The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJayMan Archive
HBD Fundamentals
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Open_book_2_by_sbmdestockI’ve been meaning to put this page together for some time. Every once in a while, we are faced with the task of explaining (or defending) the fundamentals of Human BioDiversity (HBD), such as genetic inheritance, the reality and significance of IQ, the reality of biological sex and race differences. I often found myself digging up references that demonstrate these basic principles. Now, I’m going to put these basal references in a single, easy follow list.

This is a non-exhaustive list of important reading and videos reviewing the evidence we have for biological human differences. This is the “required reading” so to speak, and is meant to be a fairly quick and dirty introduction for the newcomer to the topic that is also easy to follow and navigate. I will continue to update this list as time goes on.

The next time you’re in a debate with a blank-slatist or other HBD-denier, just point them to this page. ;)

Table of Contents:

Start with (key reading):

Top of the list: Pinker, Steven (2002). The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. Viking.

Harris , Judith Rich (1998). The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do. Free Press. Revised and Updated edition, 2009.

Harris, Judith Rich (2006). No Two Alike: Human Nature and Human Individuality. W.W. Norton.

Cochran, Gregory & Harpending, Henry (2009). The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution. Basic Books.

Frost, Peter (2011). Human nature or human natures? Futures, 43, 740–748.

Clark, Gregory (2014). The Son Also Rises: Surnames and the History of Social Mobility. Princeton University Press.

On biological sex differences:

A video of a debate between Steven Pinker and Elizabeth Spelke – Edge: THE SCIENCE OF GENDER AND SCIENCE (2005)

The video from the above site has been removed, but can be found here. The above text contains a transcript of the debate and each presenter’s slides.

This discussion/review of sex differences by Larry Cahill (2014): Equal ≠ The Same: Sex Differences in the Human Brain

Indeed, see much of the rest of Cahill’s work on this.

Ingalhalikar, Madhura, et al. (2013). Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain, PNAS 2013

Cahill, Larry (2006). Why sex matters for neuroscience, Nature Reviews Neuroscience | AOP, published online 10 May 2006.

Ruigrok, Amber N.V.; Salimi-Khorshidi, Gholamreza; Lai, Meng-Chuan; Baron-Cohen, Simon; Lombardo, Michael V.; Tait, Roger J.; and Suckling, John (2014). A meta-analysis of sex differences in human brain structure, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 39, 34-50.

Schmitt, David P. (2003). Universal Sex Differences in the Desire for Sexual Variety: Tests From 52 Nations, 6 Continents, and 13 Islands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(1), 85–104.

Schmitt, David P. et al. (2012). A Reexamination of Sex Differences in Sexuality: New Studies Reveal Old Truths. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(2), 135–139.

Schmitt, David P. (2013). When Is a Sex Difference Real? | Psychology Today

Browne, Kingsley R. (2013). Biological Sex Differences in the Workplace: Reports of the End of Men are Greatly Exaggerated (As Are Claims of Women’s Continued Inequality). Boston University Law Review, Forthcoming. Wayne State University Law School Research Paper No. 2013-04.

Borkenau, P., Hřebíčková, M., Kuppens, P., Realo, A. and Allik, J. (2013), Sex Differences in Variability in Personality: A Study in Four Samples. Journal of Personality, 81, 49–60.

This video interview with Kay Hymowitz, The Plight of the Alpha Female:

Also this article by Kay Hymowitz (2013):

Think Again: Working Women – By Kay Hymowitz – Foreign Policy

Sommers, Christina Hoff (2013). Lessons from a feminist paradise on Equal Pay Day – Society and Culture – AEI

Sommers, Christina Hoff (2013). What ‘Lean In’ Misunderstands About Gender Differences – The Atlantic

Lemos, Gina C.; Abad, Francisco J.; Almeida, Leandro S.; and Colom, Robert (2013). Sex differences on g and non-g intellectual performance reveal potential sources of STEM discrepancies. Intelligence 41(1), 11-18.

(2011) Sex differences in the Brain: Fact or Fiction?: A video lecture by Margaret M. McCarthy that goes into great depth about the evidence for human and non-human animal sex differences in the brain and behavior (see starting at 28:09 for humans).

And of course, Harald Eia’s Brainwash episode on gender.

On the reality of IQ:

This talk by Steve Hsu:

Also see these blog posts by Steve Hsu:

Information Processing: Horsepower matters; psychometrics works (2009)
Information Processing: Do advanced education and a challenging career make you smarter? (2009)

Information Processing: Life impacts of personality and intelligence (2014)

More on the predictive validity of IQ, see this essay:

Murray, Charles (1997). IQ and economic success. The Public Interest, Summer 1997, 21-35

On the central importance of g to many aspects of life:

Gottfredson, Linda S. (1997). “Why g matters: The Complexity of Everyday Life.” Intelligence 24

On the science of behavioral genetics:

See these key papers on behavioral genetics:

Bouchard, Thomas. J. and McGue, Matt (2003), Genetic and environmental influences on human psychological differences. J. Neurobiol., 54: 4–45.

Bouchard, Thomas J. (2004), Genetic Influence on Human Psychological Traits A survey. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(4): 148-151

Bouchard, Thomas J. (2008). Genes and Human Psychological Traits. In Peter Carruthers, Stephen Laurence, and Stephen Stich (Eds.), The Innate Mind, Volume 3: Foundations and the Future (69-89). Oxford University Press.

See this key defense against popular criticisms of behavioral genetics and a review of the evidence underlying the solidity of its methods:

Barnes, J.C.; Wright, John Paul; Boutwell, Brian B.; Schwartz, Joseph A.; Connoly, Eric J.; Nedelec, Joseph L.; and Beaver, Kevin M. (2014), Demonstrating the Validity of Twin Research in Criminology. Criminology.

Steger, Michael F.; Hicks, Brian M.; Kashdan, Todd B.; Krueger, Robert F.; Bouchard Jr., Thomas J. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences on the positive traits of the values in action classification, and biometric covariance with normal personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(3), 524-539.

On the impact of genetics on IQ:

Plomin, Robert and Deary, Ian J. (2014) Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings. Molecular Psychiatry advance online publication 16 September 2014

(2013) The Genetics of Intelligence « Meng Hu’s Blog

On the genetic contributions to economic success, including the role of IQ, and the lack of effects of the family environment on such (i.e., parents):

Essays on genetic variation and economic behavior – Cesarini, D. A. (2010). Essays on genetic variation and economic behavior. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from DSpace@MIT. (http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/57897).

Hyytinen, Ari; Ilmakunnas, Pekka; Johansson, Edvard; and Toivanen, Otto (2013). Heritability of Lifetime Income. Helsinki Center of Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 364

Visscher PM, Medland SE, Ferreira MAR, Morley KI, Zhu G, et al. (2006) Assumption-Free Estimation of Heritability from Genome-Wide Identity-by-Descent Sharing between Full Siblings. PLoS Genet 2(3): e41.

Davies, G., Tenesa, A., Payton, A., Yang, J., Harris, S. E., Liewald, D., … Deary, I. J. (2011). Genome-wide association studies establish that human intelligence is highly heritable and polygenic. Molecular Psychiatry, 16(10), 996–1005.

Plomin, Robert et al. (2013). Common DNA Markers Can Account for More Than Half of the Genetic Influence on Cognitive Abilities. Psychological Science, April 2013, 24(4) 562-568.

Trzaskowski, Maciej; Harlaar, Nicole; Arden, Rosalind; Krapohl, Eva; Rimfeld, Kaili; McMillan, Andrew; Dale, Philip S.; and Plomin, Robert. (2013) Genetic influence on family socioeconomic status and children’s intelligence. Intelligence, 42, 83-86.

Verweij, K. J. H., Yang, J., Lahti, J., Veijola, J., Hintsanen, M., Pulkki-Råback, L., … Zietsch, B. P. (2012). Maintenance of genetic variation in human personality: Testing evolutionary models by estimating heritability due to common causal variants and investigating the effect of distant inbreeding. Evolution; International Journal of Organic Evolution, 66(10), 3238–3251.

Also see this wonderful and comprehensive review of the heritability of brain structure and the relationship between this structure and IQ:

Strike, Lachlan T.; Couvy-Duchesne, Baptiste; Hansell, Narelle K.; Cuellar-Partida, Gabriel; Medland, Sarah E.; and Wright, Margaret J. (2015) Genetics and Brain Morphology, Neuropsychology Review, March, 14, 2015.

And of course, my own blog posts on the matter:

All Human Behavioral Traits are Heritable
Taming the “Tiger Mom” and Tackling the Parenting Myth
Environmental Hereditarianism
The Son Becomes The Father
More Behavioral Genetic Facts

As well as Harald Eia’s Brainwash episode “The Parental Effect

On the reality of race:

These five key blog posts by Steve Hsu:

(2008) Information Processing: “No scientific basis for race”
(2008) Information Processing: Human genetic variation, Fst and Lewontin’s fallacy in pictures
(2012) Information Processing: Rare variants and human genetic diversity
(2013) Information Processing: Learning can hurt
(2014) Information Processing: What’s New Since Montagu?

These papers describing some of the genetic processes used, particularly principal component analysis (PCA):

Price, Alkes L.; Reich, David (2006). Population Structure and Eigenanalysis. PLOS Genetics.
McVean, Gil (2009). A Genealogical Interpretation of Principal Components Analysis. PLOS: Genetics.

These blog posts by Peter Frost:
(2011) Evo and Proud: Apples, oranges, and genes
(2012) Evo and Proud: Trans-species polymorphisms

As well as these two by Greg Cochran:

(2012) Lewontin’s argument | West Hunter
(2014) Phenotypes vs genetic statistics | West Hunter

And this post by Razib Khan:

(2013) Why race as a biological construct matters | Gene Expression

This video of racial differences in newborn behavior:

Cross-Cultural Differences in Newborn Behavior
Discussed in Freedman, Daniel G. (1979). Human Sociobiology: A Holistic Approach. Free Press.

Also see: Kagan, Jerome, & Snidman, Nancy C. (2004). The long shadow of temperament. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.

And also see my own blog post:

How Much Hard Evidence Do You Need?

And of course, Harald Eia’s Brainwash episode on Race.

On racial differences in IQ and their global impact:

Rushton, J. Philippe and Jensen, Arthur R. (2010). Race and IQ: A Theory-Based Review of the Research in Richard Nisbett’s Intelligence and How to Get It. The Open Psychology Journal, 3, 9-35.

On the effect of poverty and socioeconomic status on IQ (there isn’t one) and said explanations for racial gaps, this blog post:

(2013) The Unsilenced Science: Black Suits, Gowns, & Skin: SAT Scores by Income, Education, & Race

Rushton, J. Philippe & Jensen, Arthur R. (2010). The rise and fall of the Flynn Effect as a reason to expect a narrowing of the Black-White IQ gap. Intelligence, 38, 213-219

Nijenhuis, J., & van der Flier, H. (2013). Is the Flynn effect on g?: A meta-analysis, Intelligence

Nijenhuisa, Jan te; Jongeneel-Grimenb, Birthe; & Armstrong, Elijah L. (2015). Are adoption gains on the g factor? A meta-analysis, Personality and Individual Differences 73, 50-60.

Gottfredson, Linda S. (2007). Shattering Logic to Explain the Flynn Effect. Cato Unbound.

Lynn, Richard and Tatu Vanhanen. (2002). IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Praeger/Greenwood.

Lynn, Richard (2008). The Global Bell Curve: Race, IQ, and Inequality Worldwide. Washington Summit Publishers.

Lynn, Richard and Tatu Vanhanen, (2012). Intelligence: A Unifying Construct for the Social Sciences.

Also see this blog post by Jason Malloy (2006):

Gene Expression: A World of Difference: Richard Lynn Maps World Intelligence

Also see the ongoing discussion over at Human Varieties

Also these posts by La Griffe du Lion:

(2002) The Smart Fraction Theory of IQ and the Wealth of Nations
(2004) Smart Fraction Theory II: Why Asians Lag

Rindermann, Heiner (2007). The g-factor of international cognitive ability comparisons: the homogeneity of results in PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS and IQ-tests across nations. European Journal of Personality 21, 667-706.

Rindermann, Heiner; Sailer, Michael; and Thompson, James (2009). The impact of smart fractions, cognitive ability of politicians and average competences of peoples on social development. Talent Development & Excellence 1 (1), 3-25.

Christainsen, Gregory B (2013). IQ and the wealth of nations: How much reverse causality? Intelligence 41, 688-698.

On the evolution of modern advanced civilized peoples:

Clark, Gregory (2007). A Farewell to Alms: A Brief Economic History of the World. Princeton University Press.

Frost, Peter (2008). Sexual selection and human geographic variation, Special Issue: Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Meeting of the NorthEastern Evolutionary Psychology Society. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2(4),169-191

Frost, Peter (2010). The Roman State and genetic pacification, Evolutionary Psychology, 8(3), 376-389.

Frost, Peter and Harpending, Henry (2015). Western Europe, State Formation, and Genetic Pacification, Evolutionary Psychology, 13(1), 230-243.

Harpending, Henry (2012). Genetics and the Historical Decline of Violence? | West Hunter

Frost, Peter (2013). Evo and Proud: Making Europeans kinder, gentler

Frost, Peter (2013). Evo and Proud: Where do those tensions come from?

Unz, Ron (2013). How Social Darwinism Made Modern China | The American Conservative

Cochran, Gregory; Hardy, Jason; & Harpending, Henry (2006). Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence. Journal of Biosocial Science 38, 1-35

Also see these blog posts by Peter Frost (2013):

East Asia’s Farewell to Alms
Does the Clark-Unz model apply to Japan and Korea?
Final thoughts on the Clark-Unz model

Fischer, David Hackett (1989). Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America. Oxford University Press

Woodard, Colin (2011). American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America. Viking Adult.

And of course, the work of HBD Chick:

start here | hbd* chick
clannishness defined | hbd* chick
big summary post on the hajnal line | hbd* chick
the middle ages « hbd* chick (2011)
year-end summary, 2011 | hbd* chick
outbreeding, self-control and lethal violence | hbd* chick
2012 top ten | hbd* chick
historic european homicide rates … and the hajnal line | hbd* chick
medieval manorialism’s selection pressures | hbd chick

In addition to my own summaries of her work:

An HBD Summary of the Foundations of Modern Civilization
How Inbred are Europeans?

And about the regional “cultures” of North America (for example, liberal New England vs. the conservative Deep South), see my series on the matter:

A Tentative Ranking of the Clannishness of the “Founding Fathers”
Sound Familiar?
The Cavaliers
Flags of the American Nations
Maps of the American Nations
Rural White Liberals – a Key to Understanding the Political Divide
More Maps of the American Nations

On genetic load:

First, be sure to see these blog posts by Greg Cochran on West Hunter (2012):

Typos
Get Smart
More thoughts on genetic load
The genetics of stupidity
The Golden Age

Also:

Keller, Matthew C., & Miller, Geoffery (2006). Resolving the paradox of common, harmful, heritable mental disorders: Which evolutionary genetic models work best? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 285-452.

On the economic impact of demographic changes (particularly immigration and the Baby Boom in the United States):

Blog posts by Peter Turchin (2013):

The End of Prosperity: Why Did Real Wages Stop Growing in the 1970s?
Cutting through the Thicket of Economic Forces (Why Real Wages Stopped Growing II)
A Proxy for Non-Market Forces (Why Real Wages Stopped Growing III)
Putting It All Together (Why Real Wages Stopped Growing IV)
More on Labor Supply (Why Real Wages Stopped Growing V)

This post by Dennis Mangan (2012):

Spot the Correlation: Wealth vs. Immigration

On racial and ethnic strife, the pull of genetic similarity, and challenges presented by “diversity”:

Putnam, Robert D. (2007). E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century — The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137-174

Also, on that note, see this ranking of the most peaceful U.S. states, in which, Maine (see HBD Chick here) consistently tops out at #1!

United States Peace Index « Vision of Humanity

Krupp, D.B., Debruine, L.M., Jones, B.C., and Lalumiere, M.L. (2012) Kin recognition: evidence that humans can perceive both positive and negative relatedness. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 25 (8). pp. 1472-1478.

Also see

Also see this much more comprehensive list of research supporting human biodiversity here:

Human BioDiversity Reading List: http://www.humanbiologicaldiversity.com/

(Republished from JayMan's Blog by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Science • Tags: WasPage 
Hide 69 CommentsLeave a Comment
69 Comments to "HBD Fundamentals"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. [...] HBD Fundamentals | JayMan’s Blog [...]

    Read More
  2. [...] HBD Fundamentals – from jayman! [...]

    Read More
  3. That really is a great and constructive effort. :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    Thanks. :)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    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
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /jman/hbd-fundamentals/#comment-1061132
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. JayMan says: • Website
    @Big Nose Kate
    That really is a great and constructive effort. :)

    Thanks. :)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Like I didn’t have enough to read before…

    Typo at Harpending’s “bigotry” link. You want this instead: http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/325/

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    Thanks! Fixed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. JayMan says: • Website
    @Assistant Village Idiot
    Like I didn't have enough to read before...

    Typo at Harpending's "bigotry" link. You want this instead: http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/325/

    Thanks! Fixed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. ben says:

    Are my eyes deceiving me, or have you really forgotten Neven Sesardic? His book ‘making sense of heritability’ is unparalleled.

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/making-sense-of-heritability-neven-sesardic.pdf

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    This list is not final by any means. I just so happened not to read that one. I'll be sure to take a look at it.
    , @td
    I haven't read the book mentioned by ben, but I highly recommend Sesardic's 2010 article Race: A Social Destruction of a Biological Concept and his recent follow-up Confusions About Race: A New Installment. These constitute a highly lucid refutation of social constructionist views on race, and you would be remiss if you did not include them here.

    Sesardic's articles are available here:

    http://www.ln.edu.hk/philoso/staff/sesardic/publications.html

    , @panjoomby
    excellent & amazing work!
    btw Ben's "lesacredprintemps..." link works if you take the "s" off of "https" making it:
    http://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/making-sense-of-heritability-neven-sesardic.pdf
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. JayMan says: • Website
    @ben
    Are my eyes deceiving me, or have you really forgotten Neven Sesardic? His book 'making sense of heritability' is unparalleled.

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/making-sense-of-heritability-neven-sesardic.pdf

    This list is not final by any means. I just so happened not to read that one. I’ll be sure to take a look at it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. [...] – in other words, they tend to have higher levels of genetic load (see here at West Hunter, or my HBD Fundamentals page for some discussion on genetic load). And thanks to pleiotropy – that is, genes that impact [...]

    Read More
  10. […] reading on human biodiversity: – jayman’s hbd fundamentals – hbd […]

    Read More
  11. […] to Stephanie Grace. For a great deal more information on the wider subject, try JayMan’s HBD Fundamentals or the HBD Bibliography. If you have counterevidence to Richwine, you can win a bottle of rich […]

    Read More
  12. td says:
    @ben
    Are my eyes deceiving me, or have you really forgotten Neven Sesardic? His book 'making sense of heritability' is unparalleled.

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/making-sense-of-heritability-neven-sesardic.pdf

    I haven’t read the book mentioned by ben, but I highly recommend Sesardic’s 2010 article Race: A Social Destruction of a Biological Concept and his recent follow-up Confusions About Race: A New Installment. These constitute a highly lucid refutation of social constructionist views on race, and you would be remiss if you did not include them here.

    Sesardic’s articles are available here:

    http://www.ln.edu.hk/philoso/staff/sesardic/publications.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous says: • Website • Disclaimer

    This is such an impressive source of information, I’m sure I’ll be coming back to it for years. I’m something of an independent scholar in the application of HBD to politics and partisan polarization, wrote a book about it called “Red Genes Blue Genes: Exposing Political Irrationality” which you can find at my dormant website, http://www.redgenesbluegenes.com I posted my own irritated reaction there to an assault on IQ that caused me discomfiture when I was waylaid by a gaggle of well-meaning liberals (at a cookout in Park Slope, Brooklyn, home of that ilk), all of whom insisted that IQ was also a social construct and not valid. I did a brief amount of web research before posting, but it would have been so helpful to have had access to this page. Keep up the good work!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. […] page HBD Fundamentals for a succinct summary of the evidence behind heritable human […]

    Read More
  15. I would recommend Wicherts’s set of papers arguing that African IQ is 80, and Rindermann’s nice paper arguing that it is 75.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    I have seen those, and Lynn's responses. I believe the evidence shows that the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africa is closer to 70 than it is to 80. The genetic potential average IQ there is probably 80, but the phenotypic IQ is no less real because of this.
    , @Anonymous
    In "Race and IQ: A Theory-Based Review of the Research in Richard Nisbett’s Intelligence and How to Get It", Rushton & Jensen wrote the following :

    Tests of university students confirm this pattern of results. One of us (JPR) traveled to South Africa to collect new IQ data from highly-select Black students at the prestigious University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. Seven independent studies were published yielding a median IQ of 84 (range 77 to 103) [40, 41, 107]. Assuming that African university students score 1 SD (15 IQ points) above the mean of their population, as university students typically do, a median IQ of 84 is consistent with a general population mean of 70. Other studies of university students have found a comparable IQ average of about 84 [108]. Studies conducted on the most select of all African university students, such as those in engineering schools, or on the basis of math and science competitions, find their average IQ is approximately 100 [41, 108]. Assuming such students score two SDs above their group average, as they do at the best universities in the US, this value too indicates an IQ of 70 for the general population.

    The only concern I have with regard to african IQs is that measurement invariance (or rather, the absence of measurement bias) is not well established. Rushton in "Construct Validity of Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices for African and Non-African Engineering Students in South Africa" showed that there is indeed invariance in factor loading, meaning that g is similar across groups, but should have used MCGFA to test measurement equivalence in measurement intercepts as well, or used instead IRT models to assess item bias.
    http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/IJSA2004.pdf

    I am not aware of strong factorial invariance in african IQs, but if it turns out that they show measurement bias, then it is likely that african IQs have been underestimated to an unknown amount. So, if we agree that african IQ is somewhat about 70 or 73, we have to say that they should be taken at the lower-bound estimates. By way of comparison, Jensen, in Bias in Mental Testing (pp 98-99) says that blacks in south regions of the US have an average of 80 points.
    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Bias-in-Mental-Testing-Arthur-R.-Jensen.pdf

    P.S. Your article is a good summary of the 'HBD fundamentals' by the way.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. JayMan says: • Website
    @elijahlarmstrong
    I would recommend Wicherts's set of papers arguing that African IQ is 80, and Rindermann's nice paper arguing that it is 75.

    I have seen those, and Lynn’s responses. I believe the evidence shows that the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africa is closer to 70 than it is to 80. The genetic potential average IQ there is probably 80, but the phenotypic IQ is no less real because of this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Lynn responded to Rindermann’s African IQ paper?

    Why are you convinced by Lynn’s responses?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    There's been an ongoing back and forth between Lynn and Wicherts's crew about the topic. One of the best discussions on the matter is Jason Malloy's work here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. JayMan says: • Website
    @elijahlarmstrong
    Lynn responded to Rindermann's African IQ paper?

    Why are you convinced by Lynn's responses?

    There’s been an ongoing back and forth between Lynn and Wicherts’s crew about the topic. One of the best discussions on the matter is Jason Malloy’s work here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Jason Malloy doesn’t supply an African IQ estimate, though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    He linked to one of his discussions in the post. See here. Also here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. JayMan says: • Website
    @elijahlarmstrong
    Jason Malloy doesn't supply an African IQ estimate, though.

    He linked to one of his discussions in the post. See here. Also here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. […] least nationalistic (with a “nation” regarded in very large terms) sentiments. Overall, Northwestern Europeans have are fairly outbred, having a history low levels of cousin marriage. However, within NW Euros, there is significant variation, and that variation affects the traits of […]

    Read More
  22. panjoomby says: • Website
    @ben
    Are my eyes deceiving me, or have you really forgotten Neven Sesardic? His book 'making sense of heritability' is unparalleled.

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/making-sense-of-heritability-neven-sesardic.pdf

    excellent & amazing work!
    btw Ben’s “lesacredprintemps…” link works if you take the “s” off of “https” making it:

    http://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/making-sense-of-heritability-neven-sesardic.pdf

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. M.G. says: • Website

    Bless you, JayMan. I’m just seeing this for the first time, what a herculean effort. Outstanding. I will be keeping this at the very top of my (6000-strong) bookmark list. Chapeau bas.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    Thank you! It's good to have you back!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. JayMan says: • Website
    @M.G.
    Bless you, JayMan. I'm just seeing this for the first time, what a herculean effort. Outstanding. I will be keeping this at the very top of my (6000-strong) bookmark list. Chapeau bas.

    Thank you! It’s good to have you back!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. […] Indeed, he even recently doubled down of his “We are all Africans” mantra (as if absolutely no relevant biological changes could have happened since then – as the esteemed evolutionary biologist and author of The Selfish Gene should know). […]

    Read More
  26. […] – hbd bibliography – jayman’s hbd fundamentals […]

    Read More
  27. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @elijahlarmstrong
    I would recommend Wicherts's set of papers arguing that African IQ is 80, and Rindermann's nice paper arguing that it is 75.

    In “Race and IQ: A Theory-Based Review of the Research in Richard Nisbett’s Intelligence and How to Get It”, Rushton & Jensen wrote the following :

    Tests of university students confirm this pattern of results. One of us (JPR) traveled to South Africa to collect new IQ data from highly-select Black students at the prestigious University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg. Seven independent studies were published yielding a median IQ of 84 (range 77 to 103) [40, 41, 107]. Assuming that African university students score 1 SD (15 IQ points) above the mean of their population, as university students typically do, a median IQ of 84 is consistent with a general population mean of 70. Other studies of university students have found a comparable IQ average of about 84 [108]. Studies conducted on the most select of all African university students, such as those in engineering schools, or on the basis of math and science competitions, find their average IQ is approximately 100 [41, 108]. Assuming such students score two SDs above their group average, as they do at the best universities in the US, this value too indicates an IQ of 70 for the general population.

    The only concern I have with regard to african IQs is that measurement invariance (or rather, the absence of measurement bias) is not well established. Rushton in “Construct Validity of Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices for African and Non-African Engineering Students in South Africa” showed that there is indeed invariance in factor loading, meaning that g is similar across groups, but should have used MCGFA to test measurement equivalence in measurement intercepts as well, or used instead IRT models to assess item bias.

    http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/IJSA2004.pdf

    I am not aware of strong factorial invariance in african IQs, but if it turns out that they show measurement bias, then it is likely that african IQs have been underestimated to an unknown amount. So, if we agree that african IQ is somewhat about 70 or 73, we have to say that they should be taken at the lower-bound estimates. By way of comparison, Jensen, in Bias in Mental Testing (pp 98-99) says that blacks in south regions of the US have an average of 80 points.

    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Bias-in-Mental-Testing-Arthur-R.-Jensen.pdf

    P.S. Your article is a good summary of the ‘HBD fundamentals’ by the way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. […] Edit 8/24/13: Also be sure to see my HBD Fundamentals page, particularly the section On the evolution of modern advanced civilized peoples […]

    Read More
  29. […] See also: HBD Fundamentals: On the evolution of modern advanced civilized peoples […]

    Read More
  30. […] HBD Fundamentals: On the evolution of modern advanced civilized peoples […]

    Read More
  31. […] HBD Fundamentals: On the economic impact of demographic changes (particularly immigration and the Ba… […]

    Read More
  32. […] Turchin explored why this correlation exists (see the posts linked here, at my  HBD Fundamentals page, in the section “On the economic impact of demographic changes (particularly immigration and […]

    Read More
  33. […] True. Indeed, that men and women are genetically different is in fact tautological: it is this genetic difference (XY vs. XX chromosomes) that defines male vs. female. But, in the sense that this genetic difference entails biological mental differences, this is correct (see my page HBD Fundamentals: On biological sex differences). […]

    Read More
  34. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I’ve discovered a highly convenient “error” in Richard Lynn’s Mexico data. In 2005 Lynn conducted a study of Mexican IQ and these were the results:

    “Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test was administered to a representative sample of 920 white, Mestizo and Native Mexican Indian children aged 7–10 years in Mexico. The mean IQs in relation to a British mean of 100 obtained from the 1979 British standardization sample and adjusted for the estimated subsequent increase were: 98·0 for whites, 94·3 for Mestizos and 83·3 for Native Mexican Indians.”

    http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=266611

    I read the full paper and didn’t find any problems with it. However, looking at those scores, and being aware that most of Mexico’s population is Mestizo, I couldn’t help but think the reported mean IQ for Mexico that I often see (87 or 88) was a little too low.

    The demographics for Mexico, correctly given in the paper linked above, are 10% White, 60% Mestizo, and 30% pure Indian. With these percentages — 98(.1) + 94(.6) + 83 (.3) — the scores above average out to 91.

    Now I double-checked Lynn’s book IQ and Global Inequality, published in 2006, and I noticed that Lynn cites the 2005 Mexican study above, but reports the overall Mexican average as 88. The reason is found on page 312:

    http://de.scribd.com/doc/129505348/Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality

    For some strange reason, in this book he reports Mexico’s demographics as 10% White, 30% Mestizo, 60% Indian. Thus 98(.1) + 94(.3) + 83 (.6) = average of 88.

    But not only is this demographic information obviously wrong, it contradicts the percentages reported in his own damn paper!

    Now, it’s possible that this was an honest error on Lynn’s part. As I mentioned, I read through the entire 2005 Mexican study, and nowhere in it did he bother calculating the overall Mexican IQ, neither as either 88 nor 91. Only the scores for each particular ethnic group are enumerated. But the “error” that appears in IQ and Global Inequality is an awfully convenient for two reasons:

    1) The only other IQ study in Mexico yielded an average of 87, but it was from the 1960s and there were some methodological problems with it. Listing the “updated” Mexican average as 88 gives an illusion of consistency and immobility.

    2) In the color-coded global IQ maps that HBDers love to throw around, yourself included, countries with a score above 90 or 91 are usually colored differently from those which score below 90. Mexico is fairly easy to spot on a map, so if it were colored with other 90+ IQ nations, people would notice. Lynn’s “error” makes it easier to group Mexico with other Central American countries.

    Furthermore, even the average of 91 is a bit skewed thanks to depressed scores of the indigenous Indians. Indians in Mexico face discrimination from both Whites AND Mestizos, and are relegated to the most squalid and unsanitary areas where they suffer from poor nutrition and other adverse environmental factors which could impact their scores. If we limited Mexico to its White and Mestizo populations, it would have an IQ safely in the 95-96 range.

    I’ve noticed that the members of the anti-Hispanic HBD contingent, such as Steve Sailer, don’t give much attention to the fact that Lynn’s 2005 Mexican study showed a mere 4 point (!) gap between Whites and Mestizos. An average IQ of 94 hardly justifies disparaging the intelligence of Mexican Mestizos, and if the Black-White gap in America were ever narrowed to a mere 4-5 points, there would probably be a push to commemorate the moment as a national holiday.

    In addition, these were native Mexicans, not immigrants. Off the top of my head, I’ve don’t think I’ve seen an average as high as 94 for any native populations (as opposed to super-selected elite immigrants) other than Europeans, Ashkenazi Jews, and East Asians.

    If an average of about 94 for Mexican Mestizos sounds implauble to you, keep in mind that

    1) Mestizos tend to perform better on culturally neutral tests than on culturally biased tests. For Blacks, the opposite is the case. This indicates that Mestizos could have untapped potential that doesn’t show up in their standardized tests scores. It’s much more difficult to argue this for Blacks. This was noticed at an early date by Arthur Jensen:

    “Surprisingly, blacks tend to perform relatively better on the more culture-loaded or verbal kinds of tests than on the culture-fair type. For example, on the widely used Wechsler Intelligence Scale, comprised of 11 different subtests, blacks do better on the culture-loaded subtests of vocabulary, general information, and verbal comprehension than on the nonverbal performance tests such as the block designs. Just the opposite is true for such minorities as Orientals, Mexican-Americans, Indians, and Puerto Ricans. [...] Our tests of Mexican-Americans produced similar results. They do rather poorly on the culture-loaded types of tests based on verbal skills and knowledge, but they do better on the culture-fair tests. The same holds true for American Indians. All these minorities perform on the two types of tests much as one might expect from the culture-bias hypothesis. Only blacks, among the minorities we have tested, score in just the opposite manner.”

    2) But then why is Mexico the way it is? Because there’s lots of disinformation about Mexico. Overall, Mexico as a country is in much better shape than, for example, India, and it is leagues ahead of a real Third-World hellhole like Haiti. This is especially true if you avoid the areas ravaged by the Cartel Wars (which have nothing to do with IQ), and the areas with more indigenous Indians. The White and Mestizo-majority areas are in good condition. With regard to PISA tests, Mexico scores on par with White-majority Uruguay and European nations like Romania and Bulgaria, and even outperforms White-majority Argentina. Mexico is more comparable to a country like Vietnam — it hovers between “First World” and “Third World”, but remains in a stage of positive growth and learns more towards the First World.

    3) Likewise, HBDers have been incredibly lazy and sloppy when it comes to Latin America in general. For example, Chile is a prosperous nation and perhaps the most successful in Latin America, so HBDers assume it’s a “White” country. Wrong. Recent DNA tests reveal that the majority of Chileans have upwards of 35-40% Amerindian admixture. “Light-skinned Mestizo” is a more apt description of the average Chilean than “White.” Once again, we see these light-skinned Mestizos outperform their much Whiter neighbors in Argentina on numerous metrics: GDP per capita, standard of living, corruption levels, etc.

    I’ve perused your blog and it appears you’ve occasionally engaged in the same anti-Mexican baiting as ideologues like Steve Sailer and others who downplay facts which contradict their worldview. Nevertheless, I’ll take your word that you’re a liberal and that you are willing to examine the evidence wherever it may lead. If you’re wondering what I’m expecting, I think the more honest HBD bloggers like you should at least reconsider obnoxious terms like “NAM” and treat different groups differently. Mestizos are not Blacks and do not deserve to be lumped in with them.

    (For the record, my own opinion is that there are some IQ gaps between different populations, and that the Black-White gap is the most substantial and has the most cogent body of evidence supporting it, while the gaps among non-African populations are more ambiguous and could contain lots of surprises and untapped potential. I don’t dismiss HBD, but I think it has a tendency to reductionism and that many of its proponents are not as impartial as they claim to be.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    @George S.

    Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

    In general, allow me to note that inconsistencies in data of national IQs are to be expected. It is part and parcel to conducting such research. See the comments at my post Welcome Readers from Portugal! and Peter Frost's post on such variability in IQ testing.


    I’ve noticed that the members of the anti-Hispanic HBD contingent, such as Steve Sailer, don’t give much attention to the fact that Lynn’s 2005 Mexican study showed a mere 4 point (!) gap between Whites and Mestizos. An average IQ of 94 hardly justifies disparaging the intelligence of Mexican Mestizos, and if the Black-White gap in America were ever narrowed to a mere 4-5 points, there would probably be a push to commemorate the moment as a national holiday.
     
    Average IQ of Hispanic Americans comes back to around 91. Jason Richwine's investigations confirm this. As well, average IQ of most Native Americans tends to cluster in the 86-90 range. Whatever the average IQ in Mexico, its diaspora in the States acts as if this is their IQ (91).

    All told, we're talking a difference of at most 3 points (94-91) or 6 points (94-88). This is well within the range of what we'd expect with natural variability in testing data.


    Mestizos tend to perform better on culturally neutral tests than on culturally biased tests. For Blacks, the opposite is the case. This indicates that Mestizos could have untapped potential that doesn’t show up in their standardized tests scores. It’s much more difficult to argue this for Blacks. This was noticed at an early date by Arthur Jensen:
     
    That was interesting. But the extensive analysis over the Ron Unz fiasco and Jason Richwine's thesis demonstrate that the Hispanic-White gap in America is quite real and persistent.

    See:

    Redebunking Ron | Occidentalist
    Ron Unz on Richwine’s Argument — Taking the Bull by the Horn | Occidentalist
    New Mexico | West Hunter


    But then why is Mexico the way it is? Because there’s lots of disinformation about Mexico. Overall, Mexico as a country is in much better shape than, for example, India, and it is leagues ahead of a real Third-World hellhole like Haiti. This is especially true if you avoid the areas ravaged by the Cartel Wars (which have nothing to do with IQ), and the areas with more indigenous Indians. The White and Mestizo-majority areas are in good condition. With regard to PISA tests, Mexico scores on par with White-majority Uruguay and European nations like Romania and Bulgaria, and even outperforms White-majority Argentina. Mexico is more comparable to a country like Vietnam — it hovers between “First World” and “Third World”, but remains in a stage of positive growth and learns more towards the First World.

     

    More or less. I can see Vietnam being a good parallel with Mexico. Newer, better data may give us an idea of what its true average IQ is. It's wager it's likely ~90, for a variety of reasons.

    Likewise, HBDers have been incredibly lazy and sloppy when it comes to Latin America in general. For example, Chile is a prosperous nation and perhaps the most successful in Latin America, so HBDers assume it’s a “White” country. Wrong. Recent DNA tests reveal that the majority of Chileans have upwards of 35-40% Amerindian admixture. “Light-skinned Mestizo” is a more apt description of the average Chilean than “White.” Once again, we see these light-skinned Mestizos outperform their much Whiter neighbors in Argentina on numerous metrics: GDP per capita, standard of living, corruption levels, etc.
     
    Well, continental race is only one part of the puzzle. Other important differences include ethnic differences (e.g., the difference between Irish and English) and sorting/selection (e.g., the difference between Indian Americans and Indians in India). It is possible that Chile received a higher IQ segment of its input populations than did Argentina.

    Broadly, I agree: more and better data from Latin America would be useful.


    If you’re wondering what I’m expecting, I think the more honest HBD bloggers like you should at least reconsider obnoxious terms like “NAM” and treat different groups differently.
    Mestizos are not Blacks and do not deserve to be lumped in with them.
     
    You may notice I don't use that term. Whether groups deserved to be lumped together or treated separately depends on the context. If we're talking, say relative physical attractiveness of different racial groups, Europeans get lumped together with many Middle Easterners and South Asians. If we're talking clannishness, the English and the Scots need to be considered separately.

    For the record, my own opinion is that there are some IQ gaps between different populations, and that the Black-White gap is the most substantial and has the most cogent body of evidence supporting it, while the gaps among non-African populations are more ambiguous and could contain lots of surprises and untapped potential. I don’t dismiss HBD, but I think it has a tendency to reductionism and that many of its proponents are not as impartial as they claim to be.)
     
    Science is all about reductionism. There's no sense in criticizing reductionism per se. As for large group-wide differences in IQ, it would be odd if there weren't any. As you may note from reading the above references, modern IQ scores generally evolved relatively recently, with each group facing their own fairly unique set of selective pressures. We'd expect such to leave their distinct cognitive and behavioral imprints on the various peoples.
    , @elijahlarmstrong
    I don't think Richard is deliberately fucking with his data, as you imply. He does make errors, but they strike me as rather unsystematic.
    , @elijahlarmstrong
    Thanks, Jayman. :)
    , @Anthony
    An average IQ of 94 for mestizos in Mexico and of 91 for people of Mexican descent in the U.S. is not a contradiction. As you point out, Mexico isn't that bad. So for people in the middle and upper end of IQ, staying in Mexico is pretty attractive. For people at the bottom, though, Mexico isn't so great. So the U.S. doesn't get Mexico's "best and brightest". Lately, we've been getting the "wretched refuse", and the numbers have been larger more recently. Anecdotally, recent Mexican immigration seems more Indian than mestizo to me, so the average IQ of the Mexican-derived population of the US would naturally be lower than the average IQ of mestizos in Mexico.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Denise says:

    I notice that there is no Wikipedia entry for “Human Biodiversity”. Is there a story there? Has anyone tried to create it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    @Denise:

    Not as far as I know. Care to give it a shot? ;)

    , @Anonymous
    I don't recommend it. I dislike the term HBD for a number of reasons, listed below, and would prefer to see it abandoned altogether.

    1) HBD is not a scientific or scholarly term. It's something Sailer made up.

    2) HBD seems to be just another name for sociobiology. We might define HBD as sociobiology with an emphasis on group differences. At any rate, it's not a distinct field, nor is it an ideology.

    3) Even the term sociobiology seems to haven fallen into disuse, and I'm not sure this stuff really needs a label. If your blog consists of social/political commentary with an awareness of and interest in biological influences on human behavior, why not just describe it as such?

    4) To a blue pill outsider, the HBD-sphere is liable to seem cult-like. It would probably be best to avoid encouraging this impression via the use of jargon and shibboleths.

    5) We would all like to see HBD ideas gain wide acceptance and be integrated throughout intellectual and scholarly discourse, as they should be. Putting a special label on our ideas and perspectives will foster intellectual ghettoization.

    Furthermore, trying to put anything controversial on Wikipedia is a waste of time unless you are highly knowledgeable and willing to devote a substantial amount of time to fighting other editors.

    , @Denise
    Oh, I certainly am not competent to create a Wikipedia entry for this. I hardly know anything.

    I am no big fan of Wikipedia, but I usually use it as a default starting point. I was just very surprised not to find an entry there, because there's usually one for just about everything. And I expected to find a juicy Talk page and history, which are sometimes entertaining for controversial subjects.

    Anonymous, sociobiology seems to be a narrower subject than HBD, isn't it, focusing on social behavior?

    Anyway, thanks for your answer. I will avoid using the term. Being politically liberal myself, I certainly see things about the community that I don't want to associate myself with. And the subject in itself is enough of a red flag.

    , @Anonymous
    I find on Wikipedia that most controversial topics get repeatedly over-written and re-edited, over and over again by any opponents of the topic. A good example of this is the men's rights group, A Voice for Men page. They spent many months editing and making changes, accommodating their opponents views, only to have others erase it. Eventually the official editors produced there own blue-pill version, and then locked it. Its not worth your time frankly. In short, its a waste of time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. JayMan says: • Website
    @Anonymous
    I've discovered a highly convenient "error" in Richard Lynn's Mexico data. In 2005 Lynn conducted a study of Mexican IQ and these were the results:

    "Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test was administered to a representative sample of 920 white, Mestizo and Native Mexican Indian children aged 7–10 years in Mexico. The mean IQs in relation to a British mean of 100 obtained from the 1979 British standardization sample and adjusted for the estimated subsequent increase were: 98·0 for whites, 94·3 for Mestizos and 83·3 for Native Mexican Indians."

    http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=266611

    I read the full paper and didn't find any problems with it. However, looking at those scores, and being aware that most of Mexico's population is Mestizo, I couldn't help but think the reported mean IQ for Mexico that I often see (87 or 88) was a little too low.

    The demographics for Mexico, correctly given in the paper linked above, are 10% White, 60% Mestizo, and 30% pure Indian. With these percentages -- 98(.1) + 94(.6) + 83 (.3) -- the scores above average out to 91.

    Now I double-checked Lynn's book IQ and Global Inequality, published in 2006, and I noticed that Lynn cites the 2005 Mexican study above, but reports the overall Mexican average as 88. The reason is found on page 312:

    http://de.scribd.com/doc/129505348/Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality

    For some strange reason, in this book he reports Mexico's demographics as 10% White, 30% Mestizo, 60% Indian. Thus 98(.1) + 94(.3) + 83 (.6) = average of 88.

    But not only is this demographic information obviously wrong, it contradicts the percentages reported in his own damn paper!

    Now, it's possible that this was an honest error on Lynn's part. As I mentioned, I read through the entire 2005 Mexican study, and nowhere in it did he bother calculating the overall Mexican IQ, neither as either 88 nor 91. Only the scores for each particular ethnic group are enumerated. But the "error" that appears in IQ and Global Inequality is an awfully convenient for two reasons:

    1) The only other IQ study in Mexico yielded an average of 87, but it was from the 1960s and there were some methodological problems with it. Listing the "updated" Mexican average as 88 gives an illusion of consistency and immobility.

    2) In the color-coded global IQ maps that HBDers love to throw around, yourself included, countries with a score above 90 or 91 are usually colored differently from those which score below 90. Mexico is fairly easy to spot on a map, so if it were colored with other 90+ IQ nations, people would notice. Lynn's "error" makes it easier to group Mexico with other Central American countries.

    Furthermore, even the average of 91 is a bit skewed thanks to depressed scores of the indigenous Indians. Indians in Mexico face discrimination from both Whites AND Mestizos, and are relegated to the most squalid and unsanitary areas where they suffer from poor nutrition and other adverse environmental factors which could impact their scores. If we limited Mexico to its White and Mestizo populations, it would have an IQ safely in the 95-96 range.

    I've noticed that the members of the anti-Hispanic HBD contingent, such as Steve Sailer, don't give much attention to the fact that Lynn's 2005 Mexican study showed a mere 4 point (!) gap between Whites and Mestizos. An average IQ of 94 hardly justifies disparaging the intelligence of Mexican Mestizos, and if the Black-White gap in America were ever narrowed to a mere 4-5 points, there would probably be a push to commemorate the moment as a national holiday.

    In addition, these were native Mexicans, not immigrants. Off the top of my head, I've don't think I've seen an average as high as 94 for any native populations (as opposed to super-selected elite immigrants) other than Europeans, Ashkenazi Jews, and East Asians.

    If an average of about 94 for Mexican Mestizos sounds implauble to you, keep in mind that

    1) Mestizos tend to perform better on culturally neutral tests than on culturally biased tests. For Blacks, the opposite is the case. This indicates that Mestizos could have untapped potential that doesn't show up in their standardized tests scores. It's much more difficult to argue this for Blacks. This was noticed at an early date by Arthur Jensen:

    "Surprisingly, blacks tend to perform relatively better on the more culture-loaded or verbal kinds of tests than on the culture-fair type. For example, on the widely used Wechsler Intelligence Scale, comprised of 11 different subtests, blacks do better on the culture-loaded subtests of vocabulary, general information, and verbal comprehension than on the nonverbal performance tests such as the block designs. Just the opposite is true for such minorities as Orientals, Mexican-Americans, Indians, and Puerto Ricans. [...] Our tests of Mexican-Americans produced similar results. They do rather poorly on the culture-loaded types of tests based on verbal skills and knowledge, but they do better on the culture-fair tests. The same holds true for American Indians. All these minorities perform on the two types of tests much as one might expect from the culture-bias hypothesis. Only blacks, among the minorities we have tested, score in just the opposite manner."

    2) But then why is Mexico the way it is? Because there's lots of disinformation about Mexico. Overall, Mexico as a country is in much better shape than, for example, India, and it is leagues ahead of a real Third-World hellhole like Haiti. This is especially true if you avoid the areas ravaged by the Cartel Wars (which have nothing to do with IQ), and the areas with more indigenous Indians. The White and Mestizo-majority areas are in good condition. With regard to PISA tests, Mexico scores on par with White-majority Uruguay and European nations like Romania and Bulgaria, and even outperforms White-majority Argentina. Mexico is more comparable to a country like Vietnam -- it hovers between "First World" and "Third World", but remains in a stage of positive growth and learns more towards the First World.

    3) Likewise, HBDers have been incredibly lazy and sloppy when it comes to Latin America in general. For example, Chile is a prosperous nation and perhaps the most successful in Latin America, so HBDers assume it's a "White" country. Wrong. Recent DNA tests reveal that the majority of Chileans have upwards of 35-40% Amerindian admixture. "Light-skinned Mestizo" is a more apt description of the average Chilean than "White." Once again, we see these light-skinned Mestizos outperform their much Whiter neighbors in Argentina on numerous metrics: GDP per capita, standard of living, corruption levels, etc.

    I've perused your blog and it appears you've occasionally engaged in the same anti-Mexican baiting as ideologues like Steve Sailer and others who downplay facts which contradict their worldview. Nevertheless, I'll take your word that you're a liberal and that you are willing to examine the evidence wherever it may lead. If you're wondering what I'm expecting, I think the more honest HBD bloggers like you should at least reconsider obnoxious terms like "NAM" and treat different groups differently. Mestizos are not Blacks and do not deserve to be lumped in with them.

    (For the record, my own opinion is that there are some IQ gaps between different populations, and that the Black-White gap is the most substantial and has the most cogent body of evidence supporting it, while the gaps among non-African populations are more ambiguous and could contain lots of surprises and untapped potential. I don't dismiss HBD, but I think it has a tendency to reductionism and that many of its proponents are not as impartial as they claim to be.)

    @George S.

    Thanks for your thoughtful comment.

    In general, allow me to note that inconsistencies in data of national IQs are to be expected. It is part and parcel to conducting such research. See the comments at my post Welcome Readers from Portugal! and Peter Frost’s post on such variability in IQ testing.

    I’ve noticed that the members of the anti-Hispanic HBD contingent, such as Steve Sailer, don’t give much attention to the fact that Lynn’s 2005 Mexican study showed a mere 4 point (!) gap between Whites and Mestizos. An average IQ of 94 hardly justifies disparaging the intelligence of Mexican Mestizos, and if the Black-White gap in America were ever narrowed to a mere 4-5 points, there would probably be a push to commemorate the moment as a national holiday.

    Average IQ of Hispanic Americans comes back to around 91. Jason Richwine’s investigations confirm this. As well, average IQ of most Native Americans tends to cluster in the 86-90 range. Whatever the average IQ in Mexico, its diaspora in the States acts as if this is their IQ (91).

    All told, we’re talking a difference of at most 3 points (94-91) or 6 points (94-88). This is well within the range of what we’d expect with natural variability in testing data.

    Mestizos tend to perform better on culturally neutral tests than on culturally biased tests. For Blacks, the opposite is the case. This indicates that Mestizos could have untapped potential that doesn’t show up in their standardized tests scores. It’s much more difficult to argue this for Blacks. This was noticed at an early date by Arthur Jensen:

    That was interesting. But the extensive analysis over the Ron Unz fiasco and Jason Richwine’s thesis demonstrate that the Hispanic-White gap in America is quite real and persistent.

    See:

    Redebunking Ron | Occidentalist
    Ron Unz on Richwine’s Argument — Taking the Bull by the Horn | Occidentalist
    New Mexico | West Hunter

    But then why is Mexico the way it is? Because there’s lots of disinformation about Mexico. Overall, Mexico as a country is in much better shape than, for example, India, and it is leagues ahead of a real Third-World hellhole like Haiti. This is especially true if you avoid the areas ravaged by the Cartel Wars (which have nothing to do with IQ), and the areas with more indigenous Indians. The White and Mestizo-majority areas are in good condition. With regard to PISA tests, Mexico scores on par with White-majority Uruguay and European nations like Romania and Bulgaria, and even outperforms White-majority Argentina. Mexico is more comparable to a country like Vietnam — it hovers between “First World” and “Third World”, but remains in a stage of positive growth and learns more towards the First World.

    More or less. I can see Vietnam being a good parallel with Mexico. Newer, better data may give us an idea of what its true average IQ is. It’s wager it’s likely ~90, for a variety of reasons.

    Likewise, HBDers have been incredibly lazy and sloppy when it comes to Latin America in general. For example, Chile is a prosperous nation and perhaps the most successful in Latin America, so HBDers assume it’s a “White” country. Wrong. Recent DNA tests reveal that the majority of Chileans have upwards of 35-40% Amerindian admixture. “Light-skinned Mestizo” is a more apt description of the average Chilean than “White.” Once again, we see these light-skinned Mestizos outperform their much Whiter neighbors in Argentina on numerous metrics: GDP per capita, standard of living, corruption levels, etc.

    Well, continental race is only one part of the puzzle. Other important differences include ethnic differences (e.g., the difference between Irish and English) and sorting/selection (e.g., the difference between Indian Americans and Indians in India). It is possible that Chile received a higher IQ segment of its input populations than did Argentina.

    Broadly, I agree: more and better data from Latin America would be useful.

    If you’re wondering what I’m expecting, I think the more honest HBD bloggers like you should at least reconsider obnoxious terms like “NAM” and treat different groups differently.
    Mestizos are not Blacks and do not deserve to be lumped in with them.

    You may notice I don’t use that term. Whether groups deserved to be lumped together or treated separately depends on the context. If we’re talking, say relative physical attractiveness of different racial groups, Europeans get lumped together with many Middle Easterners and South Asians. If we’re talking clannishness, the English and the Scots need to be considered separately.

    For the record, my own opinion is that there are some IQ gaps between different populations, and that the Black-White gap is the most substantial and has the most cogent body of evidence supporting it, while the gaps among non-African populations are more ambiguous and could contain lots of surprises and untapped potential. I don’t dismiss HBD, but I think it has a tendency to reductionism and that many of its proponents are not as impartial as they claim to be.)

    Science is all about reductionism. There’s no sense in criticizing reductionism per se. As for large group-wide differences in IQ, it would be odd if there weren’t any. As you may note from reading the above references, modern IQ scores generally evolved relatively recently, with each group facing their own fairly unique set of selective pressures. We’d expect such to leave their distinct cognitive and behavioral imprints on the various peoples.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. JayMan says: • Website
    @Denise
    I notice that there is no Wikipedia entry for "Human Biodiversity". Is there a story there? Has anyone tried to create it?

    Not as far as I know. Care to give it a shot? ;)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Anonymous
    I've discovered a highly convenient "error" in Richard Lynn's Mexico data. In 2005 Lynn conducted a study of Mexican IQ and these were the results:

    "Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test was administered to a representative sample of 920 white, Mestizo and Native Mexican Indian children aged 7–10 years in Mexico. The mean IQs in relation to a British mean of 100 obtained from the 1979 British standardization sample and adjusted for the estimated subsequent increase were: 98·0 for whites, 94·3 for Mestizos and 83·3 for Native Mexican Indians."

    http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=266611

    I read the full paper and didn't find any problems with it. However, looking at those scores, and being aware that most of Mexico's population is Mestizo, I couldn't help but think the reported mean IQ for Mexico that I often see (87 or 88) was a little too low.

    The demographics for Mexico, correctly given in the paper linked above, are 10% White, 60% Mestizo, and 30% pure Indian. With these percentages -- 98(.1) + 94(.6) + 83 (.3) -- the scores above average out to 91.

    Now I double-checked Lynn's book IQ and Global Inequality, published in 2006, and I noticed that Lynn cites the 2005 Mexican study above, but reports the overall Mexican average as 88. The reason is found on page 312:

    http://de.scribd.com/doc/129505348/Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality

    For some strange reason, in this book he reports Mexico's demographics as 10% White, 30% Mestizo, 60% Indian. Thus 98(.1) + 94(.3) + 83 (.6) = average of 88.

    But not only is this demographic information obviously wrong, it contradicts the percentages reported in his own damn paper!

    Now, it's possible that this was an honest error on Lynn's part. As I mentioned, I read through the entire 2005 Mexican study, and nowhere in it did he bother calculating the overall Mexican IQ, neither as either 88 nor 91. Only the scores for each particular ethnic group are enumerated. But the "error" that appears in IQ and Global Inequality is an awfully convenient for two reasons:

    1) The only other IQ study in Mexico yielded an average of 87, but it was from the 1960s and there were some methodological problems with it. Listing the "updated" Mexican average as 88 gives an illusion of consistency and immobility.

    2) In the color-coded global IQ maps that HBDers love to throw around, yourself included, countries with a score above 90 or 91 are usually colored differently from those which score below 90. Mexico is fairly easy to spot on a map, so if it were colored with other 90+ IQ nations, people would notice. Lynn's "error" makes it easier to group Mexico with other Central American countries.

    Furthermore, even the average of 91 is a bit skewed thanks to depressed scores of the indigenous Indians. Indians in Mexico face discrimination from both Whites AND Mestizos, and are relegated to the most squalid and unsanitary areas where they suffer from poor nutrition and other adverse environmental factors which could impact their scores. If we limited Mexico to its White and Mestizo populations, it would have an IQ safely in the 95-96 range.

    I've noticed that the members of the anti-Hispanic HBD contingent, such as Steve Sailer, don't give much attention to the fact that Lynn's 2005 Mexican study showed a mere 4 point (!) gap between Whites and Mestizos. An average IQ of 94 hardly justifies disparaging the intelligence of Mexican Mestizos, and if the Black-White gap in America were ever narrowed to a mere 4-5 points, there would probably be a push to commemorate the moment as a national holiday.

    In addition, these were native Mexicans, not immigrants. Off the top of my head, I've don't think I've seen an average as high as 94 for any native populations (as opposed to super-selected elite immigrants) other than Europeans, Ashkenazi Jews, and East Asians.

    If an average of about 94 for Mexican Mestizos sounds implauble to you, keep in mind that

    1) Mestizos tend to perform better on culturally neutral tests than on culturally biased tests. For Blacks, the opposite is the case. This indicates that Mestizos could have untapped potential that doesn't show up in their standardized tests scores. It's much more difficult to argue this for Blacks. This was noticed at an early date by Arthur Jensen:

    "Surprisingly, blacks tend to perform relatively better on the more culture-loaded or verbal kinds of tests than on the culture-fair type. For example, on the widely used Wechsler Intelligence Scale, comprised of 11 different subtests, blacks do better on the culture-loaded subtests of vocabulary, general information, and verbal comprehension than on the nonverbal performance tests such as the block designs. Just the opposite is true for such minorities as Orientals, Mexican-Americans, Indians, and Puerto Ricans. [...] Our tests of Mexican-Americans produced similar results. They do rather poorly on the culture-loaded types of tests based on verbal skills and knowledge, but they do better on the culture-fair tests. The same holds true for American Indians. All these minorities perform on the two types of tests much as one might expect from the culture-bias hypothesis. Only blacks, among the minorities we have tested, score in just the opposite manner."

    2) But then why is Mexico the way it is? Because there's lots of disinformation about Mexico. Overall, Mexico as a country is in much better shape than, for example, India, and it is leagues ahead of a real Third-World hellhole like Haiti. This is especially true if you avoid the areas ravaged by the Cartel Wars (which have nothing to do with IQ), and the areas with more indigenous Indians. The White and Mestizo-majority areas are in good condition. With regard to PISA tests, Mexico scores on par with White-majority Uruguay and European nations like Romania and Bulgaria, and even outperforms White-majority Argentina. Mexico is more comparable to a country like Vietnam -- it hovers between "First World" and "Third World", but remains in a stage of positive growth and learns more towards the First World.

    3) Likewise, HBDers have been incredibly lazy and sloppy when it comes to Latin America in general. For example, Chile is a prosperous nation and perhaps the most successful in Latin America, so HBDers assume it's a "White" country. Wrong. Recent DNA tests reveal that the majority of Chileans have upwards of 35-40% Amerindian admixture. "Light-skinned Mestizo" is a more apt description of the average Chilean than "White." Once again, we see these light-skinned Mestizos outperform their much Whiter neighbors in Argentina on numerous metrics: GDP per capita, standard of living, corruption levels, etc.

    I've perused your blog and it appears you've occasionally engaged in the same anti-Mexican baiting as ideologues like Steve Sailer and others who downplay facts which contradict their worldview. Nevertheless, I'll take your word that you're a liberal and that you are willing to examine the evidence wherever it may lead. If you're wondering what I'm expecting, I think the more honest HBD bloggers like you should at least reconsider obnoxious terms like "NAM" and treat different groups differently. Mestizos are not Blacks and do not deserve to be lumped in with them.

    (For the record, my own opinion is that there are some IQ gaps between different populations, and that the Black-White gap is the most substantial and has the most cogent body of evidence supporting it, while the gaps among non-African populations are more ambiguous and could contain lots of surprises and untapped potential. I don't dismiss HBD, but I think it has a tendency to reductionism and that many of its proponents are not as impartial as they claim to be.)

    I don’t think Richard is deliberately fucking with his data, as you imply. He does make errors, but they strike me as rather unsystematic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    @elijahlarmstrong:

    That's generally my thought as well with regard to Lynn.

    Congrats on the paper, BTW. That is, to say the least, highly impressive.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. JayMan says: • Website
    @elijahlarmstrong
    I don't think Richard is deliberately fucking with his data, as you imply. He does make errors, but they strike me as rather unsystematic.

    That’s generally my thought as well with regard to Lynn.

    Congrats on the paper, BTW. That is, to say the least, highly impressive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. @Anonymous
    I've discovered a highly convenient "error" in Richard Lynn's Mexico data. In 2005 Lynn conducted a study of Mexican IQ and these were the results:

    "Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test was administered to a representative sample of 920 white, Mestizo and Native Mexican Indian children aged 7–10 years in Mexico. The mean IQs in relation to a British mean of 100 obtained from the 1979 British standardization sample and adjusted for the estimated subsequent increase were: 98·0 for whites, 94·3 for Mestizos and 83·3 for Native Mexican Indians."

    http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=266611

    I read the full paper and didn't find any problems with it. However, looking at those scores, and being aware that most of Mexico's population is Mestizo, I couldn't help but think the reported mean IQ for Mexico that I often see (87 or 88) was a little too low.

    The demographics for Mexico, correctly given in the paper linked above, are 10% White, 60% Mestizo, and 30% pure Indian. With these percentages -- 98(.1) + 94(.6) + 83 (.3) -- the scores above average out to 91.

    Now I double-checked Lynn's book IQ and Global Inequality, published in 2006, and I noticed that Lynn cites the 2005 Mexican study above, but reports the overall Mexican average as 88. The reason is found on page 312:

    http://de.scribd.com/doc/129505348/Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality

    For some strange reason, in this book he reports Mexico's demographics as 10% White, 30% Mestizo, 60% Indian. Thus 98(.1) + 94(.3) + 83 (.6) = average of 88.

    But not only is this demographic information obviously wrong, it contradicts the percentages reported in his own damn paper!

    Now, it's possible that this was an honest error on Lynn's part. As I mentioned, I read through the entire 2005 Mexican study, and nowhere in it did he bother calculating the overall Mexican IQ, neither as either 88 nor 91. Only the scores for each particular ethnic group are enumerated. But the "error" that appears in IQ and Global Inequality is an awfully convenient for two reasons:

    1) The only other IQ study in Mexico yielded an average of 87, but it was from the 1960s and there were some methodological problems with it. Listing the "updated" Mexican average as 88 gives an illusion of consistency and immobility.

    2) In the color-coded global IQ maps that HBDers love to throw around, yourself included, countries with a score above 90 or 91 are usually colored differently from those which score below 90. Mexico is fairly easy to spot on a map, so if it were colored with other 90+ IQ nations, people would notice. Lynn's "error" makes it easier to group Mexico with other Central American countries.

    Furthermore, even the average of 91 is a bit skewed thanks to depressed scores of the indigenous Indians. Indians in Mexico face discrimination from both Whites AND Mestizos, and are relegated to the most squalid and unsanitary areas where they suffer from poor nutrition and other adverse environmental factors which could impact their scores. If we limited Mexico to its White and Mestizo populations, it would have an IQ safely in the 95-96 range.

    I've noticed that the members of the anti-Hispanic HBD contingent, such as Steve Sailer, don't give much attention to the fact that Lynn's 2005 Mexican study showed a mere 4 point (!) gap between Whites and Mestizos. An average IQ of 94 hardly justifies disparaging the intelligence of Mexican Mestizos, and if the Black-White gap in America were ever narrowed to a mere 4-5 points, there would probably be a push to commemorate the moment as a national holiday.

    In addition, these were native Mexicans, not immigrants. Off the top of my head, I've don't think I've seen an average as high as 94 for any native populations (as opposed to super-selected elite immigrants) other than Europeans, Ashkenazi Jews, and East Asians.

    If an average of about 94 for Mexican Mestizos sounds implauble to you, keep in mind that

    1) Mestizos tend to perform better on culturally neutral tests than on culturally biased tests. For Blacks, the opposite is the case. This indicates that Mestizos could have untapped potential that doesn't show up in their standardized tests scores. It's much more difficult to argue this for Blacks. This was noticed at an early date by Arthur Jensen:

    "Surprisingly, blacks tend to perform relatively better on the more culture-loaded or verbal kinds of tests than on the culture-fair type. For example, on the widely used Wechsler Intelligence Scale, comprised of 11 different subtests, blacks do better on the culture-loaded subtests of vocabulary, general information, and verbal comprehension than on the nonverbal performance tests such as the block designs. Just the opposite is true for such minorities as Orientals, Mexican-Americans, Indians, and Puerto Ricans. [...] Our tests of Mexican-Americans produced similar results. They do rather poorly on the culture-loaded types of tests based on verbal skills and knowledge, but they do better on the culture-fair tests. The same holds true for American Indians. All these minorities perform on the two types of tests much as one might expect from the culture-bias hypothesis. Only blacks, among the minorities we have tested, score in just the opposite manner."

    2) But then why is Mexico the way it is? Because there's lots of disinformation about Mexico. Overall, Mexico as a country is in much better shape than, for example, India, and it is leagues ahead of a real Third-World hellhole like Haiti. This is especially true if you avoid the areas ravaged by the Cartel Wars (which have nothing to do with IQ), and the areas with more indigenous Indians. The White and Mestizo-majority areas are in good condition. With regard to PISA tests, Mexico scores on par with White-majority Uruguay and European nations like Romania and Bulgaria, and even outperforms White-majority Argentina. Mexico is more comparable to a country like Vietnam -- it hovers between "First World" and "Third World", but remains in a stage of positive growth and learns more towards the First World.

    3) Likewise, HBDers have been incredibly lazy and sloppy when it comes to Latin America in general. For example, Chile is a prosperous nation and perhaps the most successful in Latin America, so HBDers assume it's a "White" country. Wrong. Recent DNA tests reveal that the majority of Chileans have upwards of 35-40% Amerindian admixture. "Light-skinned Mestizo" is a more apt description of the average Chilean than "White." Once again, we see these light-skinned Mestizos outperform their much Whiter neighbors in Argentina on numerous metrics: GDP per capita, standard of living, corruption levels, etc.

    I've perused your blog and it appears you've occasionally engaged in the same anti-Mexican baiting as ideologues like Steve Sailer and others who downplay facts which contradict their worldview. Nevertheless, I'll take your word that you're a liberal and that you are willing to examine the evidence wherever it may lead. If you're wondering what I'm expecting, I think the more honest HBD bloggers like you should at least reconsider obnoxious terms like "NAM" and treat different groups differently. Mestizos are not Blacks and do not deserve to be lumped in with them.

    (For the record, my own opinion is that there are some IQ gaps between different populations, and that the Black-White gap is the most substantial and has the most cogent body of evidence supporting it, while the gaps among non-African populations are more ambiguous and could contain lots of surprises and untapped potential. I don't dismiss HBD, but I think it has a tendency to reductionism and that many of its proponents are not as impartial as they claim to be.)

    Thanks, Jayman. :)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Anthony says:
    @Anonymous
    I've discovered a highly convenient "error" in Richard Lynn's Mexico data. In 2005 Lynn conducted a study of Mexican IQ and these were the results:

    "Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices test was administered to a representative sample of 920 white, Mestizo and Native Mexican Indian children aged 7–10 years in Mexico. The mean IQs in relation to a British mean of 100 obtained from the 1979 British standardization sample and adjusted for the estimated subsequent increase were: 98·0 for whites, 94·3 for Mestizos and 83·3 for Native Mexican Indians."

    http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=266611

    I read the full paper and didn't find any problems with it. However, looking at those scores, and being aware that most of Mexico's population is Mestizo, I couldn't help but think the reported mean IQ for Mexico that I often see (87 or 88) was a little too low.

    The demographics for Mexico, correctly given in the paper linked above, are 10% White, 60% Mestizo, and 30% pure Indian. With these percentages -- 98(.1) + 94(.6) + 83 (.3) -- the scores above average out to 91.

    Now I double-checked Lynn's book IQ and Global Inequality, published in 2006, and I noticed that Lynn cites the 2005 Mexican study above, but reports the overall Mexican average as 88. The reason is found on page 312:

    http://de.scribd.com/doc/129505348/Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality

    For some strange reason, in this book he reports Mexico's demographics as 10% White, 30% Mestizo, 60% Indian. Thus 98(.1) + 94(.3) + 83 (.6) = average of 88.

    But not only is this demographic information obviously wrong, it contradicts the percentages reported in his own damn paper!

    Now, it's possible that this was an honest error on Lynn's part. As I mentioned, I read through the entire 2005 Mexican study, and nowhere in it did he bother calculating the overall Mexican IQ, neither as either 88 nor 91. Only the scores for each particular ethnic group are enumerated. But the "error" that appears in IQ and Global Inequality is an awfully convenient for two reasons:

    1) The only other IQ study in Mexico yielded an average of 87, but it was from the 1960s and there were some methodological problems with it. Listing the "updated" Mexican average as 88 gives an illusion of consistency and immobility.

    2) In the color-coded global IQ maps that HBDers love to throw around, yourself included, countries with a score above 90 or 91 are usually colored differently from those which score below 90. Mexico is fairly easy to spot on a map, so if it were colored with other 90+ IQ nations, people would notice. Lynn's "error" makes it easier to group Mexico with other Central American countries.

    Furthermore, even the average of 91 is a bit skewed thanks to depressed scores of the indigenous Indians. Indians in Mexico face discrimination from both Whites AND Mestizos, and are relegated to the most squalid and unsanitary areas where they suffer from poor nutrition and other adverse environmental factors which could impact their scores. If we limited Mexico to its White and Mestizo populations, it would have an IQ safely in the 95-96 range.

    I've noticed that the members of the anti-Hispanic HBD contingent, such as Steve Sailer, don't give much attention to the fact that Lynn's 2005 Mexican study showed a mere 4 point (!) gap between Whites and Mestizos. An average IQ of 94 hardly justifies disparaging the intelligence of Mexican Mestizos, and if the Black-White gap in America were ever narrowed to a mere 4-5 points, there would probably be a push to commemorate the moment as a national holiday.

    In addition, these were native Mexicans, not immigrants. Off the top of my head, I've don't think I've seen an average as high as 94 for any native populations (as opposed to super-selected elite immigrants) other than Europeans, Ashkenazi Jews, and East Asians.

    If an average of about 94 for Mexican Mestizos sounds implauble to you, keep in mind that

    1) Mestizos tend to perform better on culturally neutral tests than on culturally biased tests. For Blacks, the opposite is the case. This indicates that Mestizos could have untapped potential that doesn't show up in their standardized tests scores. It's much more difficult to argue this for Blacks. This was noticed at an early date by Arthur Jensen:

    "Surprisingly, blacks tend to perform relatively better on the more culture-loaded or verbal kinds of tests than on the culture-fair type. For example, on the widely used Wechsler Intelligence Scale, comprised of 11 different subtests, blacks do better on the culture-loaded subtests of vocabulary, general information, and verbal comprehension than on the nonverbal performance tests such as the block designs. Just the opposite is true for such minorities as Orientals, Mexican-Americans, Indians, and Puerto Ricans. [...] Our tests of Mexican-Americans produced similar results. They do rather poorly on the culture-loaded types of tests based on verbal skills and knowledge, but they do better on the culture-fair tests. The same holds true for American Indians. All these minorities perform on the two types of tests much as one might expect from the culture-bias hypothesis. Only blacks, among the minorities we have tested, score in just the opposite manner."

    2) But then why is Mexico the way it is? Because there's lots of disinformation about Mexico. Overall, Mexico as a country is in much better shape than, for example, India, and it is leagues ahead of a real Third-World hellhole like Haiti. This is especially true if you avoid the areas ravaged by the Cartel Wars (which have nothing to do with IQ), and the areas with more indigenous Indians. The White and Mestizo-majority areas are in good condition. With regard to PISA tests, Mexico scores on par with White-majority Uruguay and European nations like Romania and Bulgaria, and even outperforms White-majority Argentina. Mexico is more comparable to a country like Vietnam -- it hovers between "First World" and "Third World", but remains in a stage of positive growth and learns more towards the First World.

    3) Likewise, HBDers have been incredibly lazy and sloppy when it comes to Latin America in general. For example, Chile is a prosperous nation and perhaps the most successful in Latin America, so HBDers assume it's a "White" country. Wrong. Recent DNA tests reveal that the majority of Chileans have upwards of 35-40% Amerindian admixture. "Light-skinned Mestizo" is a more apt description of the average Chilean than "White." Once again, we see these light-skinned Mestizos outperform their much Whiter neighbors in Argentina on numerous metrics: GDP per capita, standard of living, corruption levels, etc.

    I've perused your blog and it appears you've occasionally engaged in the same anti-Mexican baiting as ideologues like Steve Sailer and others who downplay facts which contradict their worldview. Nevertheless, I'll take your word that you're a liberal and that you are willing to examine the evidence wherever it may lead. If you're wondering what I'm expecting, I think the more honest HBD bloggers like you should at least reconsider obnoxious terms like "NAM" and treat different groups differently. Mestizos are not Blacks and do not deserve to be lumped in with them.

    (For the record, my own opinion is that there are some IQ gaps between different populations, and that the Black-White gap is the most substantial and has the most cogent body of evidence supporting it, while the gaps among non-African populations are more ambiguous and could contain lots of surprises and untapped potential. I don't dismiss HBD, but I think it has a tendency to reductionism and that many of its proponents are not as impartial as they claim to be.)

    An average IQ of 94 for mestizos in Mexico and of 91 for people of Mexican descent in the U.S. is not a contradiction. As you point out, Mexico isn’t that bad. So for people in the middle and upper end of IQ, staying in Mexico is pretty attractive. For people at the bottom, though, Mexico isn’t so great. So the U.S. doesn’t get Mexico’s “best and brightest”. Lately, we’ve been getting the “wretched refuse”, and the numbers have been larger more recently. Anecdotally, recent Mexican immigration seems more Indian than mestizo to me, so the average IQ of the Mexican-derived population of the US would naturally be lower than the average IQ of mestizos in Mexico.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Denise
    I notice that there is no Wikipedia entry for "Human Biodiversity". Is there a story there? Has anyone tried to create it?

    I don’t recommend it. I dislike the term HBD for a number of reasons, listed below, and would prefer to see it abandoned altogether.

    1) HBD is not a scientific or scholarly term. It’s something Sailer made up.

    2) HBD seems to be just another name for sociobiology. We might define HBD as sociobiology with an emphasis on group differences. At any rate, it’s not a distinct field, nor is it an ideology.

    3) Even the term sociobiology seems to haven fallen into disuse, and I’m not sure this stuff really needs a label. If your blog consists of social/political commentary with an awareness of and interest in biological influences on human behavior, why not just describe it as such?

    4) To a blue pill outsider, the HBD-sphere is liable to seem cult-like. It would probably be best to avoid encouraging this impression via the use of jargon and shibboleths.

    5) We would all like to see HBD ideas gain wide acceptance and be integrated throughout intellectual and scholarly discourse, as they should be. Putting a special label on our ideas and perspectives will foster intellectual ghettoization.

    Furthermore, trying to put anything controversial on Wikipedia is a waste of time unless you are highly knowledgeable and willing to devote a substantial amount of time to fighting other editors.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Denise says:
    @Denise
    I notice that there is no Wikipedia entry for "Human Biodiversity". Is there a story there? Has anyone tried to create it?

    Oh, I certainly am not competent to create a Wikipedia entry for this. I hardly know anything.

    I am no big fan of Wikipedia, but I usually use it as a default starting point. I was just very surprised not to find an entry there, because there’s usually one for just about everything. And I expected to find a juicy Talk page and history, which are sometimes entertaining for controversial subjects.

    Anonymous, sociobiology seems to be a narrower subject than HBD, isn’t it, focusing on social behavior?

    Anyway, thanks for your answer. I will avoid using the term. Being politically liberal myself, I certainly see things about the community that I don’t want to associate myself with. And the subject in itself is enough of a red flag.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. […] heritable human differences as presented in my post calling him out (which included a link to my HBD Fundamentals page, among other things) was the study by Anandi Mani et al “Poverty Impedes Cognitive […]

    Read More
  45. […] indicator, not the be-all-end all for the individual. Its an indicator, not a determination. These two blogs should set an free thinking reader on a course of understanding Human Biodiversity theory in […]

    Read More
  46. Anonymous says: • Website • Disclaimer

    I wish I could reblog this,but I don’t see how/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  47. […] called “racist.” I’m not sure why that is, but it betrays an ignorance of well-documented empirical evidence in favor of the theory that there are races in the biological sense of the […]

    Read More
  48. […] quite a few other HBD’ers, I try not to focus so much on IQ. Although it is of preeminent importance, it is not the be-all end-all of when it comes to human traits, […]

    Read More
  49. […] high of just under 10,000 views with my most popular post. When we’re talking pages, like my HBD Fundamentals, they views are even higher. Not bad for a day’s work at […]

    Read More
  50. […] it’s attendant anti-racist ideologies. These anti-racist ideologies are based on absurdity, and the Human Biodiversity (HBD) school of thought is making this more abundantly clear with each passing […]

    Read More
  51. […] It’s there, just under the surface – even the leftists know this (here, here, here), even the genetics are beginning to back it up for Skynet’s […]

    Read More
  52. […] of it out of the alchemy stage and into the chemistry stage, I mean we have a lot more interesting tools at our disposal […]

    Read More
  53. Anonymous says: • Website • Disclaimer
    @Denise
    I notice that there is no Wikipedia entry for "Human Biodiversity". Is there a story there? Has anyone tried to create it?

    I find on Wikipedia that most controversial topics get repeatedly over-written and re-edited, over and over again by any opponents of the topic. A good example of this is the men’s rights group, A Voice for Men page. They spent many months editing and making changes, accommodating their opponents views, only to have others erase it. Eventually the official editors produced there own blue-pill version, and then locked it. Its not worth your time frankly. In short, its a waste of time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. […] perhaps you’ve been walking around thinking things considered unsayable and when you come across one who says those unsayable things you’re, naturally, delighted by it.  But isn’t that confirmation bias?  Yes, perhaps, but […]

    Read More
  55. Mike says:

    You should consider this paper. It demonstrates that a significant percentage of variance in IQ can be attributed to test administration errors:

    http://edpsychassociates.com/Papers/IQassessorBias(2014).pdf

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  56. […] men have free will. “We believe that men are just as intelligent and rational as women.” Science calls your bluff on that. The structure is undeniably different. Don’t think we didn’t notice the way […]

    Read More
  57. […] deny that some people will be doing well, and others will be doing poorly? Inequality is driven by fundamental differences between people. In other words, human biodiversity. Where’s the celebration of ideological and intellectual […]

    Read More
  58. […] read everything on jayman’s HBD Fundamentals page (if you haven’t […]

    Read More
  59. […] skillnaderna mellan olika raser är väldokumenterade. För den intellektuellt nyfikne är den här sidan ett bra ställe att börja […]

    Read More
  60. Jay says:

    It seems like the video with Pinker and Elizabeth Spelke has been removed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    @Jay:

    Thanks for the heads up! Linked to another copy.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. JayMan says: • Website
    @Jay
    It seems like the video with Pinker and Elizabeth Spelke has been removed.

    Thanks for the heads up! Linked to another copy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Mr. XYZ says:

    : Thank you very much for sharing all of these links! :)

    However, I have a question–do you have any useful links about the brains of transgender people, about the causes of transgenderism, and about the effects of transitioning and not transitioning on transgender people?

    Basically, I am curious about this considering that, in one of your previous blog posts, you compared transgenderism to transracialism. Indeed, I’d like to know whether that is a valid comparison or whether being transgender is more similar to, say, being intersex. In addition to this, I am curious as to whether or not there is actually *any* better alternative to transitioning for transgender people.

    Also, somewhat off-topic, but out of curiosity–how would you classify Katie Baratz? :

    https://www.haverford.edu/college-communications/news/growing-intersex-going-oprah

    Would you classify her as male due to her XY chromosomes and undescended testes? Or would you look at the bigger picture and classify her as intersex?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by JayMan


 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 JayMan Comments via RSS