asian would naturally be higher than that of whites but lower than that of East-Asians, thus giving more weight to my statement: ‘perhaps dumber than their asian parent and smarter than white

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  152. @res

    Stranger:

    Nigeria has the highest GDP and highest average income, and highest average IQ in Africa. The difference between IQ in Nigeria(84) and Equatorial Guinea(59) is stunning! https://brainstats.com/average-iq-by-country.html

    Res:

    How sure about that Nigerian IQ of 84 are you?

    Stranger: Just click that link I gave. It says
    [[These numbers came from a work carried out from 2002 to 2006 by Richard Lynn, a British Professor of Psychology, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish Professor of Political Science, who conducted IQ studies in more than 80 countries.]]
    .. And those guys are the gold-standard on this topic.

    • Replies: @res
  153. @Svevlad

    I did read something somewhere that said the children of BMWF couples were a little smarter than the WMBF’s kids. The reason wasn’t given, but I immediately started thinking it was because maybe more IQ related genes are on the X chromosome than the Y chromosome. The Y chromosome has fewer genes overall compared to the X chromosome. Something I also read once but can’t recall the source.

    Anyone who actually works with genes for a living feel free to chime in.

    • Replies: @Svevlad
    , @S. M. Coulton
  154. @anon

    Really? Blacks weren’t drafted into WW2?

  155. @JosephB

    i’ve argued for years that the real number is about 82. not 85, which is an artificial number rounded up to make the math easier for those 1 standard deviation arguments people are obsessed with. on SAT and presumably ACT, the difference between africans and europeans is actually getting bigger now, not smaller, and there is about a 20 point difference between average test takers.

    it’s totally believable people in west africa can do about 70, if they grow up in west africa. whereas if they grow up in a western european nation, there is general agreement that better food, better medicine, no parasites, no nutrient deficiencies, and 10 years of organized school, can increase people’s capability from 70 to 80. even among HBD people, there is agreement that 10 years of public education in the west, does increase at least capability on intelligence tests, if not actual intelligence.

    at the same time it’s totally possible that the most backwards africans, or people barely surviving on minimal calories and not enough nutrients, can be below 70. and i think there is little doubt that negroes are smarter than aborigines and bushmen, who probably are correctly being measured in the 60s.

    it has been calculated that the inner city denizens of America’s worst cities, such as Detroit, Baltimore, Cleveland, New Orleans, and so forth, actually do have a capability below 80. and that’s in the best country in the world for africans. this is largely to due smarter people getting the heck out of there, but nevertheless it’s simply the case that there are now probably a dozen cities in the US where there are a million africans with a capability below 80 on paper and pencil intelligence tests.

  156. Neoconned says:
    @Richard B

    The white male/Asian wife thing is largely an urban and to a greater extent west coast thing.

    The black California population has fallen precipitously and most of the ones left on the west coast are what southern black guys would call “white black dudes”. Usually upper class and can still afford the obscene cost of living out there.

    In the south white guys still largely date white women though there is out dating with latinas, Asians etc.

    But in the south you have the ghetto black dudes who still date black women but want “others” and then the other black guys…especially military types or cops…..they tend to date white women. Nerdy black dudes the same. The more they know about comics and anime the more likely they are to be gay or have a non black gf or wife in this region for whatever reason…..

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  157. Whitewolf says:
    @Steve Sailer

    I’ve argued since 2002 when I reviewed Lynn and Vanhanen’s “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” that the lower IQs seen in Africa than the U.S. would appear to be clear evidence of environmental problems depressing IQ in Africa

    Environmental problems might play a part but IQs in Africa aren’t going to match Europe or Asia anytime soon unless the White genocide program is successful. The genetic disparity in IQ is just too great to be overcome by a change in environment.

    Africans evolved in a vastly different environment to other races. One where high IQ didn’t offer the same survival advantages it does in harsher and colder climates. They survived and as far as nature is concerned they are a successful race perfectly adapted to their environment complete with dark skin to protect them from the harsh sunlight.

  158. @Realist

    What environmental problems would that be?

    malnutrition, parasites, maybe even some environmental toxins like lead or other heavy metals

    • Replies: @Realist
  159. Toy says:
    @Realist

    Was that supposed to be a refutation?
    Cope harder.

  160. @Argentine American

    Historically White Males have far exceeded white females in miscegenation. The only way the PTB could get more white women involved with men of color was to Propagandize for it 24/7, and to tell them 24/7 that it’s “ok to marry outside your race”. Some theaters that do advertisements before the show, will play 5 or more ads that depict mixed race couples. It is now “ok for white women” to pair up with dark skinned men, when they were ostracized in the past while white males enjoyed sexually using women of other races.

    Other factors pushing white women into the arms of black and brown men are the values that white males now have, which are basically gaming, porn, and bitching on comment boards about white women. Plus, White males also have a lot of hang ups, including sexual ones; just listen to some of the mgtow types that proliferate around.

    • Replies: @Angharad
  161. Realist says:
    @GermanReader2

    malnutrition, parasites, maybe even some environmental toxins like lead or other heavy metals

    Food is plentiful in Sub Saharan Africa. Maybe, maybe…is there is or there is not. I contend the environment in northern Europe is much more hostile.

    • Replies: @Realist
  162. gcochran says:
    @The Alarmist

    Sure it’s significant.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  163. @Blankaerd

    As noted, I don’t doubt that such will play some role, but nothing I have seen would suggest it’s a major one compared to the more basic biological issues of insufficient nutrition stunting brain development. Are you aware of any studies attempting to quantify these specialized ability factors as part of intelligence test results in any serious way?

    If one looks only to Great Britain, adolescents there now are several inches taller on average than they were in the 1930s. This development certainly cannot be due to any changes in education, nor is it genetic when occurring over such a brief timespan. It is best explained through improved nutrition. Similarly, just as an adequate basic diet allows the body to develop to its full genetic potential (and malnutrition hinders this), the same should be true for the brain, which is very dependent on certain vitamins and essential fats as well as raw calories.

    • Replies: @Blankaerd
  164. Realist says:
    @Realist

    Should read…either there is or there is not…

  165. Idiocracy is happening. All that is going on is the intentional lowering of IQ by breeding greater conformity into the majority public and implementing highly controlled social mechanisms. Hence, the term Globohomo (Global Homogeneity). Reducing brain power only a couple of points will suffice.

    For example, take someone with an IQ in the 200 range. He can be rendered to a point of being a non-threat if he reads the New York Times daily for over 30 years. The campaign of lowering reasoning ability is completely focused on the on the younger generations.

    Who is doing this? Hmmm. What )))tribal network((( brags about their supremacy day and night regardless of their position on the political spectrum? Here’s a hint. Barb of SPECTRE.

  166. There are no valid IQ tests , to my knowledge they are all basically flawed , so the cited study is worthless .

    • Replies: @mikemikev
    , @Wizard of Oz
  167. mikemikev says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    I guess that clears everything up. Thanks.

  168. @Blankaerd

    You didn’t learn anything from Dutton, you watched a babbling video by that idiot. Cite a single study to your argument, you can’t do it.

    Source of that study? Did it discriminate between East Asians and South Asians? Seems to me East Asians are more likely to procreate with whites than other asians, thus the IQ of biracial white/asian would naturally be higher than that of whites but lower than that of East-Asians, thus giving more weight to my statement: ‘perhaps dumber than their asian parent and smarter than white‘

    The results are from Britains national CAT assessment.

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/glassessment.pdf

    Anyway, did you actually look at the fucking scores? Biracial Asians exceeded Asians on every metric except visual-spatial reasoning. All you have lent credence is your poor attention span and unwillingness to read.

    • Replies: @Blankaerd
  169. @Neoconned

    The majority of white male/asian female couples are in the south (Texas, Washington DC), the rural midwest and the northeast (New York, Massachusetts). White male + Hispanic female + Asian female exceeds all forms of interracial pairings in the south involving white women, and by a large margin.

    • Replies: @Neoconned
  170. @Brewer

    You are absolutely right. Considering the great probability that we are likely to find ourselves stranded in the Simpson desert without water and the negligible likelihood that we will ever need good legal, financial or engineering advice let us give absolute priority, before anyone has their IQ tested, that they memorise a list of the Aborigines still to be found at least occasionally in the Simpson desert and their certified qualifications as water finders.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  171. @Toy

    Are you being serious. If not, what is the purpose of your trolling? Does your slight knowledge of physics and other sciences extend to what may be done with the extra computing speed that may result from the development of quantum computing? How about its implications for medicine? Restoring your senescent brain cells even….

    • Replies: @Toy
  172. Svevlad says:
    @Don't Look at Me

    I dunno, But I read somewhere that we inherit more of our intelligence from the father, though this might only apply to female children. I don’t think it’s very true tho

  173. @9/11 Inside job

    “to my knowledge”???? What is your knowledge? And how derived? You are not trying some silly trick like pretending that something which is not comprehensively perfect for all desired uses is necessarily “,,flawed” are you?

    • Replies: @9/11 Inside job
  174. res says:
    @Professional Stranger

    Stranger: Just click that link I gave.

    I did. Perhaps you did not read my comment. Especially this part:

    Because I clicked through to one of the references they gave and searched for Nigeria and it said 67: https://books.google.fr/books?hl=fr&id=KQ4rLiAbHQQC&q=nigeria#v=snippet&q=nigeria&f=false

    That reference is the L&V book. How about you click through to that link? And check if L&V really assigned an IQ of 84 to Nigeria.

    And I also wrote this:

    David Becker has a detailed database on country IQs and the numbers he gives (including the L&V numbers) cluster around 70.
    https://www.researchgate.net/project/Worlds-IQ

    How about you click through to that link and download Becker’s spreadsheet? I think that is the current gold standard on this topic. It incorporates both the L&V 2002 numbers and the later L&V 2012 numbers.

    Still sure about 84? How about you provide a link to a primary reference? (i.e. not an article asserting L&V said something they did not)

    And no response to South Africa’s average income being higher than Nigeria’s?

    P.S. Nice projection with accusing me of not clicking your link (which I did) when you clearly did not follow the two links I gave. Perhaps you can explain how I knew where to find their L&V reference without clicking the brainstats link?

    • Replies: @Professional Stranger
  175. @AnonFromTN

    If your manuscripts were as sloppy as this Comment the editors might ppint out that mere courtesy to your readers requores you to identify unambiguously which of the graphs in the article and thread is “this graph”. And, if in patronising mode equal to your own, they might point out that there is nothing wrong with correlations. It is their significance and causation which their existence may raise for discussion.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  176. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Except Y-DNA evidence already proved Jefferson is the father.

    No. Stating that shows you don’t understand the DNA evidence. (but way to recite the popular talking point)

    The link 95Theses gave covers the DNA evidence in some detail. At best it proves a “Jefferson male” was an ancestor.

    More from that link: https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/25489-libel-against-thomas-jefferson-continues

    The Jefferson Foundation noted, “Dissenters have pointed to Jefferson’s younger brother, Randolph Jefferson, as a candidate for paternity, a possibility that would fit the DNA finding.” It should be reiterated that the DNA findings were not that Thomas Jefferson was the father of Eston Hemings, but rather that a “Jefferson male” was an ancestor.

    Randolph Jefferson had earned a reputation for socializing with Jefferson’s slaves, and was expected to visit Monticello approximately nine months before the birth of Eston Hemings.

    Until 1976, the descendants of Eston Hemings believed they were descended from a Jefferson “uncle.” While Randolph was Thomas’ brother, not his uncle, this is the type of confusion found in family stories. Randolph was known at Monticello as “Uncle Randolph,” because, of course, he was the uncle of Thomas Jefferson’s children by his late wife. According to Martha Jefferson Randolph, her father’s younger brother was “Uncle Randolph.”

    The reality is we don’t know for sure and probably never will.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  177. @Hypnotoad666

    “Is Mulatto Supremacist even a thing?” It is now. We shall give you credit.

    From now on when called a white supremacist, I will say that no, “I am a mulatto supremacist” (just like Pocahontas). Until I have a DNA test, don’t I have the right to assume that somewhere in my genealogy I have a smidgen of DNA that is not European?

  178. @Charles Erwin Wilson 3

    Wikipedia, for what its worth, (which is usually about zero on anything that is controversial) suggests the evidence tends toward Thomas being the father of Sally Heming’s children. But in this case, the argument is that Randolph (Thomas’s younger brother) seldom visited Monticello, and when he did, it was not at a time properly corresponding to the impregnation of Sally’s children. So, it would appear that in this case, Wikipedia might have more credence than usual.

    Obviously you are emphatic about Randolph being the father of Sally’s offspring. Where do you get your support for that?

  179. Toy says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Oh wow dude…
    Is that supposed to be a refutation?
    Self-righteous indignation?
    Thanks for the undergrad faculty brochure.
    I dare you to be specific.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  180. Blankaerd says:
    @John Regan

    Are you aware of any studies attempting to quantify these specialized ability factors as part of intelligence test results in any serious way?

    Yes, this is Michael Woodley’s area of research. He has shown that the Flynn effect only raised the IQ in non-g-loaded areas (so specialized abilities). I think it’s best to read the book At Our Wits End where both Dutton and Michael Woodley show that g-factor has declined significantly in the West. I have found a review of Woodley’s work below that references most of his research on the g-factor. So if you’re looking more for the actual technical stuff click on the link below.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZaEY0UjluV1djOG8/view

    I quote: ‘Since the Flynn effect cannot be plausibly explained in terms of improvements in genotypic intelligence (Woodley, 2011), and because the magnitude of Flynn effect gains are inversely correlated with the g saturation of IQ subtests, the authors conclude that to whatever extent the Flynn effect represents genuine enhancement of intelligence, it is the specialized environ-
    mental component of intelligence that has been improving.3’

    Additionally you may want to look into Woodley’s co-occurrence model where he tries to combine the drop in g and the increase in specialized abilities. This is part 1 wherein he explains and defends this model:

    (Jolly heretic is a channel worth following, I recommend all talks between Dutton and Woodley)

    If one looks only to Great Britain, adolescents there now are several inches taller on average than they were in the 1930s. This development certainly cannot be due to any changes in education, nor is it genetic when occurring over such a brief timespan.

    While it’s true that the increase in height is/was mostly down to food, in recent years average height has actually been decreasing when accounting for proportions. The reason why people are getting taller today in the West is because their legs are getting longer (but not other body parts), which relates to mutations. (and of course food) So yes it does relate somewhat to genetics. People are not proportionally becoming taller, they’re proportionally becoming smaller. It’s very similar to how the Flynn effect has masked the decrease in g despite the fact that the IQ increased over a certain time period.

  181. @Wizard of Oz

    See my comment #117 above . The article references an IQ test , which IQ test or tests did the authors of the study use in their research ? “IQ tests are fundamentally flawed … study shows ” Steve Connor ,
    The Independent , Decembe 21 ,2012 .

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  182. @Wizard of Oz

    If you are interested in reality (which is inadvisable for a troll), I meant the graph shown with this article in the TOC. If that graph shows correlation, I am the Emperor of the East.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  183. johnm33 says:

    Compare IQs with cultural habits such as consaguity in married couples or child [girls] marraige and you find the more there is of either the lower the populations IQ. Consanguity seems to confer no advantages, child marraige drops the IQ causes earlier maturity, physical robustness and unwarratied confidence. Early maturiy could be seen as a viable adaptation right up to the point where a culture collapses or ossifies.
    It seems most of these effects are related to the maternal grandmothers circumstances before her eggs were fertilised, in order to tease out any real meaning from IQ stats these effects need to be properly studied and allowed for.
    Height is certainly affected in a similar way in order to be tall you must either have a long family history of being well nourished, or some special circumstances must have existed whilst your maternal grandmother was incubating your mother, both effects increase through the generations.
    http://worldpopulationreview.com/countries/average-iq-by-country/
    http://www.womanstats.org/maps.html

  184. @res

    The fact that you think the Jefferson Y-DNA in Hemmings’s descendants doesn’t prove Jefferson’s paternity just goes to show you know nothing and are afflicted with the same paranoia and delusional religious thinking that is destroying the modern world. The DNA report obviously did not indicate that “at best” a Jefferson male was the father, as it definitively established that the Hemmings’s descendants carry the same incredibly rare Y-DNA haplogroup T as the jefferson line, found ln less than 3% of British males. There’s no way a Jefferson male isn’t the father given their association with the Jefferson, and the crackhead “dissenters” your link mentions don’t have a leg to stand on:

    In the fall of 2001, articles in the National Genealogical Society Quarterly criticized the TJHS Scholars Commission Report for poor scholarship and failure to follow accepted historical practices of analysis, or to give sufficient weight to the body of evidence.[62] In the same year, historian Alexander Boulton wrote that Randolph Jefferson had never been seriously proposed as a candidate by historians before the 1998 DNA study.</b] He noted "previous testimony had agreed" that Hemings had only one father for her children, and criticized the idea that she had multiple partners for her children.[69] Jeanette Daniels, Marietta Glauser, Diana Harvey and Carol Hubbell Ouellette conducted research and in 2003 concluded that Randolph Jefferson had been an infrequent visitor to Monticello.[70]

    https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/

    From the Historical Record

    The following summarizes what is known about Sally Hemings and her family.

    Sally Hemings (1773-1835) was a slave at Monticello; she lived in Paris with Jefferson and two of his daughters from 1787 to 1789; and, she had at least six children.

    Sally Hemings’s duties included being a nursemaid-companion to Thomas Jefferson’s daughter Maria (ca. 1784-1787), lady’s maid to daughters Martha and Maria (1787-1797), and chambermaid and seamstress (1790s-1827).

    There are no known images of Sally Hemings and only four known descriptions of her appearance or demeanor.

    Sally Hemings left no known written accounts. It is not known if she was literate.
    In the few scattered references to Sally Hemings in Thomas Jefferson’s records and correspondence, there is nothing to distinguish her from other members of her family.
    Thomas Jefferson was at Monticello at the likely conception times of Sally Hemings’s six known children. There are no records suggesting that she was elsewhere at these times, or records of any births at times that would exclude Jefferson paternity.

    There are no indications in contemporary accounts by people familiar with Monticello that Sally Hemings’s children had different fathers.

    Sally Hemings’s children were light-skinned, and three of them (daughter Harriet and sons Beverly and Eston) lived as members of white society as adults.

    According to contemporary accounts, some of Sally Hemings’s children strongly resembled Thomas Jefferson.

    Thomas Jefferson freed all of Sally Hemings’s children: Beverly and Harriet were allowed to leave Monticello in 1822; Madison and Eston were released in Jefferson’s 1826 will. Jefferson gave freedom to no other nuclear slave family.

    Thomas Jefferson did not free Sally Hemings. She was permitted to leave Monticello by his daughter Martha Jefferson Randolph not long after Jefferson’s death in 1826, and went to live with her sons Madison and Eston in Charlottesville.
    Several people close to Thomas Jefferson or the Monticello community believed that he was the father of Sally Hemings’s children.

    Eston Hemings changed his name to Eston Hemings Jefferson in 1852.
    Madison Hemings stated in 1873 that he and his siblings Beverly, Harriet, and Eston were Thomas Jefferson’s children.

    The descendants of Madison Hemings who have lived as African-Americans have passed a family history of descent from Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings down through the generations.

    Eston Hemings’s descendants, who have lived as whites, have passed down a family history of being related to Thomas Jefferson. In the 1940s, family members changed this history to state that an uncle of Jefferson’s, rather than Jefferson himself, was their ancestor.

    Basically you’re finished, just go ahead and admit that you are some kind of mentally defective screwball who has an odd obsession with fighting an uphill battle against the scientific consensus that Jefferson is the male ancestor of Hemmings’s descendants, and who chooses to exhalt crackwhore-quality “dissenters” over over the people who have set the consensus in stone.

    And the guy who did the Y-DNA analysis (which you have never even seen before) did indeed suggest that Thomas Jefferson was the father, another big dent in your shitmonger’s report.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/23835

    • Replies: @res
  185. @Don't Look at Me

    I did read something somewhere that said the children of BMWF couples were a little smarter than the WMBF’s kids.

    You never read anything to suggest this; you’re hallucinating. It always amazes me how people think they remember the fine details of what would be groundbreaking and controversial findings, but never the authors’ names.

    Actually, the Y-chromosome has more cognition-rich genes relative to size than the x-chromosome, and is functionally more significant than X chromosomes. All mammals of either sex are also genetically more like their fathers than their mothers due to a paternal imprint effect, and WMBF children are more likely to be higher IQ for this reason.

    Thankfully, traits spread via males, due to their vastly greater reproductive potential. Females are merely the packaging of man’s evolution.

    • Replies: @res
  186. @Rex Little

    Uh, no. Historically, WMBF way more common than BMWF. BMWF only started in the 1970s, really didn’t even go public until the 1990s. WMBF on the other hand was going strong for 300 years. About 30% of African Americans today carry European Y-chromosomes.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  187. Neoconned says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Not denying you but what’s your source?

    All I can tell you is from say the Baton Rouge/NOLA region to NW Florida what you say isnt the case and in some small town areas in my region black dudes dating white or non-black women exceeds 50%….

    Maybe as you go more up north it changes. I found the yellow fever thing to be huge on the West Coast but whatever….my data is mostly anecdotal from what I saw with my own eyes……

  188. Brewer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Hypothetical thinking and its ramifications are beyond the capabilities of those intoxicated by herd mentality.
    Pele wasn’t much of a tennis player.

  189. @Toy

    A semiliterate rant doesn’t deserve refutation. Just a prompt to get serious instead of polluting others’ moderately intelligent and intelligible conversation with discourteous raillery if it isn’t drunken jibes.

    • Replies: @Toy
  190. @9/11 Inside job

    Rather odd that you didn’t give a link to the Steve Connor article. Wasting only a little more of my time I discovered that, as in the #117 comment, you seem content to rely on second rate confirmations of your prejudices, in this case a journalistic hack whose knowledge of his subject doesn’t even extend to posing the elementary question whether measures of each of short term memory, reasoning and verbal skills are correlated positively with g. The link is

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/iq-tests-are-fundamentally-flawed-and-using-them-alone-to-measure-intelligence-is-a-fallacy-study-8425911.html

    You should know that Steve Sailer has been studying and writing about IQ and related topics for over 20 years (maybe much more) and deserves more than your superficial comments based on political and PC prejudices.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  191. Brewer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Rather than employing an ad hominem against a reporter, which tells us nothing relevant to the topic, would it not be more informative to list your objections to the study reported on?

    After conducting the largest online intelligence study on record, a Western University-led research team has concluded that the notion of measuring one’s intelligence quotient or IQ by a singular, standardized test is highly misleading.

    The findings from the landmark study, which included more than 100,000 participants, were published Dec. 19 in the journal Neuron. The article, “Fractionating human intelligence,” was written by Adrian M. Owen and Adam Hampshire from Western’s Brain and Mind Institute (London, Canada) and Roger Highfield, Director of External Affairs, Science Museum Group (London, U.K).

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121219133334.htm

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  192. @gcochran

    Interesting that you may be seriously interested in the AGW arguments. Or are you just saying that it is worth looking for the causes of that 0.8 degrees (or more?) because it clearly isn’t a random phenomenon like most weather? Have you had a look at the IPCCs many models? Do you regard any of them as scarily good?

  193. @AnonFromTN

    No relief from your dismissive arrogance. Aren’t you too good to be wasting your time on us here? (Or is it just that being stuck in Tennessee when your deserts merit the Ivies makes you fed up?). “TOC”?? *shown *with* this article in the TOC”. Googling gives about 100 TOCs of which Table of Contents could have a faint relevance. But, moving on from your time wasting solipsism I find in the article one graph which is labeled Figure 3 and it clearly shows a positive correlation with an upward sloping linear regression line.

  194. @res

    Stranger:

    Nigeria has the highest GDP and highest average income, and highest average IQ in Africa. The difference between IQ in Nigeria(84) and Equatorial Guinea(59) is stunning! https://brainstats.com/average-iq-by-country.html

    Res:

    How sure about that Nigerian IQ of 84 are you?

    Stranger:

    Just click that link I gave. It says
    [[These numbers came from a work carried out from 2002 to 2006 by Richard Lynn, a British Professor of Psychology, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish Professor of Political Science, who conducted IQ studies in more than 80 countries.]]
    .. And those guys are the gold-standard on this topic.

    Res:

    Nice projection with accusing me of not clicking your link

    Stranger:
    Sounds paranoid-schiczo!
    I made an assertion, then you asked a question about it, and I answered.
    You never made any assertion.
    Sounds like you have a personal involvement in this topic, and you are trying to keep your head down while at the same time, throw shit at those who rock your boat. LOL!

    • Replies: @res
  195. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    It’s fun to see what happens when someone who does not understand something (you and the word “prove”, apparently) chooses to debate it.

    The DNA report obviously did not indicate that “at best” a Jefferson male was the father, as it definitively established that the Hemmings’s descendants carry the same incredibly rare Y-DNA haplogroup T as the jefferson line, found ln less than 3% of British males. There’s no way a Jefferson male isn’t the father given their association with the Jefferson

    Right. In other words, it indicates a Jefferson male was the father. Which was what I said.

    Leaving aside all of the subjective judgments and oral history and focusing on the DNA evidence. And remember that Y-chromosome testing can not distinguish related males with a common ancestor in the male lines (absent new mutations, the Nature paper has some useful discussion of a mutation case).

    Your first link contains a good summary of the study:

    The study–which tested Y-chromosomal DNA samples from male-line descendants of Field Jefferson (Thomas Jefferson’s uncle), John Carr (grandfather of Jefferson’s Carr nephews), Eston Hemings, and Thomas Woodson–indicated a genetic link between the Jefferson and Hemings descendants. The results of the study established that an individual carrying the male Jefferson Y chromosome fathered Eston Hemings (born 1808), the last known child born to Sally Hemings. There were approximately 25 adult male Jeffersons who carried this chromosome living in Virginia at that time, and a few of them are known to have visited Monticello.

    It also goes on to assert (assertion is very different from proof–and “proved” was the word you used!):

    The study’s authors, however, said “the simplest and most probable” conclusion was that Thomas Jefferson had fathered Eston Hemings.

    So we have 25 candidates, two of whom seem most likely: Thomas and Randolph Jefferson (but see comments about Randolph’s sons in other sources below).

    Here is a link to the full text of that Nature article: https://www.mcdb.ucla.edu/Research/Goldberg/HC70A_W04/pdf/Foster_Nature_1998.pdf

    Basically you’re finished, just go ahead and admit that you are some kind of mentally defective screwball who has an odd obsession with fighting an uphill battle against the scientific consensus that Jefferson is the male ancestor of Hemmings’s descendants, and who chooses to exhalt crackwhore-quality “dissenters” over over the people who have set the consensus in stone.

    Ad hominems–the best way ever to say to someone arguing with you: “you win.”

    I stand by my words and you have done nothing to refute them. In particular the following two statements:

    1. The DNA evidence does not prove that Thomas Jefferson was Eston Hemmings father. And says little concrete about the parentage of her other children.

    2. The reality is we don’t know for sure and probably never will.

    I would also add that the DNA evidence disagrees with the family history which indicated Thomas Jefferson was the father of Thomas Woodson (well assuming no cuckolds in the family line, anyway). Worth remembering that when considering other family history about Thomas Jefferson descendants.

    Now leaving aside your incorrect usage of the word “proved”, what seems likely?

    The DNA evidence indicates that neither of the Carr nephews (sons of Jefferson’s sister) were the father of Eston Hemings. This had been suggested by Jefferson family history and was the favorite non-TJ hypothesis before the DNA analysis became available.

    Your first link mentions some relevant reports:

    Shortly after the DNA test results were released in November 1998, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation formed a research committee consisting of nine members of the foundation staff, including four with Ph.D.s. In January 2000, the committee reported that the weight of all known evidence—from the DNA study, original documents, written and oral historical accounts, and statistical data—indicated a high probability that Thomas Jefferson was the father of Eston Hemings, and that he was likely the father of all six of Sally Hemings’s children listed in Monticello records—Harriet (born 1795; died in infancy); Beverly (born 1798); an unnamed daughter (born 1799; died in infancy); Harriet (born 1801); Madison (born 1805); and Eston (born 1808).

    Since then, a committee commissioned by the Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society, after reviewing essentially the same material, reached different conclusions, namely that Sally Hemings was only a minor figure in Thomas Jefferson’s life and that it is very unlikely he fathered any of her children. This committee also suggested in its report, issued in April 2001 and revised in 2011, that Jefferson’s younger brother Randolph (1755-1815) was more likely the father of at least some of Sally Hemings’s children.

    Here is a link to the first report and other relevant information: https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/research-report-on-jefferson-and-hemings/

    I think this excerpt serves as a summary of that report:

    Although paternity cannot be established with absolute certainty, our evaluation of the best evidence available suggests the strong likelihood that Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings had a relationship over time that led to the birth of one, and perhaps all, of the known children of Sally Hemings.

    The second (and most recent) report was released as a book in 2011: https://www.amazon.com/Jefferson-Hemings-Controversy-Report-Scholars-Commission/dp/0890890854
    Here are the first 15 pages: https://cap-press.com/pdf/1179.pdf
    An overview from Amazon:

    In 2000, the newly formed Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society asked a group of more than a dozen senior scholars from across the country to carefully examine all of the evidence for and against the allegations that Thomas Jefferson fathered one or more children by Sally Hemings, one of his slaves, and to issue a public report. In April 2001, after a year of study, the Scholars Commission issued the most detailed report to date on the issue. With but a single mild dissent, the views of the distinguished panel ranged from ”serious skepticism” to a conviction that the allegation was ”almost certainly false.” This volume, edited by Scholars Commission Chairman Robert F. Turner, includes the ”Final Report”–essentially a summary of arguments and conclusions–as it was released to the press on April 12, 2001. However, several of the statements of individual views–which collectively total several hundred carefully footnoted pages and constitute the bulk of the book–have been updated and expanded to reflect new insights or evidence since the report was initially released.

    I looked harder and found this page which links to a 40 page summary from the book: https://www.tjheritage.org/the-scholars-commission
    It’s not possible to cut and paste from that, but I suggest at minimum looking at the final paragraph on page 18.

    The Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society seems like the primary advocate of the not-TJ camp. Here is a page from them on the topic. Oddly it does not seem to mention the report/book they commissioned. Perhaps it was last updated before the book was released?
    https://www.tjheritage.org/dna-hemings

    PBS actually has a good primer topic on the topic. One interesting point is the family declining to have the DNA of William Hemings (Madison Hemings male line descendant) tested.
    https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jefferson/true/primer.html

    One possibly relevant piece of information is that Thomas Jefferson was 65 when Eston Hemings was conceived: https://www.tjheritage.org/which-jefferson-was-the-father

    Now after looking at that evidence, what do I think is likely? Much of the evidence (it certainly does seem to be the popular position) suggests (but does not prove) and/or claims that Thomas Jefferson was the father of Eston Hemings (and much makes a blanket claim for all of her children). But the book linked above appears to be the most thoroughly researched piece out there and concludes otherwise. Without having a chance to review its full contents I am not sure what to think.

    Perhaps you could try leaving out the ad hominems in your next response? Unless that is the best you have to offer.

    P.S. You might consider the followup in Nature from those who did the DNA analysis. In particular notice their disavowal of the title of the article you linked.
    https://www.nature.com/articles/16181

    Abstract

    It is true that men of Randolph Jefferson’s family could have fathered Sally Hemings’ later children. Space constraints prevented us from expanding on alternative interpretations of our DNA analysis, including the interesting one proposed by Davis. The title assigned to our study was misleading in that it represented only the simplest explanation of our molecular findings: namely, that Thomas Jefferson, rather than one of the Carr brothers, was likely to have been the father of Eston Hemings Jefferson.

  196. @S. M. Coulton

    Uh, no. Historically, WMBF way more common than BMWF.

    OK, “historically” was a bad choice of words on my part. I was referring to the last 70-80 years (any children of an interracial pairing before then are probably not available for IQ studies now). My personal observation (not based on any published studies, just who I’ve seen walking around holding hands) is that 50 years ago there were almost no WMBF couples but a smattering of BMWFs. Only in the last 10-20 years have I seen WMBF pairings in numbers approaching BMWF.

    WMBF on the other hand was going strong for 300 years.

    Well yeah, 300 years ago the plantation owners and overseers were boffing the house slaves, but their kids are long dead. If WMBF pairings continued to go strong after slavery ended, I stand corrected.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  197. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    the Y-chromosome has more cognition-rich genes relative to size than the x-chromosome, and is functionally more significant than X chromosomes. All mammals of either sex are also genetically more like their fathers than their mothers due to a paternal imprint effect

    That is an interesting contention. Do you have any supporting evidence to offer? Or is it like your contention that Thomas Jefferson being the father of Sally Hemings’s children has been proved?

    Do you just plan on eliding the issue of the Y chromosome being 40% of the size of the X chromosome? Or do you think that is irrelevant with respect to your choice of metric: “more cognition-rich genes relative to size”?

    In case it is not clear yet, I am trying to figure out whether you are worth taking seriously. You say many things authoritatively, but don’t appear very good at either supporting them or debating them. Then there is your fondness for ad hominems. Current conclusion is: no, you are not worth taking seriously, but my mind is still open.

    P.S. This reads a lot like projection given the lack of supporting evidence in your original comment:

    It always amazes me how people think they remember the fine details of what would be groundbreaking and controversial findings, but never the authors’ names.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  198. @res

    Res:

    It’s fun to see what happens when someone who does not understand something (you and the word “prove”, apparently) chooses to debate it.

    Stranger:
    This guy is spamming the board, delivering condesending ad-hominen insults to anyone who disagrees with him! I had to iggy him.

    • LOL: res
    • Replies: @res
  199. @Brewer

    Merely expressing my irritation at having my time wasted by someone who is so ignorant and lazy (I refer to 9/11 Inside Job’s crappy posts) that he can comment on Steve Sailer’s thread with such low grade stuff.

    You might want to get Steve to deal with the significance of that online study, if any, apart from perhaps illustrating the problems with online studies. The general answer to those that insist on the importance of multiple intelligences is that they all are positively correlated, as they are with g. Of course outliers where someone is very high on one aspect of intelligence but low on others does raise interesting questions as, no doubt, studies of “idiot” savants and those “on the spectrum” would illustrate. But surely you can see that it is fundamental to showing understanding that you ask what correlations there are between the different mental functions and that 9/11 Inside Job’s citing a reporter who didn’t even see that is pretty shoddy.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  200. @res

    More accurately than Agree I applaud if “approve” is too condescending.

  201. Blankaerd says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Sigh. Did you even watch the video? The studies are listed right there in the description.

    https://archive.is/m3c9P#selection-476.0-476.1

    Anyway, did you actually look at the fucking scores? Biracial Asians exceeded Asians on every metric except visual-spatial reasoning. All you have lent credence is your poor attention span and unwillingness to read.

    East-Asians outperform biracial Asians on both quantitative reasoning and non-verbal reasoning by a substantial amount. Like I said, the study does not seem to discriminate between East-Asian and South / other Asian when looking at the biracial children. I therefore assume that most of them are the product between white British and East Asian, that would explain why they perform lower than the Chinese on quantitative reasoning and non-verbal reasoning, but higher than white British. The only anomaly is verbal reasoning, which is higher than any other group, but not by a huge amount when compared with whites and Chinese.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  202. Brewer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I am not so keen on the irritation factor as excuse for an invalid shortcut. It is a valid point the poster raised, albeit crudely – one that is salient, in fact pivotal to this discussion.
    The fact remains that a major study, authored by Adrian Mark Owen and Roger Highfield found what many have long suspected – that standardized IQ tests are not an accurate guide to overall cognitive function. In fact they have re-written the whole book on that subject and are immensely qualified to do so.
    If that is indeed the case, Sailer’s entire thesis is called into question – the best that can be gleaned from it is that Europeans are better at European stuff.
    Personally, I am grateful to the poster for referencing the article.

  203. @Anonymous

    What is DR3?

    Anyway, the global gag rule is definitely increasing the low-IQ population.

    • Replies: @res
  204. mikemikev says:
    @Brewer

    Could you flesh out their argument a little?

    • Replies: @Brewer
  205. @Brewer

    Thank you for coming to my support of a valid point that I raised (albeit crudely ! ” as to the validity of IQ tests , I would like to know which IQ test or tests the authors of the report used in conducting their study .

  206. @Brewer

    There are a number of people who are or have been UR regulars who might be expected to deal knowledgeably with this claim to have discovered something revolutionary. Apart from Steve Sailer, Peter Frost and James Thompson come to mind, especially the lastmentioned. Until someone so qualified explains to me how an online survey has contributed to our knowledge of , inter alia, neurological factors in cognitive performance I shall not get excited by the prospect of important novelty.

  207. res says:
    @Professional Stranger

    So no response to the actual points I made. Nice. Did you look at any of my links?

    In case it was not clear, I made several assertions.

    1. Nigeria does not have the highest average income in Africa. In SSA South Africa does.
    2. Nigeria only has the highest GDP in Africa because it is a populous country. Measured per capita that looks very different.
    3. Nigerian average IQ is not 84.

    I backed up 3. with a link to the L&V book your link referenced. It does NOT say Nigeria has an average IQ of 84. I followed it up with a link to David Becker’s more recent and comprehensive work which gives a variety of numbers around 70.

    That last sentence sounds like some textbook projection. And capping it off with a bunch of ad hominems and poo flinging. Well done!

  208. res says:
    @Professional Stranger

    Projection is a terrible thing. Thanks for ignoring me. Hopefully that saves me from having to respond to stupidity from you again.

    P.S. For a look at a real ad hominem see Stranger’s comment 202: “Sounds paranoid-schiczo!”

  209. mikemikev says:
    @Brewer

    They’re saying a three factor model captures cognitive ability better than a single factor? I don’t doubt it. Does that mean a single factor then has zero validity? I’m sure that’s very far from the case.

    Flynn:

    Gould’s book evades all of Jensen’s best arguments for a genetic component in the black–white IQ gap, by positing that they are dependent on the concept of g as a general intelligence factor. Therefore, Gould believes that if he can discredit g no more need be said. This is manifestly false. Jensen’s arguments would bite no matter whether blacks suffered from a score deficit on one or ten or one hundred factors.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
  210. res says:
    @Lockean Proviso

    What is DR3?

    Urban dictionary is good for looking up things like this.
    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dr3

    Democrats aRe the Real Racists
    often rendered as
    Dems R the Real Racists

  211. @annamaria

    Whites riot as well , see the YouTube video “Yellow vest protesters riot in Paris and ransack shops on the Champs Elysee .”

    • Replies: @Lockean Proviso
  212. @Brewer

    I have just read this by Roger Highfield

    https://www.wired.co.uk/article/raise-your-iq-instantly

    Now here’s an odd thing: IQ is out but intelligence is still defined and measurable:

    “You can explain the observed variations in intelligence with at least three factors: short-term memory; reasoning; and, finally, the verbal factor. But no fewer”.

    And he still doesn’t deal with the possible correlation of the three factors and why it may be. He says there are separate brain circuits for each of the three factors but, again, nothing about their being correlated in performance and why that might be. Do you recall the work of Harpending, Cochran and Hardy on “The Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence”? It pointed to a number of mutant gene alleles prevalent in the Ashkenazi community which had physical (obviously) consequences for brain structure and function, many being damaging only when homozygous, but advantageous when heterozygous. I think there may have been some differences in the kind of enhanced function in the case of heterozygous advantage. But I don’t recall that there was any suggestion of g being meaningless. BTW I should hsve added Greg Cochran as a suitably qualified person to comment on what Owen and Highfield seem to be be putting forward. He sometimes comments on UR as gcochran.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  213. mikemikev says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Roger Highfield works for the Science Museum Group in London.

    The Science Museum in London said Dr Watson had gone “beyond the point of acceptable debate” during an interview this weekend in which he claimed black people were less intelligent than their white counterparts.

    Even suggesting Blacks and Whites don’t have exactly the same intelligence is beyond the point of acceptable debate, according to these science authorities. Go figure.

  214. res says:
    @Brewer

    Thanks. At least that is an interesting concrete contribution to the thread. I think the first paragraph of their General Discussion section makes a better summary than the abstract, so here it is.

    The results presented here provide evidence to support the view that human intelligence is not unitary but, rather, is formed from multiple cognitive components. These components reflect the way in which the brain regions that have previously been implicated in intelligence are organized into functionally specialized networks and, moreover, when the tendency for cognitive tasks to recruit a combination of these functional networks is accounted for, there is little evidence for a higher-order intelligence factor. Further evidence for the relative independence of these components may be drawn from the fact that they correlate with questionnaire variables in a dissociable manner. Taken together, it is reasonable to conclude that human intelligence is most parsimoniously conceived of as an emergent property of multiple specialized brain systems, each of which has its own capacity.

    I don’t think anyone believes “intelligence is unitary” (i.e. that is a strawman). The idea that g arises from tasks recruiting combinations of functional networks is an interesting one. At the same time I recommend considering other possible g explanations like similar developmental and metabolic characteristics (e.g. myelination or ion concentrations) prevailing across a single brain.

    Here is a link to more about this paper: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.022

    Now the problems. First, N = 16! Need we say more? If you think so then follow the links below.

    I think this is James Thompson’s post on the furor over it: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/what-makes-good-iq-story/
    It is also mentioned in http://www.unz.com/jthompson/representativeness-beats-size/

    Dr. Thompson did not appear to think the paper was even worth engaging with in detail, but the comments of those two posts had links to more detailed discussion and rebuttal.
    http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/how-intelligent-is-iq.html
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886913012804
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289614000270

    I think this comment from the latter Dr. Thomspon post serves as a good summary.

    The incompetent study by Hampshire et al. purportedly refuting general intelligence has been expertly eviscerated by Ashton et al. here and here (res: latter two links just above, oddly the originals are broken). Among other things, they did a confirmatory factor analysis of the online IQ data used by Hampshire et al., showing that a hierarchical g solution fits the data better than the non-g solution favored by Hampshire et al. — even though the data are clearly rather bad, as evidenced by their abnormally low common variance. They also note that the brain scan data show orthogonal factors only because Hampshire et al. assume that the factors are orthogonal, not because of any evidence. Moreover, the brain scan factors are based on within-individual variation rather than between-individual differences, and extrapolating from within-individual data to between-individual data requires heroic assumptions.

    Another brief discussion in https://openpsych.net/forum/printthread.php?tid=38

    Emil’s infographic is good as well (broken link for image in previous link). Click through for a more readable version.

    TLDR: It looks like that paper is laughable.

    • Replies: @Brewer
  215. @res

    Right. In other words, it indicates a Jefferson male was the father. Which was what I said.

    No, you said that “at best”. As if to imply there were good odds that a Jefferson male waan’t the father. And this was AFTER you had previously eliminated Thomas Jefferson as a potential father, based on no evidence of any kind, but an Ann Coulter-tier book.

    And remember that Y-chromosome testing can not distinguish related males with a common ancestor in the male lines (absent new mutations, the Nature paper has some useful discussion of a mutation case).

    What? Yes they can, Y-STR can distinguish between even father and son.

    Your first link contains a good summary of the study:

    It then went on to dispell the notion that they visited regularly and that anyone but Jefferson is the father.

    1. The DNA evidence does not prove that Thomas Jefferson was Eston Hemmings father. And says little concrete about the parentage of her other children.

    Incorrect; the same standard of proof is used daily in the United States to establish paternity. Thomas Jefferson is the father of Eston, it’s 100% proven. Your entire post relies on long quotes of no relevance and whimpy cries of “ad hominem”, as if to camouflage a mere two points of your own: that Thomas Jefferson was 65 when Eston was born and that another Hemmijgs descendant’s family refuses DNA testing: hardly evidence of any kind against his paternity.

    • Replies: @res
  216. @res

    Do you just plan on eliding the issue of the Y chromosome being 40% of the size of the X chromosome? Or do you think that is irrelevant with respect to your choice of metric: “more cognition-rich genes relative to size”?

    Do you plan on eliding the issue of all mammals being genetically 20% more like their fathers than their mothers, due to an epigenetic paternal imprint effect?

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/03/150302123253.htm

    https://rbej.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12958-018-0330-5

    The protein products of the MSY genes, contribute to gonad formation, regulation of spermatogenesis, brain, heart, and kidney development [29, 30] suggesting its critical functions in tissue development and its adult functions.

    Do you plan on admitting that you use multiple sock puppet accounts to spread your weird matricuck philosophical ideas on this website, now that you have reaponded to multiple posts that weren’t addressed to your “res” account?

    In case it is not clear yet, I am trying to figure out whether you are worth taking seriously. You say many things authoritatively, but don’t appear very good at either supporting them or debating them. Then there is your fondness for ad hominems

    Then there is your weakness for ad hominems, and your obsession with pointing them out everywhere you see them, as if you genuinely believe anyone cares that you saw or were the victim of an ad hominem.

    • Replies: @res
  217. @Blankaerd

    Sigh. Did you even watch the video? The studies are listed right there in the description.

    And? He completely misrepresented them and you clearly learned nothing.

    East-Asians outperform biracial Asians on both quantitative reasoning and non-verbal reasoning by a substantial amount.

    And? This is from the United Kingdom where a good deal of biracial Asians are mixed white-South Asians.

    The only anomaly is verbal reasoning, which is higher than any other group, but not by a huge amount when compared with whites and Chinese.

    Biracial white-Asian verbal reasoning was 3 points higher than the Chinese score. You previously stated that “East Asian” (Chinese) performed “substantially” better than biracial Asians qualitative reasoning… When their average score was, similarily, 3 points higher. Such is the nature of Dutton’s flea-brained audience.

    • Replies: @Blankaerd
  218. @Rex Little

    Your personal “observations” (extremely limited life experiences) mean diddly squat, why not keep them to yourself.

    Well yeah, 300 years ago the plantation owners and overseers were boffing the house slaves, but their kids are long dead.

    WTF? No they aren’t, their grandkids are the people we call “African Americans” today, and a comparable number of them have assimilated in to Whiteness, such as Craig Cobb and Unz.com commenter “res”. Almost African American today is at least 20% White, which is the equivalent contribution of a grandparent. Also, a substntial number of these intermixing events occurred in the post-Reconstruction era South and involved black female prostitutes.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  219. Toy says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Yeh, I knew you had nothing specific to argue. And you wanna call me semi-illiterate? Lmfao you’re credibility is just a toilet to be flushed.
    Can’t decide if you’re an academic pseudo intellectual or a boomer. So I’m gonna go with both.
    Stay mad.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  220. @Lloyd1927

    Wikepedia : “Discrimination based on skin color , also known as colorism or shadeism is a form of prejudice… Research has found extensive evidence of discrimination based on skin color in criminal justice , education , the economy , health care , media and politics …Lighter skin tones are seen as preferable in many countries in Africa , Asia and South America .”
    How do you get into the higher class if you have the wrong skin color or tone ?

  221. Brewer says:
    @res

    I confess that the technical aspects of this topic are beyond my field of either expertise or interest – my academic background is in Philosophy, Law and History so it is the validity of argument that interests me. I must also confess to the influence of the purely anecdotal experience of two years teaching on an isolated island among what many would term a “primitive” culture – which caused me to re-examine my former assumptions. Too long a story for this forum, suffice to say that, having taught also in European schools, I was astonished at the relative rate of uptake among Melanesian students once they had abandoned a “magic” World-view. I was also impressed by some of the unique abilities granted them by their familiarity with the irregular patterns found in their environment. Hence my rather flippant remark above:

    If one is lost in the Simpson Desert, is it a Harvard graduate with an IQ of 142 one would prefer to encounter or an aboriginal who knows how to find water?

    This is a fascinating discussion but I see many instances of what I consider to be invalid argument.
    Wizard of Oz dismissed a poster with these words:

    you seem content to rely on second rate confirmations of your prejudices, in this case a journalistic hack

    Anyone could see that the reliance is on the Fractionating Human Intelligence study – the journalistic skills (or otherwise) of the article’s author are irrelevant.

    Arguments from authority (or “what anyone/everyone thinks”) appear very popular here:

    “Dr. Thompson did not appear to think the paper was even worth engaging with”
    “Until someone so qualified explains to me how….”

    They are invalid. If I were to employ such I would point out that Owen and Highfield appear to be eminently more qualified and experienced than some quoted here.
    In any case, when one relies on the opinion of experts and those experts disagree, there is just one reliable, logical takeaway – that the proposition is subject to controversy.
    The article above is written as if no controversy about one of its pivotal premises exists.
    I haven’t had time to properly read all your links but the Neuroskeptic article and comments attest to the weight of informed opinion on both sides.

    I think you will find that the study involved 40,000 participants. There were 16 examined to establish the purely physical brain activity aspect. This part is in the realm of medical science, a field in which just one sample is often considered adequate foundation for thesis. It is simply incorrect to state:

    N = 16

    ….in reference to the entire study.

    • Replies: @res
  222. res says:
    @res

    It seems that S.M. Coulton has declared himself a troll. Have to say I agree with that. I wonder if he will come up with a substantive response. Smart money says no IMO.

    P.S. It is amusing how many commenters here use the troll flag to indicate they have lost a debate.

    • Troll: S. M. Coulton
    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  223. @res

    Looks like this idiot “res” forgot to log in to the correct sockpuppet account to make this reply to himself. LMFAO.

    • Replies: @res
  224. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    No, you said that “at best”. As if to imply there were good odds that a Jefferson male waan’t the father.

    Interesting interpretation, but what I meant was that the most that could be said was that a Jefferson male was the father (and there is some tiny doubt there, but not worth worrying about). And that one could not go beyond that to say Thomas Jefferson in particular was the father.

    And this was AFTER you had previously eliminated Thomas Jefferson as a potential father, based on no evidence of any kind, but an Ann Coulter-tier book.

    Where exactly did I do that? At least now I understand why you reacted so strongly to my comments, but I don’t see where I ever eliminated Thomas Jefferson as the potential father.

    What? Yes they can, Y-STR can distinguish between even father and son.

    In some cases. Which was what my mutation caveats were about. But that appears to happen at a higher rate than I realized (still low though, see below). Here is one paper. BTW, comments like this indicate you do know something. It would be helpful if you would back up your assertions though.

    This looks like a good paper on the topic and actually discusses the Jefferson/Hemings case. Although I think it errs in excluding Randolph’s sons from the candidates.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5418305/

    In the paternity dispute of former US President Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), Y-STR and Y-SNP analysis demonstrated that several currently living male relatives of Thomas Jefferson share the same Y haplotype as a living descendent of Eston Hemings Jefferson, son of Sally Hemings—the President’s African American female slave (except for one repeat difference at one Y-STR, which could be easily explained by a mutation) (Foster et al. 1998). This indicates that President Jefferson had sired Eston Hemings Jefferson, or alternatively, his brother Randolph did; two scenarios such Y-chromosome analysis cannot differentiate. However, living male descendent of Thomas Corbin Woodson, the previously assumed full brother of Eston Hemings Jefferson, showed a very different Y haplotype, indicating that his biological father was a different man (Foster et al. 1998).

    Note that only 1 Y-STR mutation was seen across multiple people and all of those generations. So in only one of all of those father-son relationships would it have been possible to differentiate them using the data in the 1998 paper.

    Back to you.

    It then went on to dispell the notion that they visited regularly and that anyone but Jefferson is the father.

    Yes. The first report is clearly in the TJ is the father camp. I note that you did not engage with the second report which presents the not-TJ arguments.

    Incorrect; the same standard of proof is used daily in the United States to establish paternity. Thomas Jefferson is the father of Eston, it’s 100% proven.

    No. Let me repeat part of the quote from the 2017 paper I linked above titled: Forensic use of Y-chromosome DNA: a general overview
    Emphasis mine.

    This indicates that President Jefferson had sired Eston Hemings Jefferson, or alternatively, his brother Randolph did; two scenarios such Y-chromosome analysis cannot differentiate.

    I am assuming Manfred Kayser (author of that paper) knows rather more than either of us about what can and cannot be done with Y chromosome data. But feel free to present different opinions from actual experts on the topic. Until then consider your “100% proven” statement decisively refuted.

    Your entire post relies on long quotes of no relevance and whimpy cries of “ad hominem”, as if to camouflage a mere two points of your own: that Thomas Jefferson was 65 when Eston was born and that another Hemmijgs descendant’s family refuses DNA testing: hardly evidence of any kind against his paternity.

    OK. You completely ignored the meatiest part of my comment (why doesn’t that surprise me?) so let’s be very explicit about it. The following reference presents the best case arguing the not-TJ position. I have already disproven your “100% proven” statement, but if you want to continue arguing a weaker version of that then please read this and address its points.

    Here is the full excerpt from my earlier comment. You can hardly call this ‘long quotes of no relevance and whimpy cries of “ad hominem”’. Well, I suppose, with the standards of proof you operate by, maybe you could, but you’d be wrong.

    The second (and most recent) report was released as a book in 2011: https://www.amazon.com/Jefferson-Hemings-Controversy-Report-Scholars-Commission/dp/0890890854
    Here are the first 15 pages: https://cap-press.com/pdf/1179.pdf
    An overview from Amazon:

    In 2000, the newly formed Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society asked a group of more than a dozen senior scholars from across the country to carefully examine all of the evidence for and against the allegations that Thomas Jefferson fathered one or more children by Sally Hemings, one of his slaves, and to issue a public report. In April 2001, after a year of study, the Scholars Commission issued the most detailed report to date on the issue. With but a single mild dissent, the views of the distinguished panel ranged from ”serious skepticism” to a conviction that the allegation was ”almost certainly false.” This volume, edited by Scholars Commission Chairman Robert F. Turner, includes the ”Final Report”–essentially a summary of arguments and conclusions–as it was released to the press on April 12, 2001. However, several of the statements of individual views–which collectively total several hundred carefully footnoted pages and constitute the bulk of the book–have been updated and expanded to reflect new insights or evidence since the report was initially released.

    I looked harder and found this page which links to a 40 page summary from the book: https://www.tjheritage.org/the-scholars-commission
    It’s not possible to cut and paste from that, but I suggest at minimum looking at the final paragraph on page 18.

    In short, the best evidence is in
    https://www.tjheritage.org/scholars-commission-pdf
    If you want to continue this conversation please go read it and engage with the arguments presented there.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
    , @gcochran
  225. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    No need for a sock puppet. I do it that way just to make clear what I think of your troll flags. As I said in my earlier comment.

    It is amusing how many commenters here use the troll flag to indicate they have lost a debate.

    • Troll: S. M. Coulton
  226. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Thanks for making an effort to back up your assertions, but I looked at those links and I don’t see either of them stating “all mammals being genetically 20% more like their fathers than their mothers, due to an epigenetic paternal imprint effect.” Can you point to where they say that?
    (BTW, this is the reason for all of my quotes which you consider irrelevant. I actually support what I say explicitly)

    Do you plan on admitting that you use multiple sock puppet accounts to spread your weird matricuck philosophical ideas on this website, now that you have reaponded to multiple posts that weren’t addressed to your “res” account?

    No sock puppets here. Ron is rather militant about that. You might consider making more of an effort to distinguish writing styles. I just dislike misinformation–especially when it is presented in authoritative tone with no support.

    And what the heck do you even mean by “weird matricuck philosophical ideas”? If you are attributing any posts to me other than those under username res then you are making a mistake.

    Then there is your weakness for ad hominems, and your obsession with pointing them out everywhere you see them, as if you genuinely believe anyone cares that you saw or were the victim of an ad hominem.

    How about you point out some specific examples of “my ad hominems” in this thread? If you meet my challenge and find some I will be happy to do the same with your comments. I bet I find more.

    And the reason I care about ad hominems is they detract from debate in my opinion. Though they generally do give a good indicator of the quality of the arguments of someone disagreeing with me.

    I haven’t included this graphic in a while, but this seems like a good time. Based on http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  227. Anonymous[108] • Disclaimer says:
    @Toy

    Maybe your “semi-illiterate”[sic] and careless “you’re” are another reason for just expressing annoyance at your time wasting pollution of the page.

    • Replies: @Toy
  228. res says:
    @Brewer

    Thanks for your thoughtful and civil reply.

    Citing cases where specific skills (especially those obviously learned from childhood) are more important than having a higher IQ in a different culture is hardly a refutation of the value of IQ. The relevant comparison there would be individuals with different IQs raised in the same culture. Of course, if you are hiring (or otherwise need) ability for a task then specific skills matter.

    Arguments from authority (or “what anyone/everyone thinks”) appear very popular here

    Agreed. I will note that I continued looking for additional critiques of that paper and presented the ones I found. Thanks for at least looking at the additional links.

    In any case, when one relies on the opinion of experts and those experts disagree, there is just one reliable, logical takeaway – that the proposition is subject to controversy.

    First, it depends on how much one is relying on the opinion of experts and how much one is evaluating their actual arguments. I use many heuristics to evaluate who I find credible (e.g. overuse of ad hominems, willingness to support one’s claims, degree to which the support actually does so, quality of the arguments I can evaluate). I think that enables me to draw much better conclusions than “the proposition is subject to controversy”, but I suppose that can be argued.

    One thing to remember is that some of the topics we discuss on unz.com are extremely controversial. “Experts” can’t even agree on such a clear cut case as whether or not an average difference in measured intelligence between blacks and whites exists in the US. When it comes to the topics of IQ and race (and doubly so when they are combined) “experts” routinely assert nonsense.

    Having a technical background, I find it interesting that you think an analysis based on argument validity but completely uniformed on the technical aspects of an issue can be effective. I agree it can be used to cut through BS effectively, but at some point you have to evaluate the truth content of your premises (especially the hidden ones), and not just the logical validity of the reasoning. And in reality, few of the intermediate steps are as technically clear cut as formal logic.

    The article above is written as if no controversy about one of its pivotal premises exists.

    I gave lots of references. Please clarify which you mean.

    I think you will find that the study involved 40,000 participants. There were 16 examined to establish the purely physical brain activity aspect. This part is in the realm of medical science, a field in which just one sample is often considered adequate foundation for thesis. It is simply incorrect to state:

    N = 16

    ….in reference to the entire study.

    You are correct. They compare the results of an N=16 brain imaging study with the results of an N=44,600 online survey (which have their own sets of problems). From their summary these are the primary topline results.

    By comparing factor models of individual differences in performance with factor models of brain functional organization, we demonstrate that different components of intelligence have their analogs in distinct brain networks. Using simulations based on neuroimaging data, we show that the higher-order factor “g” is accounted for by cognitive tasks corecruiting multiple networks.

    Note that the first relies on a comparison of the two studies. I think you will agree that for that technique to work both studies must be valid. So N=16 is an issue for that conclusion. The second completely relies on the neuroimaging data–which happens to be the N=16 study.

    Don’t let the red herring of a relatively unimportant N=44,600 study distract you from the importance of the N=16 component to their stated conclusions.

    Since you aren’t familiar with the field, it is worth noting that fMRI studies are notorious for small samples and non-replicability. This colors the responses of critics because they have seen so many failures. Here is a 2018 paper discussing the issue: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-018-0073-z

  229. @Steve Sailer

    It’ been remarked many times that height and IQ are good analogs in terms of their dependence on a combination of heredity and environment (especially nutrition and health).

    Height is clearly highly heritable (like IQ), but dramatic changes in population heights are observed due to nutrition improvements from generation to generation. In effect, their is a “height Flynn effect,” although no one seems to have given it a similarly catchy name.

    It would be interesting for someone to track the correlation between rising height and IQ since, at least the nutrition and health environmental factors seem to be largely shared. For example, did Japanese and Korean IQs rise in tandem with their height increases?

  230. Toy says:
    @Anonymous

    > implying spelling errors invalidate arguments.
    Lmfao!
    I guess neither of you are going to be splitting the atom anytime soon.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  231. @res

    No. Let me repeat part of the quote from the 2017 paper I linked above titled: Forensic use of Y-chromosome DNA: a general overview
    Emphasis mine.

    Actually, yes. Let me point out to you the key word in the quote you pasted:

    This indicates that President Jefferson had sired Eston Hemings Jefferson, or alternatively, his brother Randolph did; two scenarios such Y-chromosome analysis cannot differentiate.

    Y-chromosome analysis (Y-STR) can indeed differentiate between siblings, father and son, and individuals and is used daily for the purpose of determining kinship, paternity, and criminal culpability in the court of law. Meaning your statement here:

    And remember that Y-chromosome testing can not distinguish related males with a common ancestor in the male lines (absent new mutations, the Nature paper has some useful discussion of a mutation case).

    Is absolute hogshit.

    Not responsing to any more comments in your post as it has been 100% proven beyond a shimmer of a doubt that Thomas Jefferson fathered Eston Hemmings. Any authors arguing to the contrary are just grasping for straws that aren’t there; probably on the payroll of the people who don’t want to admit their ancestor had sex with enslaved biracial people.

    • Replies: @res
  232. @mikemikev

    The article is too shrouded in jargon to tell exactly what it is talking about. But the gist seems to be that conventional IQ or “g” may be the result of a combination of specific brain functions. If, and when, we could get a better measure of how these separate functions contribute to cognitive functioning we might have a more nuanced view of the factors that contribute to one’s “g” score.

    We propose that intelligence is an emergent property of anatomically
    distinct cognitive systems, each of which has its
    own capacity.

    That all seems entirely plausible. Brain scans and other technology may shed light on the mechanisms of cognitive functioning. But in the meantime, I don’t think their hypothesis challenges the validity of current measurements of so-called “g.”

    It’s like saying that learning about the interplay of nutrition and the release of HGH would more accurately predict how tall someone will be. But at the end of the day no one is disputing that you are still 5’9 (or whatever).

  233. @res

    It was in the actual paper that was mentioned in the article but since that is behind a paywall just read the other articles on it:

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2015/03/03/genetically-more-like-dad/#.XXXpK59OmBY

    Overall, they found that most genes showed parent-of-origin effects in their levels of expression, and that paternal genes consistently won out. For up to 60 percent of the mouse’s genes, the copy from dad was more active than the copy from mom. This imbalance resulted in mice babies whose brains were significantly more like dad’s, genetically speaking.

    https://www.inverse.com/article/32991-dad-mom-genes-dominance-inheritance

    Take, for example, a 2015 study in Nature Genetics that showed the expression of thousands of different genes in mice varied depending on whether they came from a mom or a dad. While each parent technically contributed half of an offspring’s genome, approximately 60 percent of the dad’s genes were more expressive than the mom’s.

    https://www.techtimes.com/articles/37157/20150304/study-shows-that-children-are-genetically-more-similar-to-their-fathers.htm

    Moreover, he says the scientific community has previously known 95 genes that are subject to parent-of-origin effect, also known as imprinted genes. The findings show there are thousands of other genes whose origin plays a role in its expression. For instance, if a particular gene of the many hundred known genes for schizophrenia comes from the father, the offspring has more chances of expressing that gene than if it came from the mother.

    Nobody in their right minds believes evolution could have happened if the genes that make animals what they are were female-related. Females cannot breed efficiently enough to churn out evolution. Besides, there’s good data going back to the 1990s (at least) indicating children look more like their fathers than their mothers, and there’s even better reason to believe that this data is muddled and the relationship is even stronger than the data suggest. Men are more evolved than women and power evolution by having children with many different women.

    How about you point out some specific examples of “my ad hominems” in this thread? If you meet my challenge and find some I will be happy to do the same with your comments. I bet I find more.

    And the reason I care about ad hominems is they detract from debate in my opinion. Though they generally do give a good indicator of the quality of the arguments of someone disagreeing with me.

    You have never used a single ad hominem and this is a badge of shame for you, and a sign of incomplete virilization and poverty. Ad hominems do nothing but boost the quality of one’s argument and machismo, health, longevity, and power. That’s a pretty chart with its vibrant colors and triangular shape, but I’m afraid color coding one’s opinions on a chart doesn’t make them facts; it’s really more just religious thinking and esssentially no different from an ad hominem; except if doesn’t make you look macho or increase your power. Particularly when the chart was made by a guy who got married in his forties.

    Highly intelligent people are more likely to use ad-hominems and the freqeuncy of ad hominems is a direct measurement of genetic fitness and health.

    • Replies: @9/11 Inside job
    , @res
  234. Blankaerd says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    And? He completely misrepresented them and you clearly learned nothing.

    First you said no studies were cited, when clearly there were. Now you say that Dutton misrepresents said studies, without explaining how.

    And? This is from the United Kingdom where a good deal of biracial Asians are mixed white-South Asians.

    But the tested samples are at best mixed. So we don’t know the proportions of mixed south/east Asians with whites. Biracial Asians only score better on verbal reasoning by 3 points when compared with Chinese, so I wouldn’t call that highly significant. Thus, your statement that biracial Asians are smarter than both whites and Asians can be completely disregarded, because biracial Asian could very well mean mixed Chinese/white.

    Biracial white-Asian verbal reasoning was 3 points higher than the Chinese score. You previously stated that “East Asian” (Chinese) performed “substantially” better than biracial Asians qualitative reasoning… When their average score was, similarily, 3 points higher. Such is the nature of Dutton’s flea-brained audience.

    It’s obvious right here that you cannot even read other people’s comments, nor read studies you yourself listed. It’s also obvious that you’re insecure and have to revert to ad-hominems because you’re simply losing ground. I said that Chinese were substantially better than biracial Asians at both quantitative reasoning and non-verbal reasoning by a substantial amount. Chinese (East Asians) score 7 points higher on quantitative reasoning while scoring a whopping 9 points higher on non-verbal reasoning. This is according to the study you yourself listed. Congratulations, you have defeated yourself.

    Type less, read more.

    • Troll: S. M. Coulton
    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  235. @Thulean Friend

    While I welcome science for science’s sake, I think we have to come to terms with the reality that some facts are simply unwelcome and no amount of evidence-gathering will change that.

    While having an open mind about race-based IQ inequalities, there is the question about what will happen among those who are classified as having an average low IQ, if these conclusions are “officially” recognised.

    Won’t the “inferior” race(s) be saddled with an immense inferiority complex, and a related hatred towards the allegedly superior race, that brands them as inferior?

    This reminds me of “Brave new world” (Huxley) where the population was engineered from birth onwards to be very intelligent (alphas) down to stupid (epsilons), and openly classified as such.

    Can one imagine research that has so explosive implications that it should be somehow not widely publicised?

  236. @S. M. Coulton

    Well yeah, 300 years ago the plantation owners and overseers were boffing the house slaves, but their kids are long dead.

    WTF? No they aren’t

    A child conceived in 1865 would be over 150 years old today; if any of them were still alive, I think we’d have heard about it.

    a substntial number of these intermixing events occurred in the post-Reconstruction era South and involved black female prostitutes.

    Even those kids would be well over 100 now. Might be a handful still alive, but not enough to provide a decent sample size for cognition studies (which was the subject of the post at #20 that I originally addressed).

    their grandkids are the people we call “African Americans” today

    I doubt there’s anyone alive today whose grandmother was a slave. If you’re using “grandkids” to mean all descendants regardless of how many generations removed, then your statement is true but still irrelevant to anything I said.

  237. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Good point about “such.” So the questions become:
    1. Can we in theory distinguish Thomas and Randolph (or other Jefferson male line) parentage given available data and analysis techniques?
    2. Has this been done?

    The quote I gave clearly indicates that the 1998 study does not suffice to do this. Are you aware of a better DNA study of this topic? As far as I know the answer to 2. is no given the 1998 study is not sufficient to do this. 1. is an interesting question. More discussion below, but in short I believe one would need DNA from both Thomas and Randolph Jefferson and much more sophisticated analysis techniques than are in common use. And even then it might not be possible to differentiate them with high confidence (even much less than 100%).

    Not responsing to any more comments in your post as it has been 100% proven beyond a shimmer of a doubt that Thomas Jefferson fathered Eston Hemmings.

    Again. No. The 1998 paper uses DNA from current individuals to infer the Y data for Thomas Jefferson II 7 generations earlier. As far as I see they have no data for anyone in earlier generations.

    In order to differentiate between Thomas and Randolph Jefferson as potential fathers (grandsons of TJII with a different father than the descendants the study used, see Figure 1) they would need DNA from both Thomas and Randolph. Even then, I am not sure (i.e. not 100%) they would be able to resolve the difference through 5 intervening generations of mutations. It is an interesting technical question, and rather far beyond any of the examples you cite.

    Please provide a link showing the consistency with which Y-STR can differentiate between males in the same line. I have yet to see a discussion of the mutation rates and how those translate into real life ability to discriminate between males in the same male line. This quote from the 2017 forensic use paper discusses some relevant issues (emphasis mine).

    When matching Y haplotypes are observed, true biological paternity/kinship or identification can be assumed, while different haplotypes indicate non-paternity or kinship. However, when observed haplotype differences are too many and/or too large in repeat number differences to be explainable by mutations, given the mutation rates of the Y-STRs and the number of separating meiosis in the family line, it is typically difficult, if not impossible, to find out at which male in the family line the non-biological paternity occurred. Moreover, matching haplotypes do not necessarily permit the conclusion of paternity or identity of the historical men, because his close relatives living at the time would likely have shared the same Y-chromosome haplotype, and, therefore, could have been the father/wanted men with the same probability estimated from the Y haplotype.

    I’m trying to decide whether you are too stupid to realize you are wrong (about 100% proven) or too stubborn to admit it. You don’t seem stupid and appear to have some knowledge about this topic, so it must just be stubbornness. Which would seem to be confirmed by the way you dismiss the arguments of anyone who disagrees with you:

    Any authors arguing to the contrary are just grasping for straws that aren’t there; probably on the payroll of the people who don’t want to admit their ancestor had sex with enslaved biracial people.

    P.S. Regarding “Is absolute hogshit.” Note my caveat “absent new mutations.” That makes my statement true. The question then becomes what is the practical reality given real life mutation rates. That you are so confidently wrong about simple things like this says a great deal about the standards of proof you use.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  238. @S. M. Coulton

    In the last week or so I have been called both “lazy” and a “douche” on the Unz Review . My final words on this topic are that the study and the comments thereto just prove that there is a lot of bad science out there and the study itself would likely not meet the “Daubert standard” for admissibility . Finally, just which IQ test or tests did the authors of the study use ? Perhaps I missed the answer to this question .

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  239. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    It was in the actual paper that was mentioned in the article but since that is behind a paywall just read the other articles on it:

    Thanks for following up. The full text is available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273064673_Analyses_of_Allele-Specific_Gene_Expression_in_Highly_Divergent_Mouse_Crosses_Identifies_Pervasive_Allelic_Imbalance
    So let’s just go right to the original source after noting your original statement was “all mammals being genetically 20% more like their fathers than their mothers, due to an epigenetic paternal imprint effect.” and the supporting quotes you give say thing like “approximately 60 percent of the dad’s genes were more expressive than the mom’s.”

    First point. The actual text says: “We found that 54–60% of genes show higher expression from the paternal allele.” Rather different from just stating “60%.”

    One interesting point: “Imprinted genes were 1.5 times more likely to be expressed from the paternal than the maternal allele (Fig. 5b). This observation is consistent with the observation that paternal expression predominates in brain, while maternal expression predominates in placenta.9 ”

    Figure 5a shows paternal expression proportion for 95 imprinted genes. We see that difference in expression is not binary but a relatively smooth curve. This is for the more extreme case of imprinting. And even there the difference between maternal and paternal expression is small for many of the genes.

    Figure 6a shows the paternal expression proportion distribution for global alleles. This shows us how small the expression differences really are. The paternal expression proportion is overrepresented in the 0.50-0.54 paternal proportion range. So the cases of excess paternal expression are really very small differences. What we really see is a small proportion of genes (let’s use your net 20%) having an average difference between paternal and maternal expression of about 2% (0.51-0.49 expression). This gives a total effect of 20% * 2% = 0.4%. Using the lower end of range 8% would give 0.16%. So by my estimates your “20%” figure is an overstatement by about 2 orders of magnitude.

    So your original statement “all mammals being genetically 20% more like their fathers than their mothers, due to an epigenetic paternal imprint effect.” has multiple errors.
    1. It refers to genetic rather than phenotypic. The difference is actually in gene expression rather than the underlying genetics. This is a bit of a nitpick because your point is about phenotype.
    2. Your 20% (I assume you are basing this on 60% – 40%) is an overstatement given that you base it on only the high end of the range 54-60%. Using that approach with the low end would give 8%.
    3. Most seriously, you assume the genes with differences in expression go completely one way or the other while in reality they cluster around a 46-54% paternal expression proportion range.

    So while interesting (thanks for the reference) we clearly see that the real effect is far less than your stated 20%.

    For the future, you might consider that the popular press often does a poor job of accurately summarizing the results of research papers. Popular articles often have an agenda (even if only to make the results seem more important than they really are) which causes them to slant or even actively misrepresent the real results.

    You have never used a single ad hominem and this is a badge of shame for you, and a sign of incomplete virilization and poverty. Ad hominems do nothing but boost the quality of one’s argument and machismo, health, longevity, and power. That’s a pretty chart with its vibrant colors and triangular shape, but I’m afraid color coding one’s opinions on a chart doesn’t make them facts; it’s really more just religious thinking and esssentially no different from an ad hominem; except if doesn’t make you look macho or increase your power. Particularly when the chart was made by a guy who got married in his forties.

    Highly intelligent people are more likely to use ad-hominems and the freqeuncy of ad hominems is a direct measurement of genetic fitness and health.

    At least you have a sense of humor.

    P.S. FWIW I get the sense that most of the heat in our interaction is coming from you incorrectly attributing comments to me which I did not write.

  240. First point. The actual text says: “We found that 54–60% of genes show higher expression from the paternal allele.” Rather different from just stating “60%.”

    One interesting point: “Imprinted genes were 1.5 times more likely to be expressed from the paternal than the maternal allele (Fig. 5b). This observation is consistent with the observation that paternal expression predominates in brain, while maternal expression predominates in placenta.9 ”

    Figure 5a shows paternal expression proportion for 95 imprinted genes. We see that difference in expression is not binary but a relatively smooth curve. This is for the more extreme case of imprinting. And even there the difference between maternal and paternal expression is small for many of the genes.

    Here’s the full quote with all the rest of the text wrapped around those statements:

    Imprinted genes were 1.5 times more likely to be expressed from the paternal than the  maternal allele (Fig. 5b). This observation is consistent with the observation that paternal expression predominates in brain, while maternal expression predominates in placenta.9 To  test whether this asymmetry in parent-of-origin effects extends beyond imprinted genes, we  estimated the parent-of-origin effect in each cross and each sex separately. We found that  54–60% of genes show higher expression from the paternal allele, significantly different  from the expectation of 50% (P = 5.9 × 10−24, Fig. 6a, Supplementary Table 5). We also  observed that genes with higher expression from one parental allele tend to cluster (Fig. 6b).  Among the 19 autosomes, 15 have a higher proportion of genes whose neighbor has the  same parental skew than expected by chance (P = 9.6 × 10−3, binomial test).

    there are 1,652 more genes with allelic imbalance in favor of the paternal allele
    (6,790 paternal minus 5,138 maternal overexpressed genes).
    As shown in Supplementary
    Table 5, the excess of genes with paternal overexpression ranges between 938 and 2,500
    (across reciprocal crosses stratified by sex). However, this likely represents an underestimate
    because, while we have high power to identify classical imprinting (Fig. 5a), we lack
    sufficient power to identify all genes with modest parental overexpression, while correcting
    for multiple testing.

    The value difference between 50 and 60 is 18%, however it appears this is an underestimate. In reality we are probably more like 30% more similar to our fatbers, genetically.

    Figure 5a shows paternal expression proportion for 95 imprinted genes. We see that difference in expression is not binary but a relatively smooth curve. This is for the more extreme case of imprinting. And even there the difference between maternal and paternal expression is small for many of the genes.

    WTF? That is not a simple bell curve graph, but a dot plot.

    Figure 5.
    Imprinted genes in mouse brain. (a) Paternal expression ratio for 95 genes with a significant
    parent-of-origin effect. Each dot corresponds to a reciprocal cross (e.g., CASTxPWK vs
    PWKxCAST) and dot size is proportional to the parent-of-origin effect P-value. Genes
    known from the literature to be maternally expressed are shown in red, those known to be
    paternally expressed in blue, and novel imprinted genes in black (n = 54 novel genes).

    Anyone can clearly see that the paternal side of the graph has way more dots than the maternal graph, and that its dots are larger in size. Paternal weight = 20% minimum.

    Figure 6a shows the paternal expression proportion distribution for global alleles. This shows us how small the expression differences really are. The paternal expression proportion is overrepresented in the 0.50-0.54 paternal proportion range. So the cases of excess paternal expression are really very small differences.

    You have no eyesight and no ability to read graphs, old man. Look at the right half of Figure 6a and compare its volume to the left half. If they were mountains you would assume the right one was at least 20% more massive than the one on the left (which it is). This graph has a horizontal and vertical value.

    So your original statement “all mammals being genetically 20% more like their fathers than their mothers, due to an epigenetic paternal imprint effect.” has multiple errors.

    The only error being that it is probably significantly underestimated.

    • Replies: @res
  241. Anonymous[247] • Disclaimer says:
    @Toy

    “invalidate” – another solecism because the implication was not that your argument was logically invalid but that your mental processes were so lazy and sloppy that it wasn’t worth wating time on you.

    • Replies: @Toy
  242. @Blankaerd

    First you said no studies were cited, when clearly there were. Now you say that Dutton misrepresents said studies, without explaining how.

    No i said *you* didn’t cite any studies, bucko. A link to some guy babbling is not a study.

    But the tested samples are at best mixed. So we don’t know the proportions of mixed south/east Asians with whites. Biracial Asians only score better on verbal reasoning by 3 points when compared with Chinese, so I wouldn’t call that highly significant. Thus, your statement that biracial Asians are smarter than both whites and Asians can be completely disregarded, because biracial Asian could very well mean mixed Chinese/white.

    South Asian – British mixed people are more numerous in the UK than East Asian mixes.

    It’s obvious right here that you cannot even read other people’s comments, nor read studies you yourself listed. It’s also obvious that you’re insecure and have to revert to ad-hominems because you’re simply losing ground

    *whining*

    This is according to the study you yourself listed. Congratulations, you have defeated yourself

    I haven’t lost any ground and I already stated I am proud to use ad hominems, which are the #1 logical truths. I did misread that one score, although I was using a notepad under direct sunlight when I looked at that chart so that’s not really a big deal. This won’t compensate for your having retardedly assumed that biracial Asians are dumber than whites and Asians, relying on an idiot’s rambling video instead of an actual sfudy to supporf your ideas (none will), and the fact that hiracial Asians in the UK are tilted towards south Asian mixes. You really don’t have to even do any math to see that the South Asian mixes could only be holding down the scores of East Asian mixes. Biracial Asians are more intelligent than Asians and whites and that is what we would expect given what we know about the effects of heterozygosity on the intelligence of genetically similar populations.

    • Replies: @Blankaerd
  243. @res

    The 15-point difference is a displacement of the peak of an assumed bell curve. There is no evidence to justify modeling displacement as a linear function of racial admixture, plus the variance of African IQ scores is wider than that of Caucasians, which is why you can’t use the Caucasian bell curve to model African IQ.

    The gap between whites and biracials is only two points. If the 15 point gap between whites and blacks, who are about 80% black, is purely genetic in origin, then the gap between whites and biracials (who are 1/4th genetically as black as self-identified blacks) should be around 3.75 IQ points. Instead, it’s 2.0.
    Given that 100% Africans are assumed to score at IQ = 75, adding just 20% Caucasian DNA raises it to 85 …

    More data points are needed and all data needs to be for one continent, i.e. 100% African heritage in the US versus 80%, 50%, etc.

    Hope this helps.

    • Replies: @res
    , @Anon
    , @Wizard of Oz
  244. @9/11 Inside job

    I sincerely hope you will not develop PTSD as a result of being called names anonymously. It’s amazing how much stronger ad hominems are than other forms of argument, although when you think about it it makes sense philosophically, whether you’re an idealist or a materialist. Sending up smoke tonight.

  245. res says:
    @James Speaks

    There is no evidence to justify modeling displacement as a linear function of racial admixture

    Disagree. Most of the genetics of IQ is additive which makes that a reasonable first order approach. From https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5985927/

    Twin heritability compares the resemblance of identical and fraternal twins to estimate genetic and environmental components of variance. For intelligence, twin estimates of broad heritability are 50% on average14. Adoption studies of first-degree relatives yield similar estimates of narrow heritability of intelligence, suggesting that most genetic influence on intelligence is additive.

    Back to you:

    Given that 100% Africans are assumed to score at IQ = 75, adding just 20% Caucasian DNA raises it to 85 …

    As has been discussed in this thread already, the IQ of 100% Africans in Africa is likely depressed by environmental effects relative to the US.

    Hope this helps.

    You really are patronizing. ; ) Do you actually think you told me anything I did not already know?

    • Replies: @James Speaks
  246. Anon[855] • Disclaimer says:
    @James Speaks

    plus the variance of African IQ scores is wider than that of Caucasians, which is why you can’t use the Caucasian bell curve to model African IQ.

    All that reflects is the fact that the widest gene pool variance is found within Africa. ie: any two random Africans may likely be from de facto separate races within the “African” category.

    No one credibly informed you that “African” implied a single cluster recognizable as a single race. Assuming as much is why you are satisfied to cite a standardized testing anomaly like the one that you above describe, which would otherwise generally tell any professional that they are not dealing with a solitary recognizable category of subjects.

    The confusion comes from the fact that Africans are the only group to have large percentage admixtures of multiple archaic hominid species that were lurking in the African forests: creating the widest genetic variance on the planet. All archaic hominids having a dark skin tone, similar to apes.

    The other two races (‘Whites’ and ‘Asians’) essentially only having a smaller admixture percentage from one modern hominid species in the West (Neanderthal) and two modern Hominid species (Denisovan and Neanderthal) in the East.

    Though, even when dealing with Whites it would help your data to separate groups by Neanderthal admixture percentage.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  247. @res

    You’re confusing additive with linear.

    Prove to me that the effect of each allele is equal.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @res
  248. Anon[410] • Disclaimer says:

    which is why you can’t use the Caucasian bell curve to model African IQ.

    We’re still waiting for the “anti-racist” researcher who has the guts to use an all-African racial group as the standardization group for an IQ test that other races will then take.

    We won’t hold our breath. If they would even allow it to occur, which they will not, no psychiatrist is that career-suicidal.

    Which is why we have yet to see this obvious solution to the issue of “racist” IQ tests.

    For those that don’t follow, if Blacks were used as the standardization group then their median score would be 100 (the reference score) and they would not be able to claim racism as the reason for a low median score. Because, by definition, the score would not be low.

    At the same time, such a test risks (assures) that all other groups would realize median scores above 100. Essentially cementing the point of HBD advocates and neutralizing the point of the people who claim that IQ tests are racist.

  249. Anon[260] • Disclaimer says:
    @Realist

    I think it is accepted by many whites that the average Chinese IQ is about 105 and the average white IQ is about 100…therefore it is implied that the white component of a biracial, Chinese/white would negatively effect the IQ. On average of course.

    As the Chinese well know, the flaw with that factoid is that neither ‘Whites” nor “Chinese” are comprised of one race. You would want to measure small, selected genetic pools to gain an accurate reflection of this IQ arms race.

    Though it would be difficult to argue that the “White” group has not broadly led the human race into technological and governmental modernity. We also historically lead in art and almost everything else. Your supposed (but non-specific) 5 points on paper is nothing comparatively. We are observably the historical and modern leaders of the human race in almost every category. As proven by the fact that only emulating our technologies and very culture has brought Asia out of the previous age (agriculture also being our invention).

    • Replies: @Realist
  250. Anon[282] • Disclaimer says:
    @Chinaman

    Would be interesting to see a study like this done between chinaman and white. There are enough chinese biracials now that we can actually run such correlations to see who is actually corrupting the other’s bloodline and who is dragging the other down.

    The Chinese race is solely comprised of our unmixed human genetics and hominid Denisovan and Eastern Neanderthal genetics. That’s the only racial difference that you have. It’ll be tough to defend the assertion that pre-human hominid genetics from Denisovan are superior or worth defending over lesser mixed (and in some cases unmixed) modern human genetics. The best you can hope for is a limited measure of space in which to continue. I’d fight for that and be careful of any agitation for further expansion. Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth, and all of that.

  251. Toy says:
    @Anonymous

    Nice excuse.
    In other words you want the benefit of disagreeing with me, but without the responsibility of explaining why.
    Talk about lazy and sloppy mental processes lol.
    Yeah, your credibility is just another toilet waiting to be flushed.

  252. @James Speaks

    Something new! Amazing and I like it. I had never heard it suggested that the “variance” – and presumably SD of African IQ scores is greater (or even just proportionately greater than that of Europeans. Yet it is almost obviously so.

    The well known fact that there is more genetic difference in Africa than in the whole of the rest of the world (even though unimpacted by Neanderthals and Denisovans) should have led to that as a supposition. And that’s without counting pygmies and the greatly varied Khoi San peoples.

    • Replies: @res
  253. mikemikev says:
    @Anon

    All that reflects is the fact that the widest gene pool variance is found within Africa. ie: any two random Africans may likely be from de facto separate races within the “African” category.

    I think the genetic variance in Africa may have been overblown. Certainly everyone seems to take this is a fact. I don’t often see the underlying data for this. You have microraces within macroraces, so two random Africans could be in different races while being in the same race, regardless of genetic variances. Isn’t race defined by ancestry anyway, regardless of junk DNA variance? Are you saying race is defined by genetic similarity, therefore Africans should fracture first as several macroraces before Eurasians? Maybe. Do you have any data to support that?

  254. Blankaerd says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Thank you for admitting that you lost and that you’re poor at trolling.

    • Troll: S. M. Coulton
    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  255. @mikemikev

    The Bantu expansion over most of Africa means most sub-Saharans are pretty genetically similar, especially the ancestors of the great majority of black Americans.

    • Agree: mikemikev
  256. @James Speaks

    If I may butt in with a catch up question am I right to infer that linear implies equal? My primitive reasoning includes the supposition that additive effects of alleles woild only be equal by coincidence. (That has to be right doesn’t it?)

  257. Realist says:
    @Anon

    As the Chinese well know, the flaw with that factoid is that neither ‘Whites” nor “Chinese” are comprised of one race. You would want to measure small, selected genetic pools to gain an accurate reflection of this IQ arms race.

    The Chinese are a sub race of Asians and are the current majority inhabitants of China. Whites are considered to be the majority inhabitants of northwestern Europe and, those that have immigrated from there, over the last thousand years. My only mention of race was the term biracial in response to commenter ‘chinaman’s’ use of the word. I was merely using his terminology.

    Why don’t you bless us with your small, selected genetic pool breakdown?

  258. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    I think I can let the arguments in our respective comments stand. A thoughtful reader can figure out which have more merit. Just some clarifications.

    WTF? That is not a simple bell curve graph, but a dot plot.

    Which makes a relatively smooth curve with many values near 50/50. Nowhere did I call it a bell curve.

    Anyone can clearly see that the paternal side of the graph has way more dots than the maternal graph, and that its dots are larger in size. Paternal weight = 20% minimum.

    That is for the 95 imprinted genes. A small fraction of all genes. And even there that chart is fairly balanced except for the bottom 10 genes.

    The dot size is log10 of the p value which is generally larger for dots further away from the center (if you know how p-values work this is obvious). Distance from the center is the more relevant quantity for assessing contribution.

    You have no eyesight and no ability to read graphs, old man. Look at the right half of Figure 6a and compare its volume to the left half. If they were mountains you would assume the right one was at least 20% more massive than the one on the left (which it is). This graph has a horizontal and vertical value.

    Calculations by researchers who have the actual numbers >> your eyeball (which apparently isn’t nearly as good as you think since it varies so much from their calculations)

    You have no ability to interpret graphs (and I don’t need an ad hominem to make my point). Based on the researchers’ own calculations “54–60% of genes show higher expression from the paternal allele.” And as you noted, there is a horizontal value as well which is heavily concentrated in the range 48-53% paternal expression proportion (put on the x-axis of the plot you showed almost all of the points would be almost on the center line). As I showed with my calculations this relatively small difference in expression proportion per gene means that the overall difference in gene expression between maternal and paternal alleles is about 2 orders of magnitude less than you estimate.

    The only error being that it is probably significantly underestimated.

    LOL!

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  259. res says:
    @James Speaks

    I am not the one who is confused here.

    Nowhere is it necessary to assume the effect of each allele is equal (nice novel strawman though). Perhaps you could explain why you mistakenly think that is so?

    Additive means that you simply add up the contribution from each allele to get the overall contribution (which also implies the relationship of IQ to alleles is linear to the degree IQ genetics is additive). So if you have two collections of alleles (DNA from two parents) and combine them you can simply sum the individual contributions and divide by two to get the expected value of the combined (child) value.

    For a model of biracial admixture one can just use the allele frequencies of each race to compute genetic IQs for the separate races then weight them by percent admixture of each race giving the linear model.

    This works to the degree the underlying genetics is additive (and environment introduces noise) so is really only a first order model. But given statistical averaging it seems to be usable in reality.

    There are a number of examples of cognitive ability graphed versus admixture at http://www.unz.com/jthompson/admixture-in-americas-european/

  260. res says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I had never heard it suggested that the “variance” – and presumably SD of African IQ scores is greater (or even just proportionately greater than that of Europeans. Yet it is almost obviously so.

    I would not be so confident. Seeing real data on this would be good (not holding my breath for James Speaks to back up his assertions with data though). Getting IQ averages in Africa is hard (and controversial) enough. Getting accurate SDs is even harder.

    There is a great deal of both genetic and environmental variation in Africa, but I think the relatively depressed average IQs serve to keep SD/variance down.

    FWIW the IQ SD of African Americans is less than 15. From page 354 of The g Factor:

    When IQ is scaled to a mean of 100 and a standard deviation (SD) of 15 in the white population, large representative samples of the black population of the whole United States (rather than a local subgroup) show a mean close to 85. For most samples and tests, the range is 80 to 90. The black SD of IQ is approximately 12, ranging in most samples from 11 to 14.

  261. res says:
    @mikemikev

    I think the genetic variance in Africa may have been overblown.

    This is the paper which caused an outburst of that in 2009: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2947357/

    I think the basic idea is sound. There are some very divergent groups in Africa which split apart genetically very long ago.

    Africans should fracture first as several macroraces before Eurasians?

    They do genetically. This pretty much follows from the origin of humans in Africa. Phenotype is another question, but arguably true there as well. Aside from skin color African phenotypes are quite diverse.

    Here is a more recent paper discussing that: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4756148/

    And an example dendrogram:

    iSteve makes a good point about the Bantu expansion in Africa reducing what we might call per capita genetic variation. Also worth noting that the genetic diversity in Africa itself does not necessarily carry over to African origin populations overseas. For example, not many Hadza outside of Africa.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
    , @Steve Sailer
  262. So that red-and-blue graph can help a lot with understanding quotas and other “fairness” issues…

    …if it’s true that the low-IQ Europeans tend to benefit from association with the higher AVERAGE (emphasis on AVERAGE) IQ of their racial group and appearance.

    And all those (many) high-IQ Africans tend to not-benefit (be harmed) by association with the lower AVERAGE IQ of their racial group and appearance.

    The graph (if true) shows that, while the AVERAGE (emphasis on average) IQ of all Europeans is higher than the AVERAGE of Africans, huge numbers of both groups are above and below that average. Lots of Europeans’ IQs are lower than lots of Africans’ IQs. Lots are higher. Lots of Africans’ IQs are higher than lots of European IQs. Lots are lower.

    So why do we keep talking about this.

  263. @mikemikev

    That Africa has the most (mean) within-group phenotypic and genetic variation is seen in data for virtually every biological character, including skin colour and craniometric variation. You put zero effort in looking for data or researching this – when studies can be found by a mere Google search.

    The mistake made by many scientists though is to assume high African phenotypic/genetic variation supports the Recent African Origin (“Out of Africa”) model of human origins, when all it actually supports is the fact Africa (until recently) had a much larger population than any other continent; more people = more mutations and less genetic drift.

  264. mikemikev says:
    @res

    Here is a more recent paper discussing that: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4756148/

    The data are from Zhivotovsky 2003:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180270/

    Higher diversity in an area is also compatible with migrations into that area.

  265. @Toy

    Colonialism brought tremendous benefits to the subcontinent countries. Not everything is absolute in one quality or another and colonialism was no different. You need to be far more nuanced than you are now, my friend

    • Replies: @Brutis
  266. @9/11 Inside job

    Whites rarely riot. On a per-capita basis, they definitely riot less than blacks. When they do, it is very rare if at all that they rape and commit racial assault.

    As for window-smashing at anti-PTB protests, that is often committed by a small faction of agents provocateurs who are acting to taint the protest and to associate it with violence in public opinion.

    • Replies: @9/11 Inside job
  267. @res

    I tried to find evidence if a Pygmy had ever been brought to North America as a slave. I found an article from 1896 arguing for that but his evidence wasn’t conclusive.

  268. @Lockean Proviso

    Wikipedia : Tulsa race riot also known as the Greenwood Massacre of 1921 when mobs of WHITE residents attacked black residents and black businesses in Tulsa , Oklahoma …It has been called the single worst incident of racial violence in American history . Thousands of WHITES rampaged through black neighborhoods killing men and women and burning and looting black businesses .

  269. JRE says:
    @Steve Sailer

    Is there a reason to believe the relationship between white/black DNA % and IQ is a direct linear one? I am not overly familiar with the field but it seems to me at least possible and actually likely that there is some sort of non-linear relationship. For example, if Bantu Africans have an average IQ of 70 and White Americans an average of 100, one would expect 50/50 mulattoes’ average IQ to be right in the middle at 85, rather than the 80/20 American Blacks’ being 85.

    • Replies: @res
  270. Brutis says:
    @BengaliCanadianDude

    What a cuck you are

    Guess Islam select for cuck behaviour

    • Replies: @BengaliCanadianDude
  271. res says:
    @JRE

    As discussed in some comments above, the genetic contribution to IQ is mostly additive. This component of the admixture relationship should be linear.

    As also discussed in comments above, it seems likely that the average IQ in Africa is depressed by environmental effects. How much so is an important question that has bearing on how well Africa might function in the future.

    • Replies: @JRE
  272. JRE says:
    @res

    Thanks, I’ll read the comments when I get a chance, it’s always a sign of high-quality visitors to a particular website when the comments section is nearly as informative and stimulating as the original article.

    If the African environment’s effects on the native populations’ IQ, compared to a US environment, is a depression of, say, about 10 points, that would straighten out the IQ/Euro DNA ratio, about a 5 point increase for every 25% addition.

    It speaks to a much deeper difference than mere IQ between the nature of the European and the African that the latter maintains, only with much help from the former, a society that results in such a depression.

  273. @Brutis

    Guess Islam select for cuck behaviour

    Sure, but so does Hinduism.

    Either way, it’s not relevant to me.

    I don’t like religion anyways.

    Hindutwadis would like to believe they were a cultured, advanced, utopian civilization before the conquest of the Abrahamic “savages” when in reality they were always a backwater. Relax

  274. @9/11 Inside job

    Did you read his comment? Are you aware of fractions and proportions? You know…what they teach you in grade 4 or 5?

    • Replies: @9/11 Inside job
  275. gcochran says:
    @res

    Topday, one could probably resolve the issue.

    Step 2: sequence the Y chromosomes ( entire sequence, not just STRs)

    Step 1: dig up Thomas Jefferson

    • Replies: @mikemikev
    , @res
  276. @BengaliCanadianDude

    Yes , I did read his comment but he didn’t provide any statistics to back up his assertion . In any event the Greenwood Massacre is probably the worst incident of racial violence in American history and was a riot by WHITES against Blacks , there are probably many such incidents which have gone unreported, especially after the end of the Civil War ,because the history of the United States has largely been written and reported upon by Whites . The killing of Blacks by Whites got so bad rhat the US Congress tried to enact a Federal anti-lynching law in the 1920’s which was not finally enacted until 2018 .

  277. res says:
    @gcochran

    Wouldn’t you need to dig up Randolph Jefferson (and perhaps his sons) as well? Being 5 generations away from the paternity question makes things complicated. How much full sequence Y variation is typically seen between brothers or between father/son?

    Being able to analyze DNA from William Hemings (grandson of Sally Hemings) would make things easier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_Hemings#Jefferson%E2%80%93Hemings_controversy
    and provide evidence from another child of Sally Hemings (Madison has no living male line descendants).

    Relevant quote from that page:

    There are no living male-line descendants of Madison Hemings. Beverley Hemings’ descendants have been lost to history, as he apparently changed his name after moving to Washington, DC and passing into white society. Descendants of Madison Hemings declined to have the remains of his son William Hemings disturbed to extract DNA for testing (he was buried in a VA cemetery), just as Wayles-Jefferson descendants declined to have Thomas Jefferson’s remains disturbed.[23]

    I know you are knowledgeable about things like this so would enjoy hearing your thoughts in more detail.

    P.S. This link appears above, but since Figure 1 contains some relevant pedigrees I think it is worth repeating.
    https://www.mcdb.ucla.edu/Research/Goldberg/HC70A_W04/pdf/Foster_Nature_1998.pdf

  278. mikemikev says:
    @res

    There may be some flakes of dandruff, worth their weight in gold.

  279. Logan says:
    @9/11 Inside job

    Wowsers.

    Prior to the 1950s, race riots in America mostly consisted of white people attacking black people.

    Since the 1950s it has almost entirely consisted of black people attacking white people and (mostly) each other.

    Seems to me the second fact is a hell of a lot more relevant in today’s world.

    • Replies: @S. M. Coulton
  280. @res

    I think I can let the arguments in our respective comments stand. A thoughtful reader can figure out which have more merit.

    That would be mine.

    Which makes a relatively smooth curve with many values near 50/50. Nowhere did I call it a bell curve.

    “Bell curve” is another term for a Gaussian distribution, which is where terms like “gentle” apply. This is a dot plot with multi-faceted values which aren’t tied to axis. The chart shows that paternal material is ~20% more active than maternal genetic material.

    That is for the 95 imprinted genes. A small fraction of all genes. And even there that chart is fairly balanced except for the bottom 10 genes.

    You may recall the experiments from middle school (assuming you graduated from middle school) in which you count a handful of jelly beans out of a jar to determine the demography of the rest of the beans in the jar. 95 selected genes is more than sufficient to demonstrate an effect.

    The dot size is log10 of the p value which is generally larger for dots further away from the center (if you know how p-values work this is obvious). Distance from the center is the more relevant quantity for assessing contribution.

    No, the cumulative size of the larger black dots on the paternal side of the graph is a substantial contributor to the variation of expression.

    Calculations by researchers who have the actual numbers >> your eyeball (which apparently isn’t nearly as good as you think since it varies so much from their calculations)

    It doesn’t differ from their calculations, it differs from your fucktarded assumptions about their calculations and your shitty math.

    And as you noted, there is a horizontal value as well which is heavily concentrated in the range 48-53% paternal expression proportion

    The graph has two axis, you idiot. A vertical and horizontal. Your inability or refusal to understand the graphs is rooted in your inability or refusal to understand that they have more than one or two expressions of values.

    As I showed with my calculations this relatively small difference in expression proportion per gene means that the overall difference in gene expression between maternal and paternal alleles is about 2 orders of magnitude less than you estimate.

    You cannot do math, did not show anything other than an inability to do math and to read 2 different graphs.

    • LOL: res
    • Replies: @res
  281. @Blankaerd

    Thank you for admitting that you lost on both points on biracial Asian intelligence and were unable to cite a single study on the matter, and your impotent urge to “win” is duly noted.

  282. @Logan

    Prior to the 1950s, most race riots were sparked by reports of a black having attacked a white.

    After the 1950s, most race riots were sparked by reports of a white attacking a black.

    The most crucial fact, however, is that race riots have been decreasing in frequency and intensity since the early 1990s. People finally learned to get along.

  283. @res

    Your problem is that you are confused about proof. There are several different kinds of proof. There’s mathematical proof, logical proof, religious proof, statistical proof, legal proof, etc. None of these proofs are fully real; all of them have different standards of what constitutes proof (which are constantly changing), all of them have different subject matter (with varying depths in reality), and all of them have different consequences (ranging from none at all to electric chair.)

    The proof you speak of, in your obsessive insistance that Foster didn’t “prove” TJ’s paternity, is some kind of weird hybrid philosophical/religious logical proof. That has no place here. We are talking about a question of paternity. That’s a legal issue, you stupid fuck. That’s resolved by a judge and a jury, using statistical evidence. Not a humanities professor or a theologian.

    Up until the 2000s, the most common biological method of determining paternity was a blood group test. Leon Strussman wrote in 1954 that 40,000 paternity cases had been resolved by this method, and it is probable that there are still a few individuals at there paying child support, or wishing they had it, based on a blood group ruling. An impressive number of people were sent to prison for rape or executed for murder in a gas chamber based on blood group evidence. There are 8 primary human blood groups shared by the majority of Earth’s 7 billion inhabitants.

    Y-DNA haplogroup evidence has been used to name fathers in a courtroom and even convict felons, and probably still is. Blood group evidence is even in use in some jurisdictions today. Haplogroup evidence is more than sufficient by the standards of the law to establish legal proof that Thomas Jefferson is the father of Eston Hemmings. Remember that no one ever suspected Randolph as a father until Foster’s 1999 DNA study came out. Jumping to Randolph as a new suspect (when there is no evidence for his contact with Hemmings) is the last-ditch appeal of those who are now arguing from behind bars that Jefferson didn’t do it. There are several such people on death row right now making similar appeals. TJ having male siblings doesn’t justify the “dissent” about his paternity in the eyes of the jury, because the DNA evidence is just the spire on top of the church of his guilt.

    And yes the primary reason Y-STR sequencing doesn’t appear to document paternal history is that the most common standard analysis doesn’t allow you to see it:

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41431-018-0312-2?

    • Replies: @res
  284. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Lots of words, too bad none are really worth much. Let’s just take one example.

    “Bell curve” is another term for a Gaussian distribution, which is where terms like “gentle” apply.

    ROTFLMAO!

    Many non-Gaussian curves can be things like “gentle”, “smooth”, etc. I retract my earlier comment about you not seeming stupid.

  285. res says:
    @S. M. Coulton

    Your problem is that you are confused about proof. There are several different kinds of proof. There’s mathematical proof, logical proof, religious proof, statistical proof, legal proof, etc.

    And then there is “100% proof” which I would think supersedes all of those. Which just happens to be what you (stupidly) claimed. Nice to see you are finally backing off from that. Now perhaps we can have a real discussion about the level of proof attained. But to do that the first step would be for you to admit that arguments other than yours have merit, which isn’t going to happen.

    For anyone who is willing to consider other arguments, I recommend https://www.tjheritage.org/the-scholars-commission
    which includes a link to a summary
    https://www.tjheritage.org/scholars-commission-pdf
    of this book: https://www.amazon.com/Jefferson-Hemings-Controversy-Report-Scholars-Commission/dp/0890890854

    The proof you speak of, in your obsessive insistance that Foster didn’t “prove” TJ’s paternity, is some kind of weird hybrid philosophical/religious logical proof. That has no place here. We are talking about a question of paternity. That’s a legal issue, you stupid fuck. That’s resolved by a judge and a jury, using statistical evidence. Not a humanities professor or a theologian.

    That paragraph is a great example of your lack of ability in both thinking and debate. Not sure how you slot my arguments into that bizarre category. At this point you just seem to be throwing words against the wall and hoping that either some stick or that the volume convinces some people.

    To my mind that paragraph makes a lot more sense as projection than as an assessment of my views.

    At least the paper link was interesting though. Thanks. Here is full text for those who prefer that to abstracts: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329815727_A_game_of_hide_and_seq_Identification_of_parallel_Y-STR_evolution_in_deep-rooting_pedigrees

    It gives an answer to my question about mutation rates:

    For distant paternal kinship analysis, it is important to identify all Y-STR variants and to have knowledge of exact individual Y-STR mutation rates in order to correctly estimate the time to their most recent common ancestor (tMRCA). To date, various Y-STR markers have been characterized with their mutation rate ranging between 10^-4 and 10^-2 per generation (mpg) (7,9,12,13). The latter group (>10^-2 mpg) defines the rapidly mutating (RM) Y-STRs and is useful to discriminate close paternally related males (14). The inclusion of RM Y-STRs in modern Y-STR profiling kits increases the discriminatory power and the weight-of-evidence for a Y-haplotype match (15).

    One other point, perhaps Thomas Jefferson being 65 at the time of Eston’s conception matters after all:

    Both autosomal and Y-STR mutation rates have been observed to be correlated with paternal allele transfer, the age of the father and the allele length (7,9,10).

    P.S. I really don’t think you realize how ridiculous your reliance on ad hominems as “argument” makes you look. It is always amusing to see people bring what appear to be standard barroom BS “debate” tactics to a written forum which includes things like references to academic papers. The cliche “bringing a knife to a gunfight” comes to mind.

  286. @95Theses

    Sally Hemings is believed to be the half-sister of Thomas Jefferson’s wife Martha; her mother was Elizabeth Hemings, a mixed-race slave, and her father was John Wayles, also Martha’s father. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eston_Hemings

    So Sally Hemming was actually only one-quarter black to begin with — as she had a white father and a half-white mother. Her son Easton had a “male Jefferson” father and was thus only one-eighth black. Yet he was also a slave. That’s king of interesting.

    • Replies: @95Theses
  287. 95Theses says:
    @Hypnotoad666

    Indeed interesting.

    But that will have no effect on the majority of Black people who will persist in claiming that Hemings’ lineage is entitled to Monticello and all its trappings.

  288. 95Theses says:
    @res

    Ad hominems–the best way ever to say to someone arguing with you: “you win.”

    Clever. I like it!

  289. Aft says:
    @AnotherDad

    That sounds mostly right. But the issue is parasitic load, malnutrition, etc. Perfectly fine to be raised by wolves just outside the malaria/HIV belt. Plus wolves hunt pretty good sources of protein, iodine, and everything else you need.

    Where those points go (not easy to fuel a brain while fighting these):

    HIV prevalence:

    Malaria:
    https://ourworldindata.org/exports/malaria-death-rates_v3_850x600.svg

    Also Africa is a very diverse place: IQs vary by country and even among tribes within countries.

    Within the US, the environment (ample food, iodine, rarity of serious infections) is pretty much the same:

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

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 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 Steve Sailer Comments via RSS