The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 JayMan ArchiveBlogview
Henry Harpending: Extremist – Says the Southern Poverty Law Center

The Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) current “Featured Extremist” (their words) is none other than the mild-mannered Henry Harpending of West Hunter.

They go into a fair amount of detail about Harpending and his work, but take a look at what they say. Are they actually trying to discredit him (emphasis mine)?

Henry Harpending is a controversial anthropologist at the University of Utah who studies human evolution and, in his words, “genetic diversity within and between human populations.” Harpending is most famous for his book, co-authored with frequent collaborator Gregory Cochran, The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution, which argues that humans are evolving at an accelerating rate, and that this began when the ancestors of modern Europeans and Asians left Africa. Harpending believes that this accelerated evolution is most visible in differences between racial groups, which he claims are growing more distinct and different from one another. The evolution of these racial differences are, in Harpending’s account, the driving force behind all of modern human history.

You don’t say? I did:

He is also a eugenicist who believes that medieval Europeans intuitively adopted eugenic policies, and that we should recognize the importance of eugenics in our own society.

In His Own Words:

“The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have, the Romans certainly could have done it, is that a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe, and probably northern Asia. And that this led to the Industrial Revolution—this new kind of human was less violent, had an affinity for work. When you view your parents or grandparents, and you know that they’re retired, they could relax. But afterwards they can’t just sit on the couch and relax, they’ve got to go and get a shop and work on a cradle for their grandchildren… I’ve never seen anything like that in an African. I’ve never seen anyone with a hobby in Africa. They’re different.”
—“Preserving Western Civilization” conference, 2009

Yup (see National Prosperity).

“Group differences, as far as we know, are in the DNA. Nobody yet has found any credible environmental effect on IQ or academic achievement. And believe me, people have been frantically looking for one for sixty, seventy years. Nothing. If you look at the quantitative genetic analyses, they’ll talk about a contribution from genes, and a contribution from environment. What that contribution from environment is, is random error. It doesn’t matter who raised you, as long as they didn’t hit you on the head with a hammer. It doesn’t matter whether you have high or low self-esteem. Everything has been shown just not to be there.

(See The Son Becomes The Father and More Behavioral Genetic Facts.)

The gap between ethnic groups is not closing in this country. There have been announcements that it’s closing for at least the last twenty years, usually in the New York Times, it’s not there, there’s no difference. There’s no change. Nothing changes.”
—H.L. Mencken Club meeting, 2011

“Among Herero there is no such thing as an accident, there is no such thing as a natural death, witchcraft in some form is behind all of it. Did you have a gastrointestinal upset this morning? Clearly someone slipped some pink potion in the milk. … Our [African] employees were so adamant to show me the truth that they pooled their money so they could take me to the local witch doctor, who would turn me into a frog. ‘Of course he can do that, it is easy for them to do, even to white people’ they said. … A colleague pointed out a few weeks ago, after hearing this story, that if it is nearly pan-African then perhaps some of it came to the New World. Prominent and not so prominent talkers from the American Black population come out with similar theories of vague and invisible forces that are oppressing people, like ‘institutional racism’ and ‘white privilege’.”
—“My friend the witch doctor,” West Hunter blog

I will say that many (primarily poorer) Jamaicans are similar in that regard. See also bewitched | hbd chick

They continue (emphasis added):

Background:
According to Henry Harpending, innate racial differences are the defining element of human society. Harpending believes that all variation between racial and ethnic groups—including cultural differences, social and economic disparities, and achievement gaps—are the result of recent and ongoing human evolution. Harpending’s most thorough elaboration of these beliefs is found in his book, co-authored with Gregory Cochran, called The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution. Much of what Harpending and Cochran claim in The 10,000 Year Explosion builds on the work of economist Gregory Clark, who believes that the Industrial Revolution and British global dominance can best be explained evolutionarily.

According to Clark’s book A Farewell to Alms, which Harpending has described as “one of the greatest books in human biology,” most living Britons descend from the upper classes of the medieval period. Because the wealthy left approximately twice as many surviving children as did the poor, Clark argues that the traits that defined the wealthy were selected for, and became prevalent in British society. And, unsurprisingly, Clark argues that the wealthy achieved their wealth by virtue of superior qualities like peacefulness, diligence, and intelligence; these traits were thus bred into the genetic heritage of white Britons. This became what Harpending calls the evolution of a “new kind of human,” found only in populations of western European and East Asian descent.

Harpending takes Clark’s argument further. He believes that present-day hunter-gatherer societies prove that the “old kind” of human is “impulsive, violent, innumerate, illiterate, and lazy.” He insists that everyone knows this to be true about non-European, non-Asian populations, but that anthropologists aren’t allowed to say so because these are considered “hate facts.”

Wait, so they’re saying they’re not? What’s this page for then, exactly?

Instead, academics are forced to pretend “that these are really all charming, lovely people who are just the victims of capitalism.”

Harpending and Cochran are also co-authors of one of the most prominent “HBD” blogs, West Hunter. HBD, or “human biodiversity,” is the latest iteration of a long tradition of scientific racism. Proponents of HBD maintain a vocal online presence, and are at the forefront of efforts to mainstream white supremacist thought. West Hunter features a mixture of anthropology, HBD, and generic racist, far-right musings.

I guess they couldn’t take the “mega-aggressions” offered at West Hunter.

In other articles and book chapters, Harpending has made often bizarre claims about race, biology, and social structures. These include the idea that sociopathy and “hysteria” are adaptive traits in men and women respectively, as well as support for Jean-Philippe Rushton’s idea that a genetic “ethnic nepotism” explains racial solidarity and racism, and that “diversity decreases national cohesion and the ability of governments to make rational economic decisions”.

As readers here know, I have disagreed with Hapending’s and Rushton’s ideas of ethnic nepotism (since “Ethnic Genetic Interests” Do Not Exist). A key difference is that I went into great detail on why this is so. This SPLC piece is heavy on incredulity but light on specific counterarguments.

In one article, coauthored with Peter Frost, an HBD blogger and columnist with no current academic affiliation, Harpending proposed another explanation for why western Europeans were supposedly genetically predisposed to be less violent than other racial groups. In this article and in talks he has given to friendly, non-academic crowds, Harpending has argued that the introduction of the death penalty in medieval Europe contributed to the “genetic pacification” of the population through “the steady removal of individuals who were more genetically prone to personal violence.” He has even suggested that this took place because medieval Europeans invented institutions like governments, courts, and contracts,

Indeed, see here (also on the Unz Review): Western Europe, state formation, and genetic pacification).

which Harpending apparently believes had never existed anywhere before being introduced in 11th century England.

Actually, Peter Frost wrote a paper saying that a similar process may have occurred in the Roman Empire (Frost, Peter 2010, The Roman State and genetic pacification).

Possibly his strangest argument is that Amish populations in the United States experience evolutionary selection towards “Amishness,” which can be expressed in terms of an “Amish Quotient,” or “AQ.” According to Harpending, a high “Amish Quotient” translates to increases in “affinity for work, perseverance, low status competition, respect for authority, conscientiousness, and community orientation.”

See Inferring an AQ | West Hunter and Boiling Off | West Hunter. I cite this process to explain the conservatism and other characteristics of the Great Plains. See More Maps of the American Nations.

The model for “Amishness” is based on earlier work found in Harpending’s most controversial paper, coauthored with Cochran and Jason Hardy, “A Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence.” The piece, in their own words, “elaborates the hypothesis that the unique demography and sociology of Ashkenazim in medieval Europe selected for intelligence.”

That it was.

In 2009, Harpending participated in a conference on “Preserving Western Civilization,” where he spoke alongside notorious racists like Peter Brimelow (president and chief contributor to the white nationalist VDARE.com) and Jean-Philippe Rushton (president of the eugenicist Pioneer Fund from 2002 until his death in 2012).

Harpending’s talk at the conference was a full-throated defense of scientific racism. In it, he argued that anthropological analysis could identify and explain traits he claimed were shared by people from central Africa, Papua New Guinea, and Baltimore (his favorite metonym for the African-American community as a whole). These included violence, laziness, and a preference for “mating instead of parenting.” This is especially the case in Papua New Guinea, where, according to Harpending, “[w]hat these guys do is kill their neighbors. That’s their favorite activity—oh, they love it! They love it! It’s the high point of their lives. They get their DNA into the next generation by being killers, and violent. And if there’s evolution going on, that kind of society is selecting for unpredictable, violent males.”

These inherent traits mean that in societies where males are provided with necessities like food, whether from female farmers or from welfare checks, you find that “when there’s plenty of food, men do male stuff like putting on make-up, fighting, raiding, and telling stories. Male effort seems to be competitive effort, rather than parental effort.”

Reaffirming his belief in the fundamental similarities between Papuan gardening societies and African-American communities largely dependent on welfare, he later asked: “Where are these [traits] found? In post-industrial cities, among the underclass, you know, street corner males with fancy sneakers, looking good, combing their hair, males strutting around, macho. This is absolutely typical whether it’s highland New Guinea or Baltimore.” These traits were contrasted with those of Europeans and northern Asians who have evolved higher intelligence and “tend to be more disciplined than people who take life for granted.”

Well…

Harpending has also spoken several times at Paul Gottfried’s Baltimore-based H.L. Mencken Club, which hosts an annual meeting of prominent far-right thinkers and academic racists. In his 2011 talk at the Mencken Club, Harpending argued that money spent towards education is wasted, because variation in test scores is due entirely to the racial makeup of the test-taking populations. He claims that “Anglo” students in every state perform equally well on standardized tests regardless of education expenditures, and that black students are also comparable across state lines, thus the gap between white and black students’ scores is entirely genetic and has nothing to do with the educational environments. He does acknowledge that the data shows there have been gains in average scores of black students relative to white students, but insists that these are not “real.”

Education Realist might have a thing or two to say here.

Harpending also used his 2011 Mencken Club talk to promote eugenics. Hearkening back to his ideas of “genetic pacification,” Harpending claimed that “[w]hat happened in medieval Europe was brutal enforcement of laws. We didn’t go to the movie on Saturdays, we went to the public hanging. Criminals were treated without mercy.” He added that “this is eugenics. … [W]e killed off the violent folks, we replaced poor folks with the offspring of the prosperous… . Most of us are descended from exactly this process, another point being that the rest of the world isn’t like us.”

He goes on to claim that because the rest of the world has not enjoyed the centuries of eugenic policies that transformed Europeans into a “new kind of human,” non-European peoples are fundamentally incapable of adopting western, democratic norms. This, in Harpending’s view, is the only reason the war in Afghanistan failed to produce a stable, democratic government.

It concludes this way:

Harpending’s work provided a great deal of the foundation for Nicholas Wade’s controversial 2014 book, A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race, and Human History. Wade relied entirely on the Harpending, Cochran, and Hardy paper on Ashkenazi intelligence for one chapter of his book, and much of the rest relied on Harpending’s gloss on Gregory Clark’s work. Notably, when around 140 prominent population geneticists wrote a letter to the editor of The New York Times complaining that Wade’s book had radically misinterpreted their research, Harpending sneeringly dismissed this as “preening and posturing,” and a “pretentious pronouncement claiming that ‘they were genetics’ and that Wade was abusing ‘their’ knowledge.”

Anyone notice something? In their piece to discredit Harpending, they’ve selected quotes and claims that pretty much make the case for HBD, much like my earlier post (featuring “Misdreavus”) Why HBD. A novice reader coming to this SPLC piece would realize that there must be something to this HBD thing, presuming they were not deterred by the SPLC’s God-like decree that this topic matter is evil and hence verboten.

For the record, here’s the evil extremist, “White Nationalist” in action…

I have said that the case for HBD will soon become impossible to ignore. The Church can make only so many sanctions before more Galileos with their own telescopes see the real truth. As the wall of dogma collapses under its own weight, the powers on high will scramble to suppress the truth even more. Donald Trump and his recent success may be a sign that the Gatekeepers are failing in this aim (see time 13:00, courtesy The Audacious Epigone):

The problem is simple: try as you might to suppress them, facts about the world do not go away, and will continue to be discovered and re-discovered over time. Dogma can keep the truth shrouded for a while, but this is an ultimately limited process. The awful truth (see “Squid Ink“) becomes known.

The theme for this post, something to really capture the threat posed by the evil extremist Henry Harpending…

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Our [African] employees were so adamant to show me the truth that they pooled their money so they could take me to the local witch doctor, who would turn me into a frog. ‘Of course he can do that, it is easy for them to do, even to white people

    A Brit columnist from Kenya writing in The Spectator several years ago showed that secret ballots, a fundamental part of Western democracy were impossible in Africa.

    He discussed an upcoming election in Kenya with Western – educated Negro engineers from Kenya. They explained that a witch-doctor candidate would win. The witch-doctor could make himself invisible, fly through the air, and lurk unseen looking over the shoulders of everyone casting a vote in a voting booth.

    Since the witch-doctor threatened to curse those who voted against him, it was too dangerous to vote for anyone else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    And ours is called diebold
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diebold
    , @tbraton
    "Our [African] employees were so adamant to show me the truth that they pooled their money so they could take me to the local witch doctor, who would turn me into a frog. ‘ "

    I think I saw that guy in the Budweiser beer commercials a number of years ago. As I recall, he was really funny. I think his name was Larry, but I may be confusing him with one of the chameleons. The one important life lesson I got from those commercials was "never send a ferret to do a weasel's job." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF5dZRooRWQ
    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.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/jman/henry-harpending-extremist-says-the-southern-poverty-law-center/#comment-1091030
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    NORTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER’S MORRIS DEES PROFILE

    Thanks for the article. This is really amazing that SPLC would stoop so low.

    Why don’t we start a NORTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER website? And have a profile of Morris Dees on it, like this:

    Name: Morris Dees.

    Profession: Professional conman and a fraud, who runs America’s notorious Jewish hate group called the Southern Poverty Law Center, which issues lies and propaganda ad nauseum. He promote alienism and lib-barbarianism and calls anybody with culture or morals names.

    Description (Source: Wikipedia):
    In 2005, Washington Times editor Wesley Pruden called Dees “nothing more than a scam artist.”[21] …….. Stephen Bright, an Atlanta-based civil rights attorney, wrote in 2007 that Dees was “a con man and fraud”, who “has taken advantage of naive, well-meaning people–some of moderate or low incomes–who believe his pitches and give to his $175-million operation.”[23].

    According to various online sources, his divorce papers describe him as a sexual predator. All this suggests that he is a psychopath.

    Comment: Though Morris Dees has repeatedly violated the Rules of Professional Conduct in various jurisdictions, and is a well known psychopath, and is one of the most unethical and crooked lawyers and conman scamming the public, and has brought the legal profession into total disrepute, this con-man’s law license has not yet been revoked. It is suggested that you report his misconduct to Bar of the state wherever this con-man practices law and demand the revocation of his law license, which revocation is long overdue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Though I knew of the SPLC as a leftist propaganda outfit I had never heard of Morris Dees. So I have looked him up. There appears to be no Jewish ancestry so why bring "Jewish hate group" into your hypothetical response? Is that based on some unstated facts?
  3. Nice post. Yes, I agree, SPLC, quoting Harpending, fairly presents the case for HBD. Even they — or at least the person who put this piece together — must be coming around, even though they can’t come right out and admit it. Nothing libelous here except the label they attach to his name.

    re: “Hate facts” Is hate a verb or an adjective? If a verb, doesn’t that make SPLC a hate group? I’ve been describing SPLC as a hate group for years. They hate facts.

    Read More
  4. re: “Hate facts” Is hate a verb or an adjective? If a verb, doesn’t that make SPLC a hate group? I’ve been describing SPLC as a hate group for years. They hate facts.

    And the people who love them. Fact lover is just about the worst name they can call you. That Steve Sailer guy — he’s a fact lover! So is Jayman, and a traitor to boot!

    Read More
  5. @Anon
    NORTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER’S MORRIS DEES PROFILE

    Thanks for the article. This is really amazing that SPLC would stoop so low.

    Why don't we start a NORTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER website? And have a profile of Morris Dees on it, like this:

    Name: Morris Dees.

    Profession: Professional conman and a fraud, who runs America’s notorious Jewish hate group called the Southern Poverty Law Center, which issues lies and propaganda ad nauseum. He promote alienism and lib-barbarianism and calls anybody with culture or morals names.

    Description (Source: Wikipedia):
    In 2005, Washington Times editor Wesley Pruden called Dees "nothing more than a scam artist."[21] ........ Stephen Bright, an Atlanta-based civil rights attorney, wrote in 2007 that Dees was "a con man and fraud", who "has taken advantage of naive, well-meaning people–some of moderate or low incomes–who believe his pitches and give to his $175-million operation."[23].

    According to various online sources, his divorce papers describe him as a sexual predator. All this suggests that he is a psychopath.

    Comment: Though Morris Dees has repeatedly violated the Rules of Professional Conduct in various jurisdictions, and is a well known psychopath, and is one of the most unethical and crooked lawyers and conman scamming the public, and has brought the legal profession into total disrepute, this con-man’s law license has not yet been revoked. It is suggested that you report his misconduct to Bar of the state wherever this con-man practices law and demand the revocation of his law license, which revocation is long overdue.

    Though I knew of the SPLC as a leftist propaganda outfit I had never heard of Morris Dees. So I have looked him up. There appears to be no Jewish ancestry so why bring “Jewish hate group” into your hypothetical response? Is that based on some unstated facts?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Haxo Angmark
    Dees was brought up by a radical-Left Jewish family, and got the usual hardLeft, anti-White socialization therefrom. In fact, he's primarily a figurehead; the two main movers and shakers at the $PLC are Heidi Beirach and Mark Potok, both Jew-communist lawyers. I exchanged a few e-mails with Heidi B. when she was trying to put the slam on Kevin MacDonald; she's a nasty piece of work. Then there's an outer circle of largely symbolic White shabbatz goyim and even a Latino or two, to provide the usual rainbow flavor. Basically $PLC is a Jew-controlled, communist-front hedge fund whose principal purpose (aside from collecting shekels) is to smother White opposition to the anti-White immigration rackets. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Jews do not intend to be pogrom'd. Or ghetto'd. Or holocaust'd. Ever. Again. Low-IQ Blacks and Mestizos they can easily control; Asians - Chinese in particular - are, like the (out-of-Asia ) Ashkenazic Jews - high IQ and savage collectivists. They get along just fine. Whites' central tendency is (cf. KMac) altruism + individualism, making of them a potential lethal threat to the Jews' age-old universalist goal of the Destruction of the Nations. So they must be eliminated, and the $PLC (and hundreds of other Jewish Tribal organizations) is here to help. Not to mention our entire, Zion-owned political and chattering class
    , @MarkinLA
    They make most of their money scaring old Jewish ladies into giving money so the SPLC can prevent the next Holocaust.
    , @tbraton
    I think I read many years ago (can't recall where or when) that Morris Dees was Jewish, but I didn't give much thought to the issue. Here is what Wikipedia says:

    "Morris Seligman Dees, Jr. (born December 16, 1936) is the co-founder and chief trial counsel for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and a former market engineer for book publishing.[3] Along with his law partner, Joseph J. Levin Jr., Dees founded the SPLC in 1971,[4] the start of a legal career dedicated to suing organizations in discrimination cases. . . Dees was born in 1936 in Shorter, Alabama, the son of Annie Ruth (Frazer) and Morris Seligman Dees, Sr., tenant cotton farmers.[3][5] His family was Baptist.[6] His father was named "Morris Seligman" after a Jewish friend of Dees' grandfather.[7] After graduating magna cum laude from the University of Alabama School of Law in 1960, he returned to Montgomery, Alabama and opened a law office. "

    So, technically he is not Jewish, but based on this sketchy outline of facts, it appears that he has had a close association with Jews over the years, to the extent that his first two names derive, through his father, from the name of a Jewish friend of his grandfather. But if what Haxo Angmark says is true, then Dees is a mere figurehead of SPLC, and the organization is actually controlled by Jews. In any event, I agree that SPLC is an organization that lives off shakedowns, sort of like Jesse Jackson's organization.
  6. WGG [AKA "World's Greatest Grandson"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Eugenics truly is the answer to so many questions. Simply make welfare dependent upon consistent norplant/depo provera dosing, with financial penalties attached to births. Most of the world’s problems are solved within 60 years.

    The liberal/ left-wing defenders of abortion-on-demand and selling of fetal parts can feign shock, but at this point nobody’s buying it.

    It’s a much gentler solution than any other possible outcome such as:

    -continuing drift into criminal barbarism e.g. arresting blacks for actual crimes is now considered racist therefore let’s let crime run rampant

    -segregation- could be humane if both sides volunteered, but one side definitely won’t, leading to violent clashes with the state

    -domination- ultimate police state to control unruly hordes unjustly punishes law-abiders

    -cultural Darwinism- ending of welfare, charity and free legal defenses, leaving unproductive citizens to rot in prison or starve on the street

    Even if the ludicrous notion that an end to “white racism” would somehow make blacks behave better became true, crime was reduced and we all got along better, the African population bomb would sooner rather than later make us unfriendly competitors for resources once again. Why should self-sustaining Japan have to starve because of Nigeria’s lack of planning?

    Eugenics is the only way.

    Read More
  7. Our [African] employees were so adamant to show me the truth that they pooled their money so they could take me to the local witch doctor, who would turn me into a frog.

    Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn wrote of an Icelander who told him he didn’t trust a neighbor who once tricked him by turning into a bull and running off. But the neighbor didn’t transform the other man, only himself. That illustrates the gulf between African and Nordic thought.

    That, and a lot of hard work before the hard drinking.

    Read More
  8. @Wizard of Oz
    Though I knew of the SPLC as a leftist propaganda outfit I had never heard of Morris Dees. So I have looked him up. There appears to be no Jewish ancestry so why bring "Jewish hate group" into your hypothetical response? Is that based on some unstated facts?

    Dees was brought up by a radical-Left Jewish family, and got the usual hardLeft, anti-White socialization therefrom. In fact, he’s primarily a figurehead; the two main movers and shakers at the $PLC are Heidi Beirach and Mark Potok, both Jew-communist lawyers. I exchanged a few e-mails with Heidi B. when she was trying to put the slam on Kevin MacDonald; she’s a nasty piece of work. Then there’s an outer circle of largely symbolic White shabbatz goyim and even a Latino or two, to provide the usual rainbow flavor. Basically $PLC is a Jew-controlled, communist-front hedge fund whose principal purpose (aside from collecting shekels) is to smother White opposition to the anti-White immigration rackets. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Jews do not intend to be pogrom’d. Or ghetto’d. Or holocaust’d. Ever. Again. Low-IQ Blacks and Mestizos they can easily control; Asians – Chinese in particular – are, like the (out-of-Asia ) Ashkenazic Jews – high IQ and savage collectivists. They get along just fine. Whites’ central tendency is (cf. KMac) altruism + individualism, making of them a potential lethal threat to the Jews’ age-old universalist goal of the Destruction of the Nations. So they must be eliminated, and the $PLC (and hundreds of other Jewish Tribal organizations) is here to help. Not to mention our entire, Zion-owned political and chattering class

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Dees was brought up by a radical-Left Jewish family, and got the usual hardLeft, anti-White socialization therefrom.
     
    Nope. Look closely at the post you're replying to.
  9. Regarding Harpending’s claim that much of educational spending does not improve the quality nor quantity of knowledge gained by students, my father went to school for about 6 months annually between 1908-1916 in rural Alabama. After completing the 8th grade, he got his father’s permission to leave school to work. He began as a shipping clerk in a commercial bakery and rose to be the general manager. Later he set up and managed other bakeries and automobile dealerships. His success was certainly greater than average, but several generations of Americans got sufficient education in one- and two-room school houses to play their roles in creating the wealthy and civilized society that is the envy of the world. It is the attitude and aptitude of the students, together with the curriculum, that determines educational outcome, not the physical plant nor the teachers’ salaries. Observations during twenty-five years as a college professor did nothing but reinforce this early opinion of mine.

    Read More
    • Agree: E. Burke
    • Replies: @Nick
    I think that attitude sure would kill the attitude that has lead to school mergers in small-town America
  10. He made the SPLC list? Congrats! Somebody buy him a drink.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RW
    Right, that's exactly what they should do! And make it as public as possible. Folks need to get together and thumb their noses, a la Trump, at this stuff, because it reAlly is so laughable.
  11. …a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe, and probably northern Asia. And that this led to the Industrial Revolution—this new kind of human was less violent, had an affinity for work.

    Northern Europe less violent? As in the Vikings? And what does he mean by northern Asia? Mongolia perhaps? Home of Genghis Khan!

    Instead, academics are forced to pretend “that these are really all charming, lovely people who are just the victims of capitalism.”

    Is that the real agenda here? Plumping for capitalism?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jay
    "Is that the real agenda here? Plumping for capitalism?"

    Hardly. Not when the Chamber of Commerce wants unlimited non-Caucasian immigration into the U.S. Try thinking outside your ideological box. The agenda is the preservation of civilization in North America.
    , @JayMan

    Northern Europe less violent? As in the Vikings?
     
    Apparently you missed the part about recent evolution in the piece. See also this:

    “violence around the world” | hbd chick

    And what does he mean by northern Asia? Mongolia perhaps? Home of Genghis Khan!
     
    He means the historically farming Northeast Asian countries. That is China, Korea, Japan.

    Much of this was pretty easy to find...
  12. @Seamus Padraig

    ...a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe, and probably northern Asia. And that this led to the Industrial Revolution—this new kind of human was less violent, had an affinity for work.
     
    Northern Europe less violent? As in the Vikings? And what does he mean by northern Asia? Mongolia perhaps? Home of Genghis Khan!

    Instead, academics are forced to pretend “that these are really all charming, lovely people who are just the victims of capitalism.”
     
    Is that the real agenda here? Plumping for capitalism?

    “Is that the real agenda here? Plumping for capitalism?”

    Hardly. Not when the Chamber of Commerce wants unlimited non-Caucasian immigration into the U.S. Try thinking outside your ideological box. The agenda is the preservation of civilization in North America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    US Chamber of Commerce has adopted the cultmarx as its official ideology:

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/08/28/common-core-approved-black-lives-matter-textbooks-for-middle-school/

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Jeb Bush and most of the establishment republican candidates support Common Core educational standards.
     
  13. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The SPLC is a hyper-ethnic Jewish Organization waging hyper-ethnic Jewish warfare against The Historic Native Born White Christian American Majority.

    The SPLC is funded completely by hyper-ethnic Jewish multi-$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$aires. The SPLC management is 98 percent Jewsish.

    Remember the USS Liberty!!!!!!!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seminumerical
    We must remember the USS Liberty. It was a spectacularly hatefilled attempt to kill non-Jewish allies and leave no trace, for perceived gain. Luckily it failed, except for the killing part.

    Even if the IDF had succeeded in sinking the Liberty, with no survivors, various countries' Intelligence listening posts, even as far away as Scotland, had heard and recorded much of the horror, so Israel would not have gotten off Scot (ahem) free. Still they pretty much got away with it.

  14. @Jay
    "Is that the real agenda here? Plumping for capitalism?"

    Hardly. Not when the Chamber of Commerce wants unlimited non-Caucasian immigration into the U.S. Try thinking outside your ideological box. The agenda is the preservation of civilization in North America.

    US Chamber of Commerce has adopted the cultmarx as its official ideology:

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/08/28/common-core-approved-black-lives-matter-textbooks-for-middle-school/

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Jeb Bush and most of the establishment republican candidates support Common Core educational standards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @rod1963
    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists. They are predatory globalists, they are after something different, this is why they support open borders as well.

    In a lot of ways the globalists and Chamber of Commerce types have a lot in common with HBD'ers. Both want to reshape humanity to their own ends.

    The globalist/free trade/open borders claque is more about turning the West into a giant 3rd world pest hole full of ignorant and docile laborers that are easily exploited for their corporations. Where they become a hereditary aristocracy answerable to no one.

    They are Orwell's boot of the tyrant stomping on the face of humanity for eternity.
  15. Harpending is the only professor in the entire US that dares say worldwide human evolution hasn’t been convergent for the last 40,000 years . Soon there will be none. “The problem is simple: try as you might to suppress them, facts about the world do not go away, and will continue to be discovered and re-discovered over time.” Untill then best continue to hide behind a pseudonym (you will have a long wait, rely on it).

    In this chapter, we consider the accepted belief that human evolution stopped 40,000 years ago. Then we dispel it; in fact, it looks as if human evolution has become more and more rapid. [...] Ashkenazi Jews have been terrifically overrepresented in cultural and scientific achievements over the past hundred years. They have the highest average IQ of any ethnic group, and an odd set of genetic diseases. We believe that there is a simple explanation for all these surprising facts – natural selection for being better white-collar workers in the Middle Ages.

    That is natural selection. The natural means it is not eugenics.

    Why don’t the Southern Law Poverty Centre (the name apparently derives from government funding lawyers could get to sue on behalf of poor people) mention Harpending’s explanation for the obvious superiority of Ashkenazim over gentiles and non-Ashkenazim. The SPLC are conflating the views of Harpending with those of Kevin MacDonald. MacDonald is the one who talks about Jewish intelligence being the result of eugenic practices, Harpending’s book is arguing the opposite.

    Read More
  16. Congrats on joining the Unz stable. Glad you’re here, I too often forget to check your blog and spend more and more time here, at Vdare, and at Taki’s.

    Harpending making the big league is great news. Hopefully you can also become a genuine white supremacist nazi who wants to kill six million Jews and enslave all Africans and Mexicans. Maybe they’ll induct you and Unz into the $PLC Hall of Infamy in a grand joint ceremony. I’m pretty sure the minor details that you’re nonwhite and Unz is a Jew won’t prevent your proper recognition. After all, since HBD “white supremacists” don’t believe whites are “superior,” why should you need to be white to be a white supremacist at all? Anyway, I’m rooting for you. Let me know if you want me to write letters to Morris Dee$ about what an evil racist nazi hater you are.

    Read More
  17. Cochran and Harpending are the only two people I’ve seen argue for 100% heritability of intelligence. I’m an HBD advocate and no fan of the SPLC, but I don’t think C&H’s position makes sense. The Minnesota twins experiment came up with only something like .7 or .8. And what about the effect of nursing vs. formula on IQ? Not to mention that an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll by interfering with a child’s ability to focus if such an environment triggers depression or anxiety in a child who otherwise would not experience those emotions. Why would parents have such a strong desire to protect their children from abusive environments if this were not the case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Cochran and Harpending are the only two people I’ve seen argue for 100% heritability of intelligence.
     
    No. If the heritability of intelligence was 100%, then identical twins would have identical IQ's (measurement error notwithstanding). But they do not, though it's very close.

    And what about the effect of nursing vs. formula on IQ?
     
    Nil.

    Not to mention that an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll by interfering with a child’s ability to focus if such an environment triggers depression or anxiety in a child who otherwise would not experience those emotions.
     
    Turns out that that's bullshit too:

    More Behavioral Genetic Facts


    Why would parents have such a strong desire to protect their children from abusive environments if this were not the case.
     
    Oh I don't know, so that they're not miserable? So they're not physically hurt? Just some ideas...
    , @harpend
    I can't believe we ever argued anywhere for 100% heritability of intelligence. Best estimates for additive heritability seem to hover between 60% and 80%.
    , @guest
    "an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll"

    Hammers take their toll when they hit you in the head hard enough, and it's hard to focus with brain damage. So obviously environment has some effect.
  18. Leftist conservative [AKA "radical_centrist"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I agree with most of what you say here, but there are some huge points you fail to consider…

    1) blacks ARE capable of doing most jobs…the value of IQ is overrated when it comes to how blacks perform MOST jobs…you don’t need to be a genius to be a bartender, a waiter, a mechanic..
    2) you and most of the dissident right greatly underrate the power of behavioural conditioning, i.e., propaganda, which is after all, an environmental factor. Look at how brainwashed the liberals and conservatives are! That should be proof right there that environmental factors are a huge aspect of human behavior.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    1) blacks ARE capable of doing most jobs…the value of IQ is overrated when it comes to how blacks perform MOST jobs…you don’t need to be a genius to be a bartender, a waiter, a mechanic..
     
    IQ works equally well for all groups (indeed, that's a key fact demonstrating the validity of IQ tests).

    Blacks perform about as well as their IQs would predict (well, IQ tests are somewhat overpredictive for Blacks, in fact). It's just that the mean is lower, and hence, the fraction at the end qualified enough to be doctors, architects, or HBD'ers.


    you and most of the dissident right greatly underrate the power of behavioural conditioning, i.e., propaganda, which is after all, an environmental factor. Look at how brainwashed the liberals and conservatives are! That should be proof right there that environmental factors are a huge aspect of human behavior.
     
    Sure, but environmental effects seem to be a tricky business. They seem to have little effect on variation within a cohort, but a considerable effect between cohorts. This indicates it must be things that effect everybody at once. Technological change and the general societal incentive structure fit the bill.
    , @Curle
    "you don’t need to be a genius to be . . . a mechanic"

    But it helps to be smart. At least, I prefer those diagnosing my car's problems to be smart. Saves return trips.
  19. @Seamus Padraig

    ...a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe, and probably northern Asia. And that this led to the Industrial Revolution—this new kind of human was less violent, had an affinity for work.
     
    Northern Europe less violent? As in the Vikings? And what does he mean by northern Asia? Mongolia perhaps? Home of Genghis Khan!

    Instead, academics are forced to pretend “that these are really all charming, lovely people who are just the victims of capitalism.”
     
    Is that the real agenda here? Plumping for capitalism?

    Northern Europe less violent? As in the Vikings?

    Apparently you missed the part about recent evolution in the piece. See also this:

    “violence around the world” | hbd chick

    And what does he mean by northern Asia? Mongolia perhaps? Home of Genghis Khan!

    He means the historically farming Northeast Asian countries. That is China, Korea, Japan.

    Much of this was pretty easy to find…

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen

    you missed the part about recent evolution in the piece
     
    Sometimes the code is corrupted. Breivik
  20. @Haxo Angmark
    Dees was brought up by a radical-Left Jewish family, and got the usual hardLeft, anti-White socialization therefrom. In fact, he's primarily a figurehead; the two main movers and shakers at the $PLC are Heidi Beirach and Mark Potok, both Jew-communist lawyers. I exchanged a few e-mails with Heidi B. when she was trying to put the slam on Kevin MacDonald; she's a nasty piece of work. Then there's an outer circle of largely symbolic White shabbatz goyim and even a Latino or two, to provide the usual rainbow flavor. Basically $PLC is a Jew-controlled, communist-front hedge fund whose principal purpose (aside from collecting shekels) is to smother White opposition to the anti-White immigration rackets. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Jews do not intend to be pogrom'd. Or ghetto'd. Or holocaust'd. Ever. Again. Low-IQ Blacks and Mestizos they can easily control; Asians - Chinese in particular - are, like the (out-of-Asia ) Ashkenazic Jews - high IQ and savage collectivists. They get along just fine. Whites' central tendency is (cf. KMac) altruism + individualism, making of them a potential lethal threat to the Jews' age-old universalist goal of the Destruction of the Nations. So they must be eliminated, and the $PLC (and hundreds of other Jewish Tribal organizations) is here to help. Not to mention our entire, Zion-owned political and chattering class

    Dees was brought up by a radical-Left Jewish family, and got the usual hardLeft, anti-White socialization therefrom.

    Nope. Look closely at the post you’re replying to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Being a pedantic sort of chap I thought he might be saying that, despite having no Jewish ancestry he was brought up by a radical left Jewish family as one who was adopted or fostered though there is absolutely no suggestion of that in the Wikipedia article I largely relied on. And it seems most unlikely. I wasn't inclined to take on a fight about someone I had only just heard of and who is of no importance to me but thanks for opening it up for further explanation - if there is one.
  21. @Wizard of Oz
    Though I knew of the SPLC as a leftist propaganda outfit I had never heard of Morris Dees. So I have looked him up. There appears to be no Jewish ancestry so why bring "Jewish hate group" into your hypothetical response? Is that based on some unstated facts?

    They make most of their money scaring old Jewish ladies into giving money so the SPLC can prevent the next Holocaust.

    Read More
  22. @JayMan

    Northern Europe less violent? As in the Vikings?
     
    Apparently you missed the part about recent evolution in the piece. See also this:

    “violence around the world” | hbd chick

    And what does he mean by northern Asia? Mongolia perhaps? Home of Genghis Khan!
     
    He means the historically farming Northeast Asian countries. That is China, Korea, Japan.

    Much of this was pretty easy to find...

    you missed the part about recent evolution in the piece

    Sometimes the code is corrupted. Breivik

    Read More
  23. @JayMan

    Dees was brought up by a radical-Left Jewish family, and got the usual hardLeft, anti-White socialization therefrom.
     
    Nope. Look closely at the post you're replying to.

    Being a pedantic sort of chap I thought he might be saying that, despite having no Jewish ancestry he was brought up by a radical left Jewish family as one who was adopted or fostered though there is absolutely no suggestion of that in the Wikipedia article I largely relied on. And it seems most unlikely. I wasn’t inclined to take on a fight about someone I had only just heard of and who is of no importance to me but thanks for opening it up for further explanation – if there is one.

    Read More
    • Disagree: Wizard of Oz, Wizard of Oz
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Have I broken some record? Or some code? I am recorded, and not just once, but twice, as Disagreeing with myself. Once maybe, but I wouldn't be so profligate as to waste all my opportunities to be disagreeable on my cranky alter ego.
  24. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    What are these “facts”?

    Has it been shown that the intelligence measured by IQ tests is due to specific genes that black Africans lack?

    Unlikely, otherwise how could there be Nigerians at the Math Olympiad winning multiple medals. Right?

    There may be evidence largely pointing in one direction, namely that under-representation of black Africans in the top percentiles and their over-representation in the bottom percentiles is due not to discrimination, environment, disease etc., but due to heredity, which leads to fewer gifted people among them and more retarded.

    I would even adopt it as my working hypothesis.

    Still, an explanation is required. Is the Gaussian distribution of IQ among blacks left-shifted? Can’t be, otherwise there would be zero super-brights (150 IQ and up) among them. Is it a rubber band, distorted to lean left but with identical endpoints as among Europeans?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Has it been shown that the intelligence measured by IQ tests is due to specific genes that black Africans lack?
     
    Well, there are these:

    Is there no population genetic ‘support’ for a racial hereditarian hypothesis? | Human Varieties

    and

    District-Level Variation in Continental Racial Admixture Predicts Outcomes in Mexico | Human Varieties

    and

    Racial Ancestry in the Americas. Part 1: National Genomic Racial Admixture: Estimates and Validation | Human Varieties


    Unlikely, otherwise how could there be Nigerians at the Math Olympiad winning multiple medals. Right?
     
    I'm not convinced that the Math Olympiad can be used as a reliable gauge of national intelligence. That said, the results aren't totally out of the realm of what you'd expect:

    International Mathematical Olympiad - results


    There may be evidence largely pointing in one direction, namely that under-representation of black Africans in the top percentiles and their over-representation in the bottom percentiles is due not to discrimination, environment, disease etc., but due to heredity, which leads to fewer gifted people among them and more retarded.

    I would even adopt it as my working hypothesis.
     

    Pretty much.

    It looks like this, at least in the U.S.

  25. “The evolution of these racial differences are, in Harpending’s account, the driving force behind all of modern human history.”

    I think Harpending actually makes a point about three generations of associative mating forming classes that have differences that exceed, as he puts it , ‘what we used to call racial differences’. So he is actually saying the opposite of what the SPLC claim he is saying.

    “The Church can make only so many sanctions before more Galileos with their own telescopes see the real truth.”

    But the Church did not mate associatively-

    http://ideas.time.com/2012/02/07/the-new-upper-class-and-the-real-reason-we-dislike-them/

    Charles Murray: Fifty years ago, the people who rose to the most influential positions overwhelmingly had Hank’s kind of background, thoroughly grounded in the American mainstream. Today, people of influence are characterized by college education, often from elite colleges. The men are married not to the girl next door but to highly educated women socialized at the same elite schools who are often as professionally successful as their husbands. They were admitted to this path by a combination of high IQ and personality strengths. They are often the children — and, increasingly, grandchildren — of the upper-middle class and have never known any other kind of life. [...] As adults, they have distinctive tastes and preferences and seek out enclaves of others who share them. Their culture incorporates little of the lifestyle or the popular culture of the rest of the nation; in fact, members of the new upper class increasingly look down on that mainstream lifestyle and culture. Meanwhile, their children are so sheltered from the rest of the nation that they barely know what life is like outside Georgetown, Scarsdale, Kenilworth or Atherton. If this divide continues to widen, it will completely destroy what has made America’s national civic culture exceptional: a fluid, mobile society where people from different backgrounds live side by side and come together for the common good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    I think Harpending actually makes a point about three generations of associative mating forming classes that have differences that exceed, as he puts it , ‘what we used to call racial differences’. So he is actually saying the opposite of what the SPLC claim he is saying.
     
    That process doesn't change racial differences, unless there was a lot of intermixing.

    I'm completely unworried about class stratification. Gregory Clark showed that this has been going for some time.

  26. @Headfart at Headstart
    Cochran and Harpending are the only two people I've seen argue for 100% heritability of intelligence. I'm an HBD advocate and no fan of the SPLC, but I don't think C&H's position makes sense. The Minnesota twins experiment came up with only something like .7 or .8. And what about the effect of nursing vs. formula on IQ? Not to mention that an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll by interfering with a child's ability to focus if such an environment triggers depression or anxiety in a child who otherwise would not experience those emotions. Why would parents have such a strong desire to protect their children from abusive environments if this were not the case.

    Cochran and Harpending are the only two people I’ve seen argue for 100% heritability of intelligence.

    No. If the heritability of intelligence was 100%, then identical twins would have identical IQ’s (measurement error notwithstanding). But they do not, though it’s very close.

    And what about the effect of nursing vs. formula on IQ?

    Nil.

    Not to mention that an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll by interfering with a child’s ability to focus if such an environment triggers depression or anxiety in a child who otherwise would not experience those emotions.

    Turns out that that’s bullshit too:

    More Behavioral Genetic Facts

    Why would parents have such a strong desire to protect their children from abusive environments if this were not the case.

    Oh I don’t know, so that they’re not miserable? So they’re not physically hurt? Just some ideas…

    Read More
  27. @Headfart at Headstart
    Cochran and Harpending are the only two people I've seen argue for 100% heritability of intelligence. I'm an HBD advocate and no fan of the SPLC, but I don't think C&H's position makes sense. The Minnesota twins experiment came up with only something like .7 or .8. And what about the effect of nursing vs. formula on IQ? Not to mention that an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll by interfering with a child's ability to focus if such an environment triggers depression or anxiety in a child who otherwise would not experience those emotions. Why would parents have such a strong desire to protect their children from abusive environments if this were not the case.

    I can’t believe we ever argued anywhere for 100% heritability of intelligence. Best estimates for additive heritability seem to hover between 60% and 80%.

    Read More
  28. @Leftist conservative
    I agree with most of what you say here, but there are some huge points you fail to consider...

    1) blacks ARE capable of doing most jobs...the value of IQ is overrated when it comes to how blacks perform MOST jobs...you don't need to be a genius to be a bartender, a waiter, a mechanic..
    2) you and most of the dissident right greatly underrate the power of behavioural conditioning, i.e., propaganda, which is after all, an environmental factor. Look at how brainwashed the liberals and conservatives are! That should be proof right there that environmental factors are a huge aspect of human behavior.

    1) blacks ARE capable of doing most jobs…the value of IQ is overrated when it comes to how blacks perform MOST jobs…you don’t need to be a genius to be a bartender, a waiter, a mechanic..

    IQ works equally well for all groups (indeed, that’s a key fact demonstrating the validity of IQ tests).

    Blacks perform about as well as their IQs would predict (well, IQ tests are somewhat overpredictive for Blacks, in fact). It’s just that the mean is lower, and hence, the fraction at the end qualified enough to be doctors, architects, or HBD’ers.

    you and most of the dissident right greatly underrate the power of behavioural conditioning, i.e., propaganda, which is after all, an environmental factor. Look at how brainwashed the liberals and conservatives are! That should be proof right there that environmental factors are a huge aspect of human behavior.

    Sure, but environmental effects seem to be a tricky business. They seem to have little effect on variation within a cohort, but a considerable effect between cohorts. This indicates it must be things that effect everybody at once. Technological change and the general societal incentive structure fit the bill.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BurplesonAFB
    How do you explain the extreme rise of the average Irish IQ? A century's worth of Flynn all in two decades?
    , @res

    Sure, but environmental effects seem to be a tricky business. They seem to have little effect on variation within a cohort, but a considerable effect between cohorts. This indicates it must be things that effect everybody at once. Technological change and the general societal incentive structure fit the bill.
     
    I think it must be things that effect everybody at once is largely correct, but I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion (i.e. environmental effects don't matter within a cohort). I think it would be more accurate to say we can't detect the environmental effects (which I agree are often smaller than the genetic effects) because there is too little variance in the environment within a cohort (with a greater variance between cohorts). This is especially true if there is a GxE interaction which results in a relatively small fraction of the population being most affected by the environment. A side note is I believe the G/E effect sizes vary depending on how much variance is present in each. Studies with uniform genotypes will likely give different heritability estimates from studies with uniform environments.

    Another way of saying this is that even if environmental effects are not detectable in observational studies there may be benefit to targeted intervention. My favorite example for this is PKU treatment. Visualize how observational studies would have seen this. The necessary intervention (minimizing phenylalanine intake) is difficult and unlikely to occur by chance so likely would have never been noticed/found.

    If I am misinterpreting you please clarify. Study references welcome ;-)

    P.S. Regarding breastfeeding vs. formula, I think it's important to be aware of the actual formula content (which changes over time and is also variable between products).

    P.P.S. Very glad to see you on unz.com!
  29. SPLC: “[Harpending] believes that medieval Europeans intuitively adopted eugenic policies…”

    Intuitively-adopted eugenic policies? That’s an inapt phrase that paints Harpending as a poor thinker or a clumsy author.

    Except that he never said it. Details…

    Read More
  30. @JayMan

    1) blacks ARE capable of doing most jobs…the value of IQ is overrated when it comes to how blacks perform MOST jobs…you don’t need to be a genius to be a bartender, a waiter, a mechanic..
     
    IQ works equally well for all groups (indeed, that's a key fact demonstrating the validity of IQ tests).

    Blacks perform about as well as their IQs would predict (well, IQ tests are somewhat overpredictive for Blacks, in fact). It's just that the mean is lower, and hence, the fraction at the end qualified enough to be doctors, architects, or HBD'ers.


    you and most of the dissident right greatly underrate the power of behavioural conditioning, i.e., propaganda, which is after all, an environmental factor. Look at how brainwashed the liberals and conservatives are! That should be proof right there that environmental factors are a huge aspect of human behavior.
     
    Sure, but environmental effects seem to be a tricky business. They seem to have little effect on variation within a cohort, but a considerable effect between cohorts. This indicates it must be things that effect everybody at once. Technological change and the general societal incentive structure fit the bill.

    How do you explain the extreme rise of the average Irish IQ? A century’s worth of Flynn all in two decades?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    How do you explain the extreme rise of the average Irish IQ? A century’s worth of Flynn all in two decades?
     
    I don't believe Irish IQs have changed all that much. Still, HBD Chick was all over it.
  31. @Anonymous
    What are these "facts"?

    Has it been shown that the intelligence measured by IQ tests is due to specific genes that black Africans lack?

    Unlikely, otherwise how could there be Nigerians at the Math Olympiad winning multiple medals. Right?

    There may be evidence largely pointing in one direction, namely that under-representation of black Africans in the top percentiles and their over-representation in the bottom percentiles is due not to discrimination, environment, disease etc., but due to heredity, which leads to fewer gifted people among them and more retarded.

    I would even adopt it as my working hypothesis.

    Still, an explanation is required. Is the Gaussian distribution of IQ among blacks left-shifted? Can't be, otherwise there would be zero super-brights (150 IQ and up) among them. Is it a rubber band, distorted to lean left but with identical endpoints as among Europeans?

    Has it been shown that the intelligence measured by IQ tests is due to specific genes that black Africans lack?

    Well, there are these:

    Is there no population genetic ‘support’ for a racial hereditarian hypothesis? | Human Varieties

    and

    District-Level Variation in Continental Racial Admixture Predicts Outcomes in Mexico | Human Varieties

    and

    Racial Ancestry in the Americas. Part 1: National Genomic Racial Admixture: Estimates and Validation | Human Varieties

    Unlikely, otherwise how could there be Nigerians at the Math Olympiad winning multiple medals. Right?

    I’m not convinced that the Math Olympiad can be used as a reliable gauge of national intelligence. That said, the results aren’t totally out of the realm of what you’d expect:

    International Mathematical Olympiad – results

    There may be evidence largely pointing in one direction, namely that under-representation of black Africans in the top percentiles and their over-representation in the bottom percentiles is due not to discrimination, environment, disease etc., but due to heredity, which leads to fewer gifted people among them and more retarded.

    I would even adopt it as my working hypothesis.

    Pretty much.

    It looks like this, at least in the U.S.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    the IMO results for East Asians are better than what would be expected given the small mean difference of around 3 IQ points between europeans and east asians. This is interesting because for being successful at the IMO you really need to be gifted and learning probably has not such big effects on the very creative way of thinking you need to succeed. Concerning Nigeria one should not forget that in the year 2000 there were already 1.3 times as many births in Nigeria than in the USA (while in 1950 the USA had twice as many births as Nigeria )
    , @Anonymous
    I will look into your links (thanks), but I'm not sure you've understood what I'm asking.

    Regarding the Math Olympiad, I didn't suggest that they "can be used as a reliable gauge of national intelligence". Rather, I'm saying that if the ancestors of today's Europeans, subsequent to their exodus from Africa, developed a number of genes encoding for superior reasoning ability compared to the Africans left behind, then no Nigerian could hope to solve even a single problem in the Math Olympiad, let alone win several medals.

    Yet that is what has happened. How do you explain that?
  32. @Sean
    "The evolution of these racial differences are, in Harpending’s account, the driving force behind all of modern human history."

    I think Harpending actually makes a point about three generations of associative mating forming classes that have differences that exceed, as he puts it , 'what we used to call racial differences'. So he is actually saying the opposite of what the SPLC claim he is saying.

    "The Church can make only so many sanctions before more Galileos with their own telescopes see the real truth."

    But the Church did not mate associatively-
    http://ideas.time.com/2012/02/07/the-new-upper-class-and-the-real-reason-we-dislike-them/

    Charles Murray: Fifty years ago, the people who rose to the most influential positions overwhelmingly had Hank’s kind of background, thoroughly grounded in the American mainstream. Today, people of influence are characterized by college education, often from elite colleges. The men are married not to the girl next door but to highly educated women socialized at the same elite schools who are often as professionally successful as their husbands. They were admitted to this path by a combination of high IQ and personality strengths. They are often the children — and, increasingly, grandchildren — of the upper-middle class and have never known any other kind of life. [...] As adults, they have distinctive tastes and preferences and seek out enclaves of others who share them. Their culture incorporates little of the lifestyle or the popular culture of the rest of the nation; in fact, members of the new upper class increasingly look down on that mainstream lifestyle and culture. Meanwhile, their children are so sheltered from the rest of the nation that they barely know what life is like outside Georgetown, Scarsdale, Kenilworth or Atherton. If this divide continues to widen, it will completely destroy what has made America’s national civic culture exceptional: a fluid, mobile society where people from different backgrounds live side by side and come together for the common good.
     

    I think Harpending actually makes a point about three generations of associative mating forming classes that have differences that exceed, as he puts it , ‘what we used to call racial differences’. So he is actually saying the opposite of what the SPLC claim he is saying.

    That process doesn’t change racial differences, unless there was a lot of intermixing.

    I’m completely unworried about class stratification. Gregory Clark showed that this has been going for some time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    The SPLC say HH is emphasising racial differences but on my reading he isn't. What he said about the Amish proves it. That is associative mating enabling what looks like a caste to form within a population (within a race).

    "I’m completely unworried about class stratification. Gregory Clark showed that this has been going for some time"

    Murray seems to be talking about associative mating though not in those words. I think his point (which HH also mentioned) is that women at university marrying equally smart men is a phase shift in associative mating and caste formation. No ruling class has ever had such a accumulating cognitive edge. You think these people can be dismissed but they increasingly run things. You can't just start talking about race so brutally and expect a knowledge class of superior types to pay attention.

    Professor Harpending, and his students, will take the flak, not you. I do not believe the SPLC has demonstrated they have correct understanding what HH is saying.

  33. @BurplesonAFB
    How do you explain the extreme rise of the average Irish IQ? A century's worth of Flynn all in two decades?

    How do you explain the extreme rise of the average Irish IQ? A century’s worth of Flynn all in two decades?

    I don’t believe Irish IQs have changed all that much. Still, HBD Chick was all over it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "Still, HBD Chick was all over it."

    Was she, really? If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she's actually saying she can't find anything obviously wrong with the low '72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she'd trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science -- when is that not the case?) I'm not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.

    Were you referring to the bottom of her post where she suggests (to put it in her words) that the low scores were the result of brain drain? That is a large heap of dust to be sweeping under that particular rug, and even if her hunch is correct, the situation still seems puzzling.

  34. SPLC:”The evolution of these racial differences are, in Harpending’s account, the driving force behind all of modern human history.”
    Jayman:You don’t say? I did:

    Are you sure you are not playing into their hands with remarks like that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Are you sure you are not playing into their hands with remarks like that?
     
    Mega-aggressions, my friend, mega-aggressions.
  35. Dear Professor Harpending: Since you are an academic, I hope you will pardon me being academic as well.

    I take issue with your statement, “The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have…”

    The Industrial Revolution could not have happened in the year “zero’. There was no “Year Zero”. The year after 1 BC was 1 AD. This is why, for example, the first year of the 21st century was 2001, not 2000, a fact which causes some confusion to the innumerate.

    Read More
  36. @JayMan

    1) blacks ARE capable of doing most jobs…the value of IQ is overrated when it comes to how blacks perform MOST jobs…you don’t need to be a genius to be a bartender, a waiter, a mechanic..
     
    IQ works equally well for all groups (indeed, that's a key fact demonstrating the validity of IQ tests).

    Blacks perform about as well as their IQs would predict (well, IQ tests are somewhat overpredictive for Blacks, in fact). It's just that the mean is lower, and hence, the fraction at the end qualified enough to be doctors, architects, or HBD'ers.


    you and most of the dissident right greatly underrate the power of behavioural conditioning, i.e., propaganda, which is after all, an environmental factor. Look at how brainwashed the liberals and conservatives are! That should be proof right there that environmental factors are a huge aspect of human behavior.
     
    Sure, but environmental effects seem to be a tricky business. They seem to have little effect on variation within a cohort, but a considerable effect between cohorts. This indicates it must be things that effect everybody at once. Technological change and the general societal incentive structure fit the bill.

    Sure, but environmental effects seem to be a tricky business. They seem to have little effect on variation within a cohort, but a considerable effect between cohorts. This indicates it must be things that effect everybody at once. Technological change and the general societal incentive structure fit the bill.

    I think it must be things that effect everybody at once is largely correct, but I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion (i.e. environmental effects don’t matter within a cohort). I think it would be more accurate to say we can’t detect the environmental effects (which I agree are often smaller than the genetic effects) because there is too little variance in the environment within a cohort (with a greater variance between cohorts). This is especially true if there is a GxE interaction which results in a relatively small fraction of the population being most affected by the environment. A side note is I believe the G/E effect sizes vary depending on how much variance is present in each. Studies with uniform genotypes will likely give different heritability estimates from studies with uniform environments.

    Another way of saying this is that even if environmental effects are not detectable in observational studies there may be benefit to targeted intervention. My favorite example for this is PKU treatment. Visualize how observational studies would have seen this. The necessary intervention (minimizing phenylalanine intake) is difficult and unlikely to occur by chance so likely would have never been noticed/found.

    If I am misinterpreting you please clarify. Study references welcome ;-)

    P.S. Regarding breastfeeding vs. formula, I think it’s important to be aware of the actual formula content (which changes over time and is also variable between products).

    P.P.S. Very glad to see you on unz.com!

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    I think it must be things that effect everybody at once is largely correct, but I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion (i.e. environmental effects don’t matter within a cohort). I think it would be more accurate to say we can’t detect the environmental effects (which I agree are often smaller than the genetic effects)
     
    No. I meant what I said:

    A side note is I believe the G/E effect sizes vary depending on how much variance is present in each. Studies with uniform genotypes will likely give different heritability estimates from studies with uniform environments.
     
    In principle – but in practice this is turning out not to be the case. Large, nationally representative behavioral genetic samples still produce zero shared environment.

    Another way of saying this is that even if environmental effects are not detectable in observational studies there may be benefit to targeted intervention. My favorite example for this is PKU treatment.
     
    Few and far between, it appears.

    P.S. Regarding breastfeeding vs. formula, I think it’s important to be aware of the actual formula content (which changes over time and is also variable between products).
     
    Boomers aren't dumber than other generations. It think it matters none at all.

    P.P.S. Very glad to see you on unz.com!
     Good to be here! :)

    Environmental Hereditarianism


    This is especially true if there is a GxE interaction which results in a relatively small fraction of the population being most affected by the environment.
     
    Generally don't exist.
  37. @JayMan

    I think Harpending actually makes a point about three generations of associative mating forming classes that have differences that exceed, as he puts it , ‘what we used to call racial differences’. So he is actually saying the opposite of what the SPLC claim he is saying.
     
    That process doesn't change racial differences, unless there was a lot of intermixing.

    I'm completely unworried about class stratification. Gregory Clark showed that this has been going for some time.

    The SPLC say HH is emphasising racial differences but on my reading he isn’t. What he said about the Amish proves it. That is associative mating enabling what looks like a caste to form within a population (within a race).

    “I’m completely unworried about class stratification. Gregory Clark showed that this has been going for some time”

    Murray seems to be talking about associative mating though not in those words. I think his point (which HH also mentioned) is that women at university marrying equally smart men is a phase shift in associative mating and caste formation. No ruling class has ever had such a accumulating cognitive edge. You think these people can be dismissed but they increasingly run things. You can’t just start talking about race so brutally and expect a knowledge class of superior types to pay attention.

    Professor Harpending, and his students, will take the flak, not you. I do not believe the SPLC has demonstrated they have correct understanding what HH is saying.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    The SPLC say HH is emphasising racial differences but on my reading he isn’t. What he said about the Amish proves it. That is associative mating enabling what looks like a caste to form within a population (within a race).
     
    Ethnicities and races are qualitatively the same.

    No ruling class has ever had such a accumulating cognitive edge. You think these people can be dismissed but they increasingly run things. You can’t just start talking about race so brutally and expect a knowledge class of superior types to pay attention.
     
    Same old story, different year, my friend.
  38. @JayMan

    Has it been shown that the intelligence measured by IQ tests is due to specific genes that black Africans lack?
     
    Well, there are these:

    Is there no population genetic ‘support’ for a racial hereditarian hypothesis? | Human Varieties

    and

    District-Level Variation in Continental Racial Admixture Predicts Outcomes in Mexico | Human Varieties

    and

    Racial Ancestry in the Americas. Part 1: National Genomic Racial Admixture: Estimates and Validation | Human Varieties


    Unlikely, otherwise how could there be Nigerians at the Math Olympiad winning multiple medals. Right?
     
    I'm not convinced that the Math Olympiad can be used as a reliable gauge of national intelligence. That said, the results aren't totally out of the realm of what you'd expect:

    International Mathematical Olympiad - results


    There may be evidence largely pointing in one direction, namely that under-representation of black Africans in the top percentiles and their over-representation in the bottom percentiles is due not to discrimination, environment, disease etc., but due to heredity, which leads to fewer gifted people among them and more retarded.

    I would even adopt it as my working hypothesis.
     

    Pretty much.

    It looks like this, at least in the U.S.

    the IMO results for East Asians are better than what would be expected given the small mean difference of around 3 IQ points between europeans and east asians. This is interesting because for being successful at the IMO you really need to be gifted and learning probably has not such big effects on the very creative way of thinking you need to succeed. Concerning Nigeria one should not forget that in the year 2000 there were already 1.3 times as many births in Nigeria than in the USA (while in 1950 the USA had twice as many births as Nigeria )

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    the IMO results for East Asians are better than what would be expected given the small mean difference of around 3 IQ points between europeans and east asians.
     
    As I understand, the difference in math ability is quite bit larger.
  39. @fnn
    US Chamber of Commerce has adopted the cultmarx as its official ideology:

    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/08/28/common-core-approved-black-lives-matter-textbooks-for-middle-school/

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Jeb Bush and most of the establishment republican candidates support Common Core educational standards.
     

    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists. They are predatory globalists, they are after something different, this is why they support open borders as well.

    In a lot of ways the globalists and Chamber of Commerce types have a lot in common with HBD’ers. Both want to reshape humanity to their own ends.

    The globalist/free trade/open borders claque is more about turning the West into a giant 3rd world pest hole full of ignorant and docile laborers that are easily exploited for their corporations. Where they become a hereditary aristocracy answerable to no one.

    They are Orwell’s boot of the tyrant stomping on the face of humanity for eternity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn

    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists.
     
    They adopt radical egalitarianism as a legitimizing ideology. That's how they suck in the masses and get antifa retards to bust heads for them.
    , @Rifleman

    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists. They are predatory globalists, they are after something different, this is why they support open borders as well.
     
    Good luck trying to convince them of this.

    The stupidity and denial and resistance of the White male idiots and their fetish for the threat of "Cultural Marxism" NEVER ENDS!!!

    They crave it like a baby craves his bottle!

    The globalist/free trade/open borders claque is more about turning the West into a giant 3rd world pest hole full of ignorant and docile laborers that are easily exploited for their corporations. Where they become a hereditary aristocracy answerable to no one.

    They are Orwell’s boot of the tyrant stomping on the face of humanity for eternity.
     
    Plain for all to see and yet.................."CULTURAL MARXISM!!!!!"

    Right wing White male paranoids have a well earned reputation for stupidity.

    As I've written on here endlessly:

    "I’ve been trying to communicate this on these various sites for a while.

    Especially when some White male whatnot, commentators and writers, claims CULTURAL MARXISM!!!!! is on the loose and subverting the White race, Europe and America!

    These dopes seem to have gotten the idea from one of right wing White America’s favorite dopes Glenn Beck, I’m not sure. But even people who should know better like Pat Buchanan, Paul Gottfried and Stevarino have pandered to these guys with the Cultural marxism nonsense.

    I put it right up there with the”women hate Beta males and love bad boys and jerks” line that seem to make these White guys’ “‘ginas tingle”.

    It’s CULTURAL CAPITALISM that is running things.

    I could say it a million times and they WILL NOT get it.

    Cultural Capitalism wants a webbed global network of labor, consumption, resources, production, information/patents, money/credit/debt across ALL national borders. They want this to maximize profit margins for corporations and family trusts.

    Doesn’t matter whether it’s Fox News or the NYTimes. Republicans or Democrats. La Raza or the Chamber of Congress. The Bush family or the Clinton family. Same all over Europe.

    To them the nation state is an antiquated but for now necessary device for the development of laws and monetary policy. They have to work with it.

    But they are not too happy about it nor are they happy about the upstart peasants and lumpen bourgeoisie that want to cling to their guns and gods and communities and national identity.


    Except…………when it comes to Israel. But of course , that is a special case."
  40. @Sean

    SPLC:"The evolution of these racial differences are, in Harpending’s account, the driving force behind all of modern human history."
    Jayman:You don’t say? I did:
     
    Are you sure you are not playing into their hands with remarks like that?

    Are you sure you are not playing into their hands with remarks like that?

    Mega-aggressions, my friend, mega-aggressions.

    Read More
  41. @res

    Sure, but environmental effects seem to be a tricky business. They seem to have little effect on variation within a cohort, but a considerable effect between cohorts. This indicates it must be things that effect everybody at once. Technological change and the general societal incentive structure fit the bill.
     
    I think it must be things that effect everybody at once is largely correct, but I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion (i.e. environmental effects don't matter within a cohort). I think it would be more accurate to say we can't detect the environmental effects (which I agree are often smaller than the genetic effects) because there is too little variance in the environment within a cohort (with a greater variance between cohorts). This is especially true if there is a GxE interaction which results in a relatively small fraction of the population being most affected by the environment. A side note is I believe the G/E effect sizes vary depending on how much variance is present in each. Studies with uniform genotypes will likely give different heritability estimates from studies with uniform environments.

    Another way of saying this is that even if environmental effects are not detectable in observational studies there may be benefit to targeted intervention. My favorite example for this is PKU treatment. Visualize how observational studies would have seen this. The necessary intervention (minimizing phenylalanine intake) is difficult and unlikely to occur by chance so likely would have never been noticed/found.

    If I am misinterpreting you please clarify. Study references welcome ;-)

    P.S. Regarding breastfeeding vs. formula, I think it's important to be aware of the actual formula content (which changes over time and is also variable between products).

    P.P.S. Very glad to see you on unz.com!

    I think it must be things that effect everybody at once is largely correct, but I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion (i.e. environmental effects don’t matter within a cohort). I think it would be more accurate to say we can’t detect the environmental effects (which I agree are often smaller than the genetic effects)

    No. I meant what I said:

    A side note is I believe the G/E effect sizes vary depending on how much variance is present in each. Studies with uniform genotypes will likely give different heritability estimates from studies with uniform environments.

    In principle – but in practice this is turning out not to be the case. Large, nationally representative behavioral genetic samples still produce zero shared environment.

    Another way of saying this is that even if environmental effects are not detectable in observational studies there may be benefit to targeted intervention. My favorite example for this is PKU treatment.

    Few and far between, it appears.

    P.S. Regarding breastfeeding vs. formula, I think it’s important to be aware of the actual formula content (which changes over time and is also variable between products).

    Boomers aren’t dumber than other generations. It think it matters none at all.

    P.P.S. Very glad to see you on unz.com!

    Good to be here! :)

    Environmental Hereditarianism

    This is especially true if there is a GxE interaction which results in a relatively small fraction of the population being most affected by the environment.

    Generally don’t exist.

    Read More
  42. @Sean
    The SPLC say HH is emphasising racial differences but on my reading he isn't. What he said about the Amish proves it. That is associative mating enabling what looks like a caste to form within a population (within a race).

    "I’m completely unworried about class stratification. Gregory Clark showed that this has been going for some time"

    Murray seems to be talking about associative mating though not in those words. I think his point (which HH also mentioned) is that women at university marrying equally smart men is a phase shift in associative mating and caste formation. No ruling class has ever had such a accumulating cognitive edge. You think these people can be dismissed but they increasingly run things. You can't just start talking about race so brutally and expect a knowledge class of superior types to pay attention.

    Professor Harpending, and his students, will take the flak, not you. I do not believe the SPLC has demonstrated they have correct understanding what HH is saying.

    The SPLC say HH is emphasising racial differences but on my reading he isn’t. What he said about the Amish proves it. That is associative mating enabling what looks like a caste to form within a population (within a race).

    Ethnicities and races are qualitatively the same.

    No ruling class has ever had such a accumulating cognitive edge. You think these people can be dismissed but they increasingly run things. You can’t just start talking about race so brutally and expect a knowledge class of superior types to pay attention.

    Same old story, different year, my friend.

    Read More
  43. @Erik Sieven
    the IMO results for East Asians are better than what would be expected given the small mean difference of around 3 IQ points between europeans and east asians. This is interesting because for being successful at the IMO you really need to be gifted and learning probably has not such big effects on the very creative way of thinking you need to succeed. Concerning Nigeria one should not forget that in the year 2000 there were already 1.3 times as many births in Nigeria than in the USA (while in 1950 the USA had twice as many births as Nigeria )

    the IMO results for East Asians are better than what would be expected given the small mean difference of around 3 IQ points between europeans and east asians.

    As I understand, the difference in math ability is quite bit larger.

    Read More
  44. I wonder if the work of HBDers is making any difference. Are HBDers just an internet clique or are they actually making headway against the old ideology that shouted RACIST at anyone who asks the questions Henry Harpending asks.

    I genuinely don’t know, I can’t see the forest through the trees. My best guess is it is a fight worth fighting but real change comes only generationally, that people rarely change their opinions with age. That the next generation of thinking people shall be slightly different because they grew up with quality books on this sweeping subject like “The 10,000 Year Explosion.” and like “A Farewell to Alms.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    There are problems.

    Many racists find that HBD fits right into what they already believe. Fish in water, but that is probably an understatement.

    Some HBD people are racists.

    The HBD people who are not racists and would like to separate themselves from the ones who are racists can't figure out how to do that.

    A lot of HBD people don't worry about any separation at all because they are free-thinkers, let ideas compete, no censorship, let a thousand flowers bloom, the science will sort it out,etc.

    , @MarkinLA
    I wonder if the work of HBDers is making any difference.

    We have been beating our collective heads against the wall for 50 years embracing any dubious theory but HBD to close the black/white gap. At some point reality has to set in with all the money we have wasted and realize that we won't fix it and need an industrial policy to make the best use of the people we have warts and all.
  45. @JayMan

    The SPLC say HH is emphasising racial differences but on my reading he isn’t. What he said about the Amish proves it. That is associative mating enabling what looks like a caste to form within a population (within a race).
     
    Ethnicities and races are qualitatively the same.

    No ruling class has ever had such a accumulating cognitive edge. You think these people can be dismissed but they increasingly run things. You can’t just start talking about race so brutally and expect a knowledge class of superior types to pay attention.
     
    Same old story, different year, my friend.

    Professor Harpending seems less dogmatic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Professor Harpending seems less dogmatic.
     
    Read around here for a little while. It's data, not dogma.
  46. @White Guy In Japan
    He made the SPLC list? Congrats! Somebody buy him a drink.

    Right, that’s exactly what they should do! And make it as public as possible. Folks need to get together and thumb their noses, a la Trump, at this stuff, because it reAlly is so laughable.

    Read More
  47. “The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have, the Romans certainly could have done it, is that a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe.”

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man – Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.

    The place where it happened does have to do with evolution. Surviving in cold climates requires thinking, industriousness, and cooperation — all intellectual traits. There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man – Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.
     
    Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it's not, where did Isaac Newton come from?
    , @HA
    "There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years."

    There was apparently room enough for berserkers and seal-hunting igloo dwellers for a good portion of those millennia, and neither group cared all that much for intellectual pursuits (in comparison with contemporaneous Hittites, Egyptians, Sumerians, etc.).

    , @harpend
    There could easily have been an industrial revolution in Roman times. Take a look at this set of Roman water wheels in Syria at

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCNKLy_Diz8cCFQeWiAod0sIHLA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdepositphotos.com%2F3557876%2Fstock-photo-aqueduct-with-water-wheel-in.html&ei=G2ziVZKSD4esogTShZ_gAg&psig=AFQjCNFidSGp0C2Y4xSTqbxzApx9K-0WnA&ust=1440988436271936

    BTW they have been maintained and repaired by the Syrian government. They almost certainly are not the original wood.
  48. @Sean
    Professor Harpending seems less dogmatic.

    Professor Harpending seems less dogmatic.

    Read around here for a little while. It’s data, not dogma.

    Read More
  49. similar theories of vague and invisible forces that are oppressing people

    surely not unique to Africans.

    Isn’t the most absorbing Russian literature a meld of ancient Russian folk ways and more enlightened understandings?

    Is literature genetically determined?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Isn’t the most absorbing Russian literature a meld of ancient Russian folk ways and more enlightened understandings?

    Is literature genetically determined?
     

    Where does literature come from?
  50. @Dave Chamberlin
    I wonder if the work of HBDers is making any difference. Are HBDers just an internet clique or are they actually making headway against the old ideology that shouted RACIST at anyone who asks the questions Henry Harpending asks.

    I genuinely don't know, I can't see the forest through the trees. My best guess is it is a fight worth fighting but real change comes only generationally, that people rarely change their opinions with age. That the next generation of thinking people shall be slightly different because they grew up with quality books on this sweeping subject like "The 10,000 Year Explosion." and like "A Farewell to Alms."

    There are problems.

    Many racists find that HBD fits right into what they already believe. Fish in water, but that is probably an understatement.

    Some HBD people are racists.

    The HBD people who are not racists and would like to separate themselves from the ones who are racists can’t figure out how to do that.

    A lot of HBD people don’t worry about any separation at all because they are free-thinkers, let ideas compete, no censorship, let a thousand flowers bloom, the science will sort it out,etc.

    Read More
  51. @Art
    “The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have, the Romans certainly could have done it, is that a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe.”

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man - Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.

    The place where it happened does have to do with evolution. Surviving in cold climates requires thinking, industriousness, and cooperation --- all intellectual traits. There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years.

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man – Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.

    Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it’s not, where did Isaac Newton come from?

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it’s not, where did Isaac Newton come from?"

    I would agree with you that people like Newton do not spring up without centuries of preparation, but unraveling the cultural shifts from the genetic ones is a chicken/egg problem. Steve Sailer has discussed the women of Malcolm Gladwell's family as a kind of parable: some chose nerdy professorial types for husbands, while some chose partners with an earthier appeal (so to speak). As a result, some had children who drifted up in the world, and some had children who drifted down. Guess in which of those two groups of women Malcolm's mother was? The fact that genetics was an essential plot driver in that parable doesn't really change it all that much.

    Likewise, the fact that there is a genetic component to being learned and intellectual doesn't change the fact that at some specific junctures in the past someone with the power to choose decided that he or she would confer wealth and reproductive success to those who were learned, as opposed to simply being good at hacking others to bits. Perhaps that was a ruler doling out titles and knighthoods, or perhaps it was a woman (or more likely, someone in her family) choosing a mate for her (and vice versa with regard to the selection of wives). And of course, that meant the children of those people were more genetically likely to confer such favors in a similar fashion, because those choices likewise have an associated heritability, so that a kind of virtuous cycle was thereby added on top of the drift, but again, disentangling the genetics from the culture is difficult, if not impossible.

    , @Art
    “Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it’s not, where did Isaac Newton come from?”

    Please – in the European culture of the 1700’s and 1800’s everyone with a brain was a Newtonian – in science and philosophy.

    In intellect circles the person that starts something new – is given credit for that something by naming it after him.

    Did you get to my second paragraph – it gives credit to cold Northern Europe for its gradual evolutionary intellectual ascendancy.
    , @rod1963
    James Watt was the principal impetuous for the industrial revolution with the invention of the steam engine.

    No steam engine no industrial revolution.

    Lets not forget Bessemer either.

    Both could be considered the end products of a stable culture that allowed such men to flourish and engage in the pursuits they wished. Said culture also provided the necessary infrastructure for them to invent what they did and spread it throughout the West.

    In others eras say Roman or Athenian they would not have been able to accomplish what they did.
  52. @SolontoCroesus

    similar theories of vague and invisible forces that are oppressing people
     
    surely not unique to Africans.

    Isn't the most absorbing Russian literature a meld of ancient Russian folk ways and more enlightened understandings?

    Is literature genetically determined?

    Isn’t the most absorbing Russian literature a meld of ancient Russian folk ways and more enlightened understandings?

    Is literature genetically determined?

    Where does literature come from?

    Read More
  53. @JayMan

    How do you explain the extreme rise of the average Irish IQ? A century’s worth of Flynn all in two decades?
     
    I don't believe Irish IQs have changed all that much. Still, HBD Chick was all over it.

    “Still, HBD Chick was all over it.”

    Was she, really? If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she’s actually saying she can’t find anything obviously wrong with the low ’72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she’d trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science — when is that not the case?) I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.

    Were you referring to the bottom of her post where she suggests (to put it in her words) that the low scores were the result of brain drain? That is a large heap of dust to be sweeping under that particular rug, and even if her hunch is correct, the situation still seems puzzling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.
     
    1. Don't ever get too caught up in the results of one study.
    2. If something doesn't make sense, odds are it's wrong.

    That one result is all we have to go on for the supposedly low Irish IQ of the time. I'm not going to be too worried about it.

    , @Ron Unz

    If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she’s actually saying she can’t find anything obviously wrong with the low ’72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she’d trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science — when is that not the case?) I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.
     
    Yes, when I originally came out with my big Race/IQ article and follow-up series a couple of years ago, "HBD*Chick" was one of my most energetic critics, with a long sequences of agitated posts. But when the dust cleared, I believe that my analysis was proven correct in virtually every individual case and particular.

    The ultimate story regarding that extremely large Irish IQ study turned out to be particularly ironic. About six months after the heated dispute regarding the study's contested validity had died down, she (or maybe it's "he") dropped me a note that the original academic author had learned of the dispute, gotten in touch, and confirmed the extreme precision of the methodology:

    http://www.ronunz.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/IrishIQ-HBDChick.pdf

    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere. So if we know anything at all about IQ anywhere in the history of the world, it's that the Flynn-adjusted Irish IQ was 87(!) in 1972.

    Here's my short 2013 column in which I mentioned this along with a couple of other amusing codas:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-revised/

    And for those so interested, here's a link to my original article plus the 20,000 words of follow-up columns, summarizing the very long and contentious debate:

    http://www.unz.com/author/ron-unz/topic/race-iq/?ItemOrder=ASC
  54. @JayMan

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man – Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.
     
    Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it's not, where did Isaac Newton come from?

    “Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it’s not, where did Isaac Newton come from?”

    I would agree with you that people like Newton do not spring up without centuries of preparation, but unraveling the cultural shifts from the genetic ones is a chicken/egg problem. Steve Sailer has discussed the women of Malcolm Gladwell’s family as a kind of parable: some chose nerdy professorial types for husbands, while some chose partners with an earthier appeal (so to speak). As a result, some had children who drifted up in the world, and some had children who drifted down. Guess in which of those two groups of women Malcolm’s mother was? The fact that genetics was an essential plot driver in that parable doesn’t really change it all that much.

    Likewise, the fact that there is a genetic component to being learned and intellectual doesn’t change the fact that at some specific junctures in the past someone with the power to choose decided that he or she would confer wealth and reproductive success to those who were learned, as opposed to simply being good at hacking others to bits. Perhaps that was a ruler doling out titles and knighthoods, or perhaps it was a woman (or more likely, someone in her family) choosing a mate for her (and vice versa with regard to the selection of wives). And of course, that meant the children of those people were more genetically likely to confer such favors in a similar fashion, because those choices likewise have an associated heritability, so that a kind of virtuous cycle was thereby added on top of the drift, but again, disentangling the genetics from the culture is difficult, if not impossible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    I would agree with you that people like Newton do not spring up without centuries of preparation, but unraveling the cultural shifts from the genetic ones is a chicken/egg problem.
     
    In a vacuum it would be. But that's not the case. See:

    The Rise of Universalism


    Likewise, the fact that there is a genetic component to being learned and intellectual doesn’t change the fact that at some specific junctures in the past someone with the power to choose decided that he or she would confer wealth and reproductive success to those who were learned, as opposed to simply being good at hacking others to bits.
     
    Where do decisions come from?

    Random events happen, but the world is a bit more deterministic than you're giving it credit for.


    but again, disentangling the genetics from the culture is difficult, if not impossible.
     
    Where does culture come from? (HBD Chick's question.)
  55. @Art
    “The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have, the Romans certainly could have done it, is that a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe.”

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man - Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.

    The place where it happened does have to do with evolution. Surviving in cold climates requires thinking, industriousness, and cooperation --- all intellectual traits. There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years.

    “There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years.”

    There was apparently room enough for berserkers and seal-hunting igloo dwellers for a good portion of those millennia, and neither group cared all that much for intellectual pursuits (in comparison with contemporaneous Hittites, Egyptians, Sumerians, etc.).

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    There was apparently room enough for berserkers and seal-hunting igloo dwellers for a good portion of those millennia, and neither group cared all that much for intellectual pursuits (in comparison with contemporaneous Hittites, Egyptians, Sumerians, etc.).
     
    Farming, and hence Clark-Unz selection, appears to be prerequisite for high-civilization (at least farming for low-latitude civilizations).

    See:

    Predictions on the Worldwide Distribution of Personality

    , @Sean
    According to Robin Dunbar brothers of berserkers didn't get murdered very often. No one wanted to mess with a psycho. here. Killing and revenge attacks were far from rare among the Inuit. It only pays to be harmless in a peaceful environment. So the idea that "sociopathy (and “hysteria”) are or have been adaptive traits in men and women respectively in some times and places is relevant.
  56. @JayMan

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man – Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.
     
    Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it's not, where did Isaac Newton come from?

    “Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it’s not, where did Isaac Newton come from?”

    Please – in the European culture of the 1700’s and 1800’s everyone with a brain was a Newtonian – in science and philosophy.

    In intellect circles the person that starts something new – is given credit for that something by naming it after him.

    Did you get to my second paragraph – it gives credit to cold Northern Europe for its gradual evolutionary intellectual ascendancy.

    Read More
  57. I’m really shocked they have only found that 100 genes explain only 5% of iq. I get tthe sense we are missing something really important. There’s only 20k genes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    I’m really shocked they have only found that 100 genes explain only 5% of iq. I get tthe sense we are missing something really important. There’s only 20k genes.
     
    84% of all genes are expressed in the brain.
  58. Clark argues that the wealthy achieved their wealth by virtue of superior qualities like peacefulness,

    Peaceful? Puh-lease, the British empire like the latter American one is flush with violence. And not just random violence(that too), but highly organized, industrialized, state sanctioned(with most of the entire population behind you) violence. IRAN is NEXT!

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Peaceful? Puh-lease, the British empire like the latter American one is flush with violence. And not just random violence(that too), but highly organized, industrialized, state sanctioned(with most of the entire population behind you) violence.
     
    That's just it: there's a big difference between interpersonal violence and organized, state-directed violence. See:

    Western Europe, state formation, and genetic pacification - The Unz Review

  59. @Dave Chamberlin
    I wonder if the work of HBDers is making any difference. Are HBDers just an internet clique or are they actually making headway against the old ideology that shouted RACIST at anyone who asks the questions Henry Harpending asks.

    I genuinely don't know, I can't see the forest through the trees. My best guess is it is a fight worth fighting but real change comes only generationally, that people rarely change their opinions with age. That the next generation of thinking people shall be slightly different because they grew up with quality books on this sweeping subject like "The 10,000 Year Explosion." and like "A Farewell to Alms."

    I wonder if the work of HBDers is making any difference.

    We have been beating our collective heads against the wall for 50 years embracing any dubious theory but HBD to close the black/white gap. At some point reality has to set in with all the money we have wasted and realize that we won’t fix it and need an industrial policy to make the best use of the people we have warts and all.

    Read More
  60. @HA
    "Still, HBD Chick was all over it."

    Was she, really? If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she's actually saying she can't find anything obviously wrong with the low '72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she'd trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science -- when is that not the case?) I'm not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.

    Were you referring to the bottom of her post where she suggests (to put it in her words) that the low scores were the result of brain drain? That is a large heap of dust to be sweeping under that particular rug, and even if her hunch is correct, the situation still seems puzzling.

    I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.

    1. Don’t ever get too caught up in the results of one study.
    2. If something doesn’t make sense, odds are it’s wrong.

    That one result is all we have to go on for the supposedly low Irish IQ of the time. I’m not going to be too worried about it.

    Read More
  61. @HA
    "Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it’s not, where did Isaac Newton come from?"

    I would agree with you that people like Newton do not spring up without centuries of preparation, but unraveling the cultural shifts from the genetic ones is a chicken/egg problem. Steve Sailer has discussed the women of Malcolm Gladwell's family as a kind of parable: some chose nerdy professorial types for husbands, while some chose partners with an earthier appeal (so to speak). As a result, some had children who drifted up in the world, and some had children who drifted down. Guess in which of those two groups of women Malcolm's mother was? The fact that genetics was an essential plot driver in that parable doesn't really change it all that much.

    Likewise, the fact that there is a genetic component to being learned and intellectual doesn't change the fact that at some specific junctures in the past someone with the power to choose decided that he or she would confer wealth and reproductive success to those who were learned, as opposed to simply being good at hacking others to bits. Perhaps that was a ruler doling out titles and knighthoods, or perhaps it was a woman (or more likely, someone in her family) choosing a mate for her (and vice versa with regard to the selection of wives). And of course, that meant the children of those people were more genetically likely to confer such favors in a similar fashion, because those choices likewise have an associated heritability, so that a kind of virtuous cycle was thereby added on top of the drift, but again, disentangling the genetics from the culture is difficult, if not impossible.

    I would agree with you that people like Newton do not spring up without centuries of preparation, but unraveling the cultural shifts from the genetic ones is a chicken/egg problem.

    In a vacuum it would be. But that’s not the case. See:

    The Rise of Universalism

    Likewise, the fact that there is a genetic component to being learned and intellectual doesn’t change the fact that at some specific junctures in the past someone with the power to choose decided that he or she would confer wealth and reproductive success to those who were learned, as opposed to simply being good at hacking others to bits.

    Where do decisions come from?

    Random events happen, but the world is a bit more deterministic than you’re giving it credit for.

    but again, disentangling the genetics from the culture is difficult, if not impossible.

    Where does culture come from? (HBD Chick’s question.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "Where do decisions come from?...Where does culture come from? (HBD Chick’s question.)"

    With respect to the post on the Rise of Universalism, I wasn't making any argument related to that, at least not directly. Rather, in the matter of the above two questions about decisions and culture, I was saying that to the extent that one allows for any moral agency whatsoever (and I realize many don't), it is perfectly valid to assume that decisions and culture are indeed partially influenced by decisions that people make, as exemplified in the somewhat idealized tale of the Gladwell matrons. Nothing Clark or Harpending have mentioned disproves that, as far as I can tell. They just make the argument that the additively heritable contribution is larger in magnitude than whatever can be ascribed to the individual. If that's the case, fine, but that is hardly a revolutionary notion, except perhaps to the most diehard blank-slate and pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps advocates. Most of all of us already believed that in the grand scheme of things, the game is rigged to a significant extent. Now, if that 60-80% number Harpending mentioned ever gets bumped up to 100%, I'll have to revise my outlook, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

    And yes, I might add, the net effect of all those collective decisions that prior generations of Europeans and others made was no doubt amplified through the heritability/success feedback loop I and others noted that first allowed knowledge and learning (as we've come to regard those terms) to enhance reproductive success, but someone (or something, if you insist) did make those choices at some point to set up that feedback loop. Again, people are free to discount the notion of choice and free will (excuse the logical quandary in that statement), but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.

  62. @rod1963
    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists. They are predatory globalists, they are after something different, this is why they support open borders as well.

    In a lot of ways the globalists and Chamber of Commerce types have a lot in common with HBD'ers. Both want to reshape humanity to their own ends.

    The globalist/free trade/open borders claque is more about turning the West into a giant 3rd world pest hole full of ignorant and docile laborers that are easily exploited for their corporations. Where they become a hereditary aristocracy answerable to no one.

    They are Orwell's boot of the tyrant stomping on the face of humanity for eternity.

    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists.

    They adopt radical egalitarianism as a legitimizing ideology. That’s how they suck in the masses and get antifa retards to bust heads for them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @rod1963
    I agree, your explanation makes a lot of sense. They just switch ideologies to con the people(I don't think they have ideology of their own outside of a lust for power and wealth and understanding the mechanisms to achieve them). And yeah they're quite successful at it. Not only do they get the antifa thugs to work for them, but the libertarian/corporate worshiping whites on the other side.
  63. @HA
    "There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years."

    There was apparently room enough for berserkers and seal-hunting igloo dwellers for a good portion of those millennia, and neither group cared all that much for intellectual pursuits (in comparison with contemporaneous Hittites, Egyptians, Sumerians, etc.).

    There was apparently room enough for berserkers and seal-hunting igloo dwellers for a good portion of those millennia, and neither group cared all that much for intellectual pursuits (in comparison with contemporaneous Hittites, Egyptians, Sumerians, etc.).

    Farming, and hence Clark-Unz selection, appears to be prerequisite for high-civilization (at least farming for low-latitude civilizations).

    See:

    Predictions on the Worldwide Distribution of Personality

    Read More
  64. @Eric
    I'm really shocked they have only found that 100 genes explain only 5% of iq. I get tthe sense we are missing something really important. There's only 20k genes.

    I’m really shocked they have only found that 100 genes explain only 5% of iq. I get tthe sense we are missing something really important. There’s only 20k genes.

    84% of all genes are expressed in the brain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    This reply to Jay Man seems to have got misplaced so I'll try to find a workaround.

    You will no doubt agree that there is often a problem of interpretation when people quote percentages (right down to making one wonder whether the reduction of say 5 per cent means 20 per cent becomes 15 per cent or 18 per cent...). I find it a bit difficult to be sure I understand all the implications of such statements as that heredity explains 60 per cents of the variance in IQ - let alone remembering what the difference is if it is narrow sense heredity or broad. Any elucidation so that I would be prepared with answers to a range of "so that means that, if etc..." questions would be greatly welcomed. But, in the immediate context, what I am seeking is elaboration of the implications of "100 genes explain [only] 5 per cent of IQ".
    Does that mean that, if you blocked the expression of those 100 genes what would have been an IQ of 100 would be an IQ of 95 and that 160 would become 152? or what?
  65. @Biff

    Clark argues that the wealthy achieved their wealth by virtue of superior qualities like peacefulness,
     
    Peaceful? Puh-lease, the British empire like the latter American one is flush with violence. And not just random violence(that too), but highly organized, industrialized, state sanctioned(with most of the entire population behind you) violence. IRAN is NEXT!

    Peaceful? Puh-lease, the British empire like the latter American one is flush with violence. And not just random violence(that too), but highly organized, industrialized, state sanctioned(with most of the entire population behind you) violence.

    That’s just it: there’s a big difference between interpersonal violence and organized, state-directed violence. See:

    Western Europe, state formation, and genetic pacification – The Unz Review

    Read More
    • Replies: @Biff
    Did people become more pacified because the State took over and monopolized the violence?
  66. @HA
    "Still, HBD Chick was all over it."

    Was she, really? If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she's actually saying she can't find anything obviously wrong with the low '72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she'd trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science -- when is that not the case?) I'm not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.

    Were you referring to the bottom of her post where she suggests (to put it in her words) that the low scores were the result of brain drain? That is a large heap of dust to be sweeping under that particular rug, and even if her hunch is correct, the situation still seems puzzling.

    If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she’s actually saying she can’t find anything obviously wrong with the low ’72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she’d trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science — when is that not the case?) I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.

    Yes, when I originally came out with my big Race/IQ article and follow-up series a couple of years ago, “HBD*Chick” was one of my most energetic critics, with a long sequences of agitated posts. But when the dust cleared, I believe that my analysis was proven correct in virtually every individual case and particular.

    The ultimate story regarding that extremely large Irish IQ study turned out to be particularly ironic. About six months after the heated dispute regarding the study’s contested validity had died down, she (or maybe it’s “he”) dropped me a note that the original academic author had learned of the dispute, gotten in touch, and confirmed the extreme precision of the methodology:

    http://www.ronunz.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/IrishIQ-HBDChick.pdf

    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere. So if we know anything at all about IQ anywhere in the history of the world, it’s that the Flynn-adjusted Irish IQ was 87(!) in 1972.

    Here’s my short 2013 column in which I mentioned this along with a couple of other amusing codas:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-revised/

    And for those so interested, here’s a link to my original article plus the 20,000 words of follow-up columns, summarizing the very long and contentious debate:

    http://www.unz.com/author/ron-unz/topic/race-iq/?ItemOrder=ASC

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pure and Easy
    What is the current IQ of the Irish? Have there been any recent studies?
    , @jeppo
    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere.

    So there's no way this test could have been a statistical outlier, despite its size and scrupulousness? Because Lynn and Vanhanen's 2012 adjusted estimate for Irish IQ was 95 (a rise of 8 points, or more than half a standard deviation in 40 years), and Rindermann's 2007 estimate was 98 (a rise of 11 points, or more than two-thirds of a standard deviation in 35 years).

    http://jakubmarian.com/average-iq-in-europe-by-country-map/

    On the 2012 PISA tests, Irish students finished 20th in math (tied with Slovenia), 14th in science (tied with the Netherlands), and 7th in reading (tied with Canada). On the 2011 TIMSS tests, Irish 4th graders finished 17th in math (one point behind Germany), and 22nd in science (one point behind Northern Ireland).

    The Irish students scored above average in all five categories on these two tests, roughly comparable to the results of other Northwest European nations. Considering that the average IQ of Northwest Europeans is approximately 100, there's no reason to believe that the average Irish IQ is much different from that number.

    So if we're to take that 1972 IQ test as gospel, where the Irish scored a paltry 87, then this is truly an astonishing development. Splitting the difference between Lynn & Vanhanen, Rindermann, PISA and TIMSS, let's say that Ireland now has an average IQ of 97. That's a gain of 10 points, or two-thirds of a standard deviation in just four decades, which leads to two important questions:

    1) How did this happen? Were the Irish of 1972 malnourished or vitamin-deficient in some way that led to such a feeble intelligence? Was there some debilitating illness retarding mental development sweeping through Ireland up to that time? What has happened there in the last forty years that has led to such a dramatic rise in average IQ?

    2) Has something like this ever happened anywhere else? Is there any other country where average intelligence has risen so sharply and quickly? La Griffe du Lion and Steve Sailer call the one standard deviation gap in intelligence between whites and blacks the Fundamental Constant of Sociology. It hasn't budged since IQ testing began a century ago. Yet the Irish have miraculously jumped from African American levels of intelligence to European levels in a mere four decades. Allegedly.

    Occam's Razor would suggest that Irish IQ hasn't changed that radically in the past forty years, and that the 1972 study--as scrupulous as it may have been--was an outlier. Irish intelligence then was probably much like it is now: slightly below that of the British but pretty close. More like an IQ of 97 rather than 87.
    , @BubbaJoe
    Dear Ron,

    1. The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.

    2. I've read through the controversy, but I haven't seen anyone yet prove something of vital importance to the debate: the average IQ of the Irish who left. The assumption is that Irish IQ was low because of a prolonged brain drain. What proof is there that those who left were smarter than those who stayed? It's flattering to Irish Americans, surely, but the fact is Ireland is a great place to be if you're smart, well connected, and well off. One could just as easily argue the poorer (and thus less intelligent?) had greater cause to leave. Indeed, the famine Irish, at least, were largely from the poorer West (also the most native Gaelic). This cohort forms the bulk of the Irish American community. Still, even excluding the Famine, the areas of Ireland which had (have) the highest emigration levels are in the west and southwest.
    As genetic data show an East-West divide within Ireland, and as it is argued that the former (being more Anglo/Norman) is more intelligent than the latter (being more Gaelic), perhaps due to earlier rates of outbreeding, it doesn't make sense that the less intelligent Irish in Ireland became more intelligent abroad than the more intelligent Irish at home.
    Whether Irish IQ increased dramatically, the case that the halting of the brain drain caused that increase is dubious at best.
  67. “I’ve never seen an African with a hobby. They’re different.”

    This is of course bullsh*t. I lived in Africa for three years, in a mostly peasant and fishing community: I knew plenty of people who had hobbies. This is a pitch-perfect example of HBD people shooting themselves in the foot by making outrageous, exaggerated, and clearly falsifiable claims (almost on par with James Watson’s remarks about African employees).

    To put my cards on the table, I’m a working biologist, and though my politics tend far left, I’m strongly hereditarian when it comes to esplaining IQ and personality differences. (I like to call myself a neoreactionary communist, drawing left-wing conclusions from right wing premises). And I’m agnostic on the broader question of whether racial differences in IQ are due to genetic factors or something else (and quite hostile to cultural liberalism in general). That having been said, that one of the supposed leading lights of HBD would make such a statistically sloppy and easily falsified remark doesn’t exactly help your ‘movement’, to say the least.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen

    almost on par with James Watson’s remarks about African employees
     
    I use the reaction to this statement as a mental shibboleth. Although a lot of them seem to be operating from the right side of the curve, I am not sure how many of the HBDers understand what that remark indicates about his thinking and the flaw therein.

    I am looking forward to reading your blog.
    , @harpend
    My comment was about an anecdotal observation that I found interesting. It would be nice to have more data, in this case informative anecdotes even. I have no particular attachment to this particular "hypothesis".

    Many of the "hbd crew" that I know have little or no interest in the politics of the matters. Human biological diversity is interesting enough without its hangers-on ever vigilant for symptoms of incorrect thought. (BTW I am not slamming you with this remark.)
    , @candid_observer
    Out of curiosity, what were some of the hobbies you observed among Africans?
  68. @Big Bill

    Our [African] employees were so adamant to show me the truth that they pooled their money so they could take me to the local witch doctor, who would turn me into a frog. ‘Of course he can do that, it is easy for them to do, even to white people
     
    A Brit columnist from Kenya writing in The Spectator several years ago showed that secret ballots, a fundamental part of Western democracy were impossible in Africa.

    He discussed an upcoming election in Kenya with Western - educated Negro engineers from Kenya. They explained that a witch-doctor candidate would win. The witch-doctor could make himself invisible, fly through the air, and lurk unseen looking over the shoulders of everyone casting a vote in a voting booth.

    Since the witch-doctor threatened to curse those who voted against him, it was too dangerous to vote for anyone else.

    And ours is called diebold

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

    Read More
  69. @rod1963
    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists. They are predatory globalists, they are after something different, this is why they support open borders as well.

    In a lot of ways the globalists and Chamber of Commerce types have a lot in common with HBD'ers. Both want to reshape humanity to their own ends.

    The globalist/free trade/open borders claque is more about turning the West into a giant 3rd world pest hole full of ignorant and docile laborers that are easily exploited for their corporations. Where they become a hereditary aristocracy answerable to no one.

    They are Orwell's boot of the tyrant stomping on the face of humanity for eternity.

    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists. They are predatory globalists, they are after something different, this is why they support open borders as well.

    Good luck trying to convince them of this.

    The stupidity and denial and resistance of the White male idiots and their fetish for the threat of “Cultural Marxism” NEVER ENDS!!!

    They crave it like a baby craves his bottle!

    The globalist/free trade/open borders claque is more about turning the West into a giant 3rd world pest hole full of ignorant and docile laborers that are easily exploited for their corporations. Where they become a hereditary aristocracy answerable to no one.

    They are Orwell’s boot of the tyrant stomping on the face of humanity for eternity.

    Plain for all to see and yet………………”CULTURAL MARXISM!!!!!”

    Right wing White male paranoids have a well earned reputation for stupidity.

    As I’ve written on here endlessly:

    “I’ve been trying to communicate this on these various sites for a while.

    Especially when some White male whatnot, commentators and writers, claims CULTURAL MARXISM!!!!! is on the loose and subverting the White race, Europe and America!

    These dopes seem to have gotten the idea from one of right wing White America’s favorite dopes Glenn Beck, I’m not sure. But even people who should know better like Pat Buchanan, Paul Gottfried and Stevarino have pandered to these guys with the Cultural marxism nonsense.

    I put it right up there with the”women hate Beta males and love bad boys and jerks” line that seem to make these White guys’ “‘ginas tingle”.

    It’s CULTURAL CAPITALISM that is running things.

    I could say it a million times and they WILL NOT get it.

    Cultural Capitalism wants a webbed global network of labor, consumption, resources, production, information/patents, money/credit/debt across ALL national borders. They want this to maximize profit margins for corporations and family trusts.

    Doesn’t matter whether it’s Fox News or the NYTimes. Republicans or Democrats. La Raza or the Chamber of Congress. The Bush family or the Clinton family. Same all over Europe.

    To them the nation state is an antiquated but for now necessary device for the development of laws and monetary policy. They have to work with it.

    But they are not too happy about it nor are they happy about the upstart peasants and lumpen bourgeoisie that want to cling to their guns and gods and communities and national identity.

    Except…………when it comes to Israel. But of course , that is a special case.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Franklin
    That is mighty white supremacist of you to say all that wisdom.
  70. @JayMan

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man – Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.
     
    Even if this was true (Newton alone was responsible), which it's not, where did Isaac Newton come from?

    James Watt was the principal impetuous for the industrial revolution with the invention of the steam engine.

    No steam engine no industrial revolution.

    Lets not forget Bessemer either.

    Both could be considered the end products of a stable culture that allowed such men to flourish and engage in the pursuits they wished. Said culture also provided the necessary infrastructure for them to invent what they did and spread it throughout the West.

    In others eras say Roman or Athenian they would not have been able to accomplish what they did.

    Read More
  71. @Ron Unz

    If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she’s actually saying she can’t find anything obviously wrong with the low ’72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she’d trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science — when is that not the case?) I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.
     
    Yes, when I originally came out with my big Race/IQ article and follow-up series a couple of years ago, "HBD*Chick" was one of my most energetic critics, with a long sequences of agitated posts. But when the dust cleared, I believe that my analysis was proven correct in virtually every individual case and particular.

    The ultimate story regarding that extremely large Irish IQ study turned out to be particularly ironic. About six months after the heated dispute regarding the study's contested validity had died down, she (or maybe it's "he") dropped me a note that the original academic author had learned of the dispute, gotten in touch, and confirmed the extreme precision of the methodology:

    http://www.ronunz.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/IrishIQ-HBDChick.pdf

    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere. So if we know anything at all about IQ anywhere in the history of the world, it's that the Flynn-adjusted Irish IQ was 87(!) in 1972.

    Here's my short 2013 column in which I mentioned this along with a couple of other amusing codas:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-revised/

    And for those so interested, here's a link to my original article plus the 20,000 words of follow-up columns, summarizing the very long and contentious debate:

    http://www.unz.com/author/ron-unz/topic/race-iq/?ItemOrder=ASC

    What is the current IQ of the Irish? Have there been any recent studies?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    What is the current IQ of the Irish? Have there been any recent studies?
     
    Well, why don't you bother taking a look at the links I copiously supplied upthread? A couple of years ago I published something like 25,000 words on all these issues, leading to a very widespread debate on this and related topics. Here's one of my columns focusing on the Irish IQ issue in particular:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-irish-iq-chinese-iq/
  72. @JayMan

    I would agree with you that people like Newton do not spring up without centuries of preparation, but unraveling the cultural shifts from the genetic ones is a chicken/egg problem.
     
    In a vacuum it would be. But that's not the case. See:

    The Rise of Universalism


    Likewise, the fact that there is a genetic component to being learned and intellectual doesn’t change the fact that at some specific junctures in the past someone with the power to choose decided that he or she would confer wealth and reproductive success to those who were learned, as opposed to simply being good at hacking others to bits.
     
    Where do decisions come from?

    Random events happen, but the world is a bit more deterministic than you're giving it credit for.


    but again, disentangling the genetics from the culture is difficult, if not impossible.
     
    Where does culture come from? (HBD Chick's question.)

    “Where do decisions come from?…Where does culture come from? (HBD Chick’s question.)”

    With respect to the post on the Rise of Universalism, I wasn’t making any argument related to that, at least not directly. Rather, in the matter of the above two questions about decisions and culture, I was saying that to the extent that one allows for any moral agency whatsoever (and I realize many don’t), it is perfectly valid to assume that decisions and culture are indeed partially influenced by decisions that people make, as exemplified in the somewhat idealized tale of the Gladwell matrons. Nothing Clark or Harpending have mentioned disproves that, as far as I can tell. They just make the argument that the additively heritable contribution is larger in magnitude than whatever can be ascribed to the individual. If that’s the case, fine, but that is hardly a revolutionary notion, except perhaps to the most diehard blank-slate and pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps advocates. Most of all of us already believed that in the grand scheme of things, the game is rigged to a significant extent. Now, if that 60-80% number Harpending mentioned ever gets bumped up to 100%, I’ll have to revise my outlook, but I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

    And yes, I might add, the net effect of all those collective decisions that prior generations of Europeans and others made was no doubt amplified through the heritability/success feedback loop I and others noted that first allowed knowledge and learning (as we’ve come to regard those terms) to enhance reproductive success, but someone (or something, if you insist) did make those choices at some point to set up that feedback loop. Again, people are free to discount the notion of choice and free will (excuse the logical quandary in that statement), but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    . Again, people are free to discount the notion of choice and free will (excuse the logical quandary in that statement)
     
    Yup, and you bet I do:

    No, You Don't Have Free Will, and This Is Why


    but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.
     
    Randomness. Flukes. Luck. Call it what you will.

    But, in the end, culture doesn't exist somehow divorced from genes, nor can it. Genes influence culture which in turn influences genes (through selective forces). This is gene-culture co-evolution.

  73. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @JayMan

    Has it been shown that the intelligence measured by IQ tests is due to specific genes that black Africans lack?
     
    Well, there are these:

    Is there no population genetic ‘support’ for a racial hereditarian hypothesis? | Human Varieties

    and

    District-Level Variation in Continental Racial Admixture Predicts Outcomes in Mexico | Human Varieties

    and

    Racial Ancestry in the Americas. Part 1: National Genomic Racial Admixture: Estimates and Validation | Human Varieties


    Unlikely, otherwise how could there be Nigerians at the Math Olympiad winning multiple medals. Right?
     
    I'm not convinced that the Math Olympiad can be used as a reliable gauge of national intelligence. That said, the results aren't totally out of the realm of what you'd expect:

    International Mathematical Olympiad - results


    There may be evidence largely pointing in one direction, namely that under-representation of black Africans in the top percentiles and their over-representation in the bottom percentiles is due not to discrimination, environment, disease etc., but due to heredity, which leads to fewer gifted people among them and more retarded.

    I would even adopt it as my working hypothesis.
     

    Pretty much.

    It looks like this, at least in the U.S.

    I will look into your links (thanks), but I’m not sure you’ve understood what I’m asking.

    Regarding the Math Olympiad, I didn’t suggest that they “can be used as a reliable gauge of national intelligence”. Rather, I’m saying that if the ancestors of today’s Europeans, subsequent to their exodus from Africa, developed a number of genes encoding for superior reasoning ability compared to the Africans left behind, then no Nigerian could hope to solve even a single problem in the Math Olympiad, let alone win several medals.

    Yet that is what has happened. How do you explain that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.
     
    That is what you're saying, actually.

    Rather, I’m saying that if the ancestors of today’s Europeans, subsequent to their exodus from Africa, developed a number of genes encoding for superior reasoning ability compared to the Africans left behind, then no Nigerian could hope to solve even a single problem in the Math Olympiad, let alone win several medals.
     
    Find a statistics textbook and study it hard.
  74. @Headfart at Headstart
    Cochran and Harpending are the only two people I've seen argue for 100% heritability of intelligence. I'm an HBD advocate and no fan of the SPLC, but I don't think C&H's position makes sense. The Minnesota twins experiment came up with only something like .7 or .8. And what about the effect of nursing vs. formula on IQ? Not to mention that an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll by interfering with a child's ability to focus if such an environment triggers depression or anxiety in a child who otherwise would not experience those emotions. Why would parents have such a strong desire to protect their children from abusive environments if this were not the case.

    “an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll”

    Hammers take their toll when they hit you in the head hard enough, and it’s hard to focus with brain damage. So obviously environment has some effect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Hammers take their toll when they hit you in the head hard enough, and it’s hard to focus with brain damage. So obviously environment has some effect.
     
    How many children get hit in the head with hammers these days?
  75. HBD may very well be a valid avenue of scientific exploration like string theory but is it really needed to explain the facts of everyday life? Here’s an article whose predictions align completely with HBD but are based on utterly non-controversial premises.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-delong/china-market-crash-5-years_b_8045742.html?1440772415

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    HBD may very well be a valid avenue of scientific exploration like string theory but is it really needed to explain the facts of everyday life?
     
    Yes. When it comes to humanity, everything is an HBD matter.
  76. @fnn

    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists.
     
    They adopt radical egalitarianism as a legitimizing ideology. That's how they suck in the masses and get antifa retards to bust heads for them.

    I agree, your explanation makes a lot of sense. They just switch ideologies to con the people(I don’t think they have ideology of their own outside of a lust for power and wealth and understanding the mechanisms to achieve them). And yeah they’re quite successful at it. Not only do they get the antifa thugs to work for them, but the libertarian/corporate worshiping whites on the other side.

    Read More
  77. @Ron Unz

    If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she’s actually saying she can’t find anything obviously wrong with the low ’72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she’d trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science — when is that not the case?) I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.
     
    Yes, when I originally came out with my big Race/IQ article and follow-up series a couple of years ago, "HBD*Chick" was one of my most energetic critics, with a long sequences of agitated posts. But when the dust cleared, I believe that my analysis was proven correct in virtually every individual case and particular.

    The ultimate story regarding that extremely large Irish IQ study turned out to be particularly ironic. About six months after the heated dispute regarding the study's contested validity had died down, she (or maybe it's "he") dropped me a note that the original academic author had learned of the dispute, gotten in touch, and confirmed the extreme precision of the methodology:

    http://www.ronunz.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/IrishIQ-HBDChick.pdf

    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere. So if we know anything at all about IQ anywhere in the history of the world, it's that the Flynn-adjusted Irish IQ was 87(!) in 1972.

    Here's my short 2013 column in which I mentioned this along with a couple of other amusing codas:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-revised/

    And for those so interested, here's a link to my original article plus the 20,000 words of follow-up columns, summarizing the very long and contentious debate:

    http://www.unz.com/author/ron-unz/topic/race-iq/?ItemOrder=ASC

    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere.

    So there’s no way this test could have been a statistical outlier, despite its size and scrupulousness? Because Lynn and Vanhanen’s 2012 adjusted estimate for Irish IQ was 95 (a rise of 8 points, or more than half a standard deviation in 40 years), and Rindermann’s 2007 estimate was 98 (a rise of 11 points, or more than two-thirds of a standard deviation in 35 years).

    http://jakubmarian.com/average-iq-in-europe-by-country-map/

    On the 2012 PISA tests, Irish students finished 20th in math (tied with Slovenia), 14th in science (tied with the Netherlands), and 7th in reading (tied with Canada). On the 2011 TIMSS tests, Irish 4th graders finished 17th in math (one point behind Germany), and 22nd in science (one point behind Northern Ireland).

    The Irish students scored above average in all five categories on these two tests, roughly comparable to the results of other Northwest European nations. Considering that the average IQ of Northwest Europeans is approximately 100, there’s no reason to believe that the average Irish IQ is much different from that number.

    So if we’re to take that 1972 IQ test as gospel, where the Irish scored a paltry 87, then this is truly an astonishing development. Splitting the difference between Lynn & Vanhanen, Rindermann, PISA and TIMSS, let’s say that Ireland now has an average IQ of 97. That’s a gain of 10 points, or two-thirds of a standard deviation in just four decades, which leads to two important questions:

    1) How did this happen? Were the Irish of 1972 malnourished or vitamin-deficient in some way that led to such a feeble intelligence? Was there some debilitating illness retarding mental development sweeping through Ireland up to that time? What has happened there in the last forty years that has led to such a dramatic rise in average IQ?

    2) Has something like this ever happened anywhere else? Is there any other country where average intelligence has risen so sharply and quickly? La Griffe du Lion and Steve Sailer call the one standard deviation gap in intelligence between whites and blacks the Fundamental Constant of Sociology. It hasn’t budged since IQ testing began a century ago. Yet the Irish have miraculously jumped from African American levels of intelligence to European levels in a mere four decades. Allegedly.

    Occam’s Razor would suggest that Irish IQ hasn’t changed that radically in the past forty years, and that the 1972 study–as scrupulous as it may have been–was an outlier. Irish intelligence then was probably much like it is now: slightly below that of the British but pretty close. More like an IQ of 97 rather than 87.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    The Irish students scored above average in all five categories on these two tests, roughly comparable to the results of other Northwest European nations. Considering that the average IQ of Northwest Europeans is approximately 100, there’s no reason to believe that the average Irish IQ is much different from that number.
     
    I wouldn't say that.

    Occam’s Razor would suggest that Irish IQ hasn’t changed that radically in the past forty years, and that the 1972 study–as scrupulous as it may have been–was an outlier. Irish intelligence then was probably much like it is now: slightly below that of the British but pretty close. More like an IQ of 97 rather than 87.
     
    Occam's Razor would suggest that IQs haven't changed that drastically during that time. As to what's going on, that's a little less than clear.

    L & V 2012 pegs Ireland at around 95, which is probably the correct value. One day we'll find out what's going on there.

    When HBD Chick and I say "Northwest Europeans", we typically exclude the Celts. Ireland for example sits firmly outside the Hajnal line.

    , @Ron Unz

    So if we’re to take that 1972 IQ test as gospel, where the Irish scored a paltry 87, then this is truly an astonishing development. Splitting the difference between Lynn & Vanhanen, Rindermann, PISA and TIMSS, let’s say that Ireland now has an average IQ of 97. That’s a gain of 10 points, or two-thirds of a standard deviation in just four decades...

    2) Has something like this ever happened anywhere else? Is there any other country where average intelligence has risen so sharply and quickly?

    Yet the Irish have miraculously jumped from African American levels of intelligence to European levels in a mere four decades. Allegedly.
     
    Since you wrote such a lengthy and dumbstruck response to my brief comment, perhaps you should have bothered reading the numerous links I had conveniently provided? I did publish something like 25,000 words on these issues...

    But the simple answer to your silly question is YES. As Ireland became much wealthier and less rural, there was a huge and steady rise in Flynn-adjusted IQ, showing an almost perfect correlation with time. The IQs of lots and lots of other European countries and European immigrant groups have demonstrated almost exactly the same pattern of massive increases over time, and the same is true of Hispanic immigrant groups today.

    That's because IQ obviously has a *huge* environmental/cultural/socio-economic component. The massive, overwhelming evidence is available in plain sight in all of Lynn's books, though for ideological reasons neither Lynn nor any of his silly acolytes ever noticed it until I pointed it all out.

    I exhaustively covered all of this years ago, and I'm too busy with other things to waste any more time on this subject now, but here are a few links to begin your necessary (re)education:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-irish-iq-chinese-iq/

    http://www.unz.com/article/race-iq-and-wealth/

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-super-flynn-effects-in-germans-jews-and-hispanics/

    Incidentally, the notion that Lynn "estimated" the Irish IQ as being 95 is utterly, *utterly* ridiculous, as you'll see if you bother reading my articles.
  78. @Wizard of Oz
    Being a pedantic sort of chap I thought he might be saying that, despite having no Jewish ancestry he was brought up by a radical left Jewish family as one who was adopted or fostered though there is absolutely no suggestion of that in the Wikipedia article I largely relied on. And it seems most unlikely. I wasn't inclined to take on a fight about someone I had only just heard of and who is of no importance to me but thanks for opening it up for further explanation - if there is one.

    Have I broken some record? Or some code? I am recorded, and not just once, but twice, as Disagreeing with myself. Once maybe, but I wouldn’t be so profligate as to waste all my opportunities to be disagreeable on my cranky alter ego.

    Read More
  79. @HA
    "Where do decisions come from?...Where does culture come from? (HBD Chick’s question.)"

    With respect to the post on the Rise of Universalism, I wasn't making any argument related to that, at least not directly. Rather, in the matter of the above two questions about decisions and culture, I was saying that to the extent that one allows for any moral agency whatsoever (and I realize many don't), it is perfectly valid to assume that decisions and culture are indeed partially influenced by decisions that people make, as exemplified in the somewhat idealized tale of the Gladwell matrons. Nothing Clark or Harpending have mentioned disproves that, as far as I can tell. They just make the argument that the additively heritable contribution is larger in magnitude than whatever can be ascribed to the individual. If that's the case, fine, but that is hardly a revolutionary notion, except perhaps to the most diehard blank-slate and pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps advocates. Most of all of us already believed that in the grand scheme of things, the game is rigged to a significant extent. Now, if that 60-80% number Harpending mentioned ever gets bumped up to 100%, I'll have to revise my outlook, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

    And yes, I might add, the net effect of all those collective decisions that prior generations of Europeans and others made was no doubt amplified through the heritability/success feedback loop I and others noted that first allowed knowledge and learning (as we've come to regard those terms) to enhance reproductive success, but someone (or something, if you insist) did make those choices at some point to set up that feedback loop. Again, people are free to discount the notion of choice and free will (excuse the logical quandary in that statement), but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.

    . Again, people are free to discount the notion of choice and free will (excuse the logical quandary in that statement)

    Yup, and you bet I do:

    No, You Don’t Have Free Will, and This Is Why

    but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.

    Randomness. Flukes. Luck. Call it what you will.

    But, in the end, culture doesn’t exist somehow divorced from genes, nor can it. Genes influence culture which in turn influences genes (through selective forces). This is gene-culture co-evolution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    “But, in the end, culture doesn’t exist somehow divorced from genes, nor can it. Genes influence culture which in turn influences genes (through selective forces). This is gene-culture co-evolution.”

    It is true that emotions will always be with us – but more and more our knowledge based culture makes our decisions regarding the future.

    As time is progressing biological evolution is waning as a changer of the future. Biological selection is coming to a halt. For the most part Western babies do not die – cultural science keeps them alive. And the top 80% of the gene pool have only two children – if that! All over the globe cultures are migrating to the Western knowledge culture.

    There is one good biological thing happening, people are marring out of their local gene pool – this is a good thing.
  80. @Anonymous
    I will look into your links (thanks), but I'm not sure you've understood what I'm asking.

    Regarding the Math Olympiad, I didn't suggest that they "can be used as a reliable gauge of national intelligence". Rather, I'm saying that if the ancestors of today's Europeans, subsequent to their exodus from Africa, developed a number of genes encoding for superior reasoning ability compared to the Africans left behind, then no Nigerian could hope to solve even a single problem in the Math Olympiad, let alone win several medals.

    Yet that is what has happened. How do you explain that?

    but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.

    That is what you’re saying, actually.

    Rather, I’m saying that if the ancestors of today’s Europeans, subsequent to their exodus from Africa, developed a number of genes encoding for superior reasoning ability compared to the Africans left behind, then no Nigerian could hope to solve even a single problem in the Math Olympiad, let alone win several medals.

    Find a statistics textbook and study it hard.

    Read More
  81. @guest
    "an abusive and emotionally disruptive home environment can take its toll"

    Hammers take their toll when they hit you in the head hard enough, and it's hard to focus with brain damage. So obviously environment has some effect.

    Hammers take their toll when they hit you in the head hard enough, and it’s hard to focus with brain damage. So obviously environment has some effect.

    How many children get hit in the head with hammers these days?

    Read More
  82. @Vinay
    HBD may very well be a valid avenue of scientific exploration like string theory but is it really needed to explain the facts of everyday life? Here's an article whose predictions align completely with HBD but are based on utterly non-controversial premises.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-delong/china-market-crash-5-years_b_8045742.html?1440772415

    HBD may very well be a valid avenue of scientific exploration like string theory but is it really needed to explain the facts of everyday life?

    Yes. When it comes to humanity, everything is an HBD matter.

    Read More
  83. @jeppo
    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere.

    So there's no way this test could have been a statistical outlier, despite its size and scrupulousness? Because Lynn and Vanhanen's 2012 adjusted estimate for Irish IQ was 95 (a rise of 8 points, or more than half a standard deviation in 40 years), and Rindermann's 2007 estimate was 98 (a rise of 11 points, or more than two-thirds of a standard deviation in 35 years).

    http://jakubmarian.com/average-iq-in-europe-by-country-map/

    On the 2012 PISA tests, Irish students finished 20th in math (tied with Slovenia), 14th in science (tied with the Netherlands), and 7th in reading (tied with Canada). On the 2011 TIMSS tests, Irish 4th graders finished 17th in math (one point behind Germany), and 22nd in science (one point behind Northern Ireland).

    The Irish students scored above average in all five categories on these two tests, roughly comparable to the results of other Northwest European nations. Considering that the average IQ of Northwest Europeans is approximately 100, there's no reason to believe that the average Irish IQ is much different from that number.

    So if we're to take that 1972 IQ test as gospel, where the Irish scored a paltry 87, then this is truly an astonishing development. Splitting the difference between Lynn & Vanhanen, Rindermann, PISA and TIMSS, let's say that Ireland now has an average IQ of 97. That's a gain of 10 points, or two-thirds of a standard deviation in just four decades, which leads to two important questions:

    1) How did this happen? Were the Irish of 1972 malnourished or vitamin-deficient in some way that led to such a feeble intelligence? Was there some debilitating illness retarding mental development sweeping through Ireland up to that time? What has happened there in the last forty years that has led to such a dramatic rise in average IQ?

    2) Has something like this ever happened anywhere else? Is there any other country where average intelligence has risen so sharply and quickly? La Griffe du Lion and Steve Sailer call the one standard deviation gap in intelligence between whites and blacks the Fundamental Constant of Sociology. It hasn't budged since IQ testing began a century ago. Yet the Irish have miraculously jumped from African American levels of intelligence to European levels in a mere four decades. Allegedly.

    Occam's Razor would suggest that Irish IQ hasn't changed that radically in the past forty years, and that the 1972 study--as scrupulous as it may have been--was an outlier. Irish intelligence then was probably much like it is now: slightly below that of the British but pretty close. More like an IQ of 97 rather than 87.

    The Irish students scored above average in all five categories on these two tests, roughly comparable to the results of other Northwest European nations. Considering that the average IQ of Northwest Europeans is approximately 100, there’s no reason to believe that the average Irish IQ is much different from that number.

    I wouldn’t say that.

    Occam’s Razor would suggest that Irish IQ hasn’t changed that radically in the past forty years, and that the 1972 study–as scrupulous as it may have been–was an outlier. Irish intelligence then was probably much like it is now: slightly below that of the British but pretty close. More like an IQ of 97 rather than 87.

    Occam’s Razor would suggest that IQs haven’t changed that drastically during that time. As to what’s going on, that’s a little less than clear.

    L & V 2012 pegs Ireland at around 95, which is probably the correct value. One day we’ll find out what’s going on there.

    When HBD Chick and I say “Northwest Europeans”, we typically exclude the Celts. Ireland for example sits firmly outside the Hajnal line.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jeppo
    When HBD Chick and I say “Northwest Europeans”, we typically exclude the Celts. Ireland for example sits firmly outside the Hajnal line.

    Yes, Ireland sits firmly outside the Hajnal line, as do Finland and most of Austria too. Meanwhile, France and most of Italy, Spain and Portugal sit firmly inside the Hajnal line, making a mockery of the term "Northwest European" to describe the nations inside the line. Maybe we need another term to accurately describe these culturally akin nations other than the geographically vague "NW European." Right now I'm leaning towards "Anglo-Germanic."

    I made the case that Ireland, Finland and Austria belong with the Anglo-Germanic/NW European group of countries, and that France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don't, here:

    http://www.unz.com/jman/national-prosperity/#comment-1064964
    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/a-genetic-marker-for-empathy/#comment-1082073

    Since then a couple of new studies have been released that confirm my belief. The Fraser Institute came out with their Human Freedom Index, using 76 distinct indicators of personal and economic freedom. All 17 Anglo-Germanic nations (not including Liechtenstein) finish in the top 22. This is how the 7 nations in question ranked:

    #3. Finland
    #8. Ireland
    #12. Austria
    #25. Portugal
    #33. France
    #34. Italy
    #37. Spain

    http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/publications/human-freedom-index-preliminary-report.pdf

    The Economist came out with their annual list of the world's most liveable cities. Here are the top ten (actually 11 because two cities are tied for tenth place):

    1. Melbourne
    2. Vienna
    3. Vancouver
    4. Toronto
    5. Calgary
    5. Adelaide
    7. Sydney
    8. Perth
    9. Auckland
    10. Helsinki
    10. Zurich

    All 11 cities are in the Anglo-Germanic world, including one each from Austria and Finland. Needless to say, no Latin cities made the list.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/08/daily-chart-5

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don't.

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.
  84. @Pure and Easy
    What is the current IQ of the Irish? Have there been any recent studies?

    What is the current IQ of the Irish? Have there been any recent studies?

    Well, why don’t you bother taking a look at the links I copiously supplied upthread? A couple of years ago I published something like 25,000 words on all these issues, leading to a very widespread debate on this and related topics. Here’s one of my columns focusing on the Irish IQ issue in particular:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-irish-iq-chinese-iq/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pure and Easy
    Why did you get all defensive for asking a simple question?

    I read them later but I didn't think my question was out of order.

    Thanks for the links in previous and this post.
  85. @jeppo
    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere.

    So there's no way this test could have been a statistical outlier, despite its size and scrupulousness? Because Lynn and Vanhanen's 2012 adjusted estimate for Irish IQ was 95 (a rise of 8 points, or more than half a standard deviation in 40 years), and Rindermann's 2007 estimate was 98 (a rise of 11 points, or more than two-thirds of a standard deviation in 35 years).

    http://jakubmarian.com/average-iq-in-europe-by-country-map/

    On the 2012 PISA tests, Irish students finished 20th in math (tied with Slovenia), 14th in science (tied with the Netherlands), and 7th in reading (tied with Canada). On the 2011 TIMSS tests, Irish 4th graders finished 17th in math (one point behind Germany), and 22nd in science (one point behind Northern Ireland).

    The Irish students scored above average in all five categories on these two tests, roughly comparable to the results of other Northwest European nations. Considering that the average IQ of Northwest Europeans is approximately 100, there's no reason to believe that the average Irish IQ is much different from that number.

    So if we're to take that 1972 IQ test as gospel, where the Irish scored a paltry 87, then this is truly an astonishing development. Splitting the difference between Lynn & Vanhanen, Rindermann, PISA and TIMSS, let's say that Ireland now has an average IQ of 97. That's a gain of 10 points, or two-thirds of a standard deviation in just four decades, which leads to two important questions:

    1) How did this happen? Were the Irish of 1972 malnourished or vitamin-deficient in some way that led to such a feeble intelligence? Was there some debilitating illness retarding mental development sweeping through Ireland up to that time? What has happened there in the last forty years that has led to such a dramatic rise in average IQ?

    2) Has something like this ever happened anywhere else? Is there any other country where average intelligence has risen so sharply and quickly? La Griffe du Lion and Steve Sailer call the one standard deviation gap in intelligence between whites and blacks the Fundamental Constant of Sociology. It hasn't budged since IQ testing began a century ago. Yet the Irish have miraculously jumped from African American levels of intelligence to European levels in a mere four decades. Allegedly.

    Occam's Razor would suggest that Irish IQ hasn't changed that radically in the past forty years, and that the 1972 study--as scrupulous as it may have been--was an outlier. Irish intelligence then was probably much like it is now: slightly below that of the British but pretty close. More like an IQ of 97 rather than 87.

    So if we’re to take that 1972 IQ test as gospel, where the Irish scored a paltry 87, then this is truly an astonishing development. Splitting the difference between Lynn & Vanhanen, Rindermann, PISA and TIMSS, let’s say that Ireland now has an average IQ of 97. That’s a gain of 10 points, or two-thirds of a standard deviation in just four decades…

    2) Has something like this ever happened anywhere else? Is there any other country where average intelligence has risen so sharply and quickly?

    Yet the Irish have miraculously jumped from African American levels of intelligence to European levels in a mere four decades. Allegedly.

    Since you wrote such a lengthy and dumbstruck response to my brief comment, perhaps you should have bothered reading the numerous links I had conveniently provided? I did publish something like 25,000 words on these issues…

    But the simple answer to your silly question is YES. As Ireland became much wealthier and less rural, there was a huge and steady rise in Flynn-adjusted IQ, showing an almost perfect correlation with time. The IQs of lots and lots of other European countries and European immigrant groups have demonstrated almost exactly the same pattern of massive increases over time, and the same is true of Hispanic immigrant groups today.

    That’s because IQ obviously has a *huge* environmental/cultural/socio-economic component. The massive, overwhelming evidence is available in plain sight in all of Lynn’s books, though for ideological reasons neither Lynn nor any of his silly acolytes ever noticed it until I pointed it all out.

    I exhaustively covered all of this years ago, and I’m too busy with other things to waste any more time on this subject now, but here are a few links to begin your necessary (re)education:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-irish-iq-chinese-iq/

    http://www.unz.com/article/race-iq-and-wealth/

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-super-flynn-effects-in-germans-jews-and-hispanics/

    Incidentally, the notion that Lynn “estimated” the Irish IQ as being 95 is utterly, *utterly* ridiculous, as you’ll see if you bother reading my articles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    That’s because IQ obviously has a *huge* environmental/cultural/socio-economic component. The massive, overwhelming evidence is available in plain sight in all of Lynn’s books, though for ideological reasons neither Lynn nor any of his silly acolytes ever noticed it until I pointed it all out.
     
    Tested IQ, yes (plenty of ways bounce test results in one direction or another). The g-factor (and hence, the part of IQ that is "real"), not so much. Future post.
  86. This stereotype of Swedish behavior is something I associate to varying degrees with other people of Northwest Euro background.

    Individualistic, orderly, rule following, needing “distance” from others.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Societies succeed because they've built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.
    Immigrants who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society. Despite the gibberish of the lunatic left most people recognize this and quite rightly reject the attempt to destroy their society in pursuit of a crazed political fantasy.
  87. @JayMan

    The Irish students scored above average in all five categories on these two tests, roughly comparable to the results of other Northwest European nations. Considering that the average IQ of Northwest Europeans is approximately 100, there’s no reason to believe that the average Irish IQ is much different from that number.
     
    I wouldn't say that.

    Occam’s Razor would suggest that Irish IQ hasn’t changed that radically in the past forty years, and that the 1972 study–as scrupulous as it may have been–was an outlier. Irish intelligence then was probably much like it is now: slightly below that of the British but pretty close. More like an IQ of 97 rather than 87.
     
    Occam's Razor would suggest that IQs haven't changed that drastically during that time. As to what's going on, that's a little less than clear.

    L & V 2012 pegs Ireland at around 95, which is probably the correct value. One day we'll find out what's going on there.

    When HBD Chick and I say "Northwest Europeans", we typically exclude the Celts. Ireland for example sits firmly outside the Hajnal line.

    When HBD Chick and I say “Northwest Europeans”, we typically exclude the Celts. Ireland for example sits firmly outside the Hajnal line.

    Yes, Ireland sits firmly outside the Hajnal line, as do Finland and most of Austria too. Meanwhile, France and most of Italy, Spain and Portugal sit firmly inside the Hajnal line, making a mockery of the term “Northwest European” to describe the nations inside the line. Maybe we need another term to accurately describe these culturally akin nations other than the geographically vague “NW European.” Right now I’m leaning towards “Anglo-Germanic.”

    I made the case that Ireland, Finland and Austria belong with the Anglo-Germanic/NW European group of countries, and that France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don’t, here:

    http://www.unz.com/jman/national-prosperity/#comment-1064964

    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/a-genetic-marker-for-empathy/#comment-1082073

    Since then a couple of new studies have been released that confirm my belief. The Fraser Institute came out with their Human Freedom Index, using 76 distinct indicators of personal and economic freedom. All 17 Anglo-Germanic nations (not including Liechtenstein) finish in the top 22. This is how the 7 nations in question ranked:

    #3. Finland
    #8. Ireland
    #12. Austria
    #25. Portugal
    #33. France
    #34. Italy
    #37. Spain

    http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/publications/human-freedom-index-preliminary-report.pdf

    The Economist came out with their annual list of the world’s most liveable cities. Here are the top ten (actually 11 because two cities are tied for tenth place):

    1. Melbourne
    2. Vienna
    3. Vancouver
    4. Toronto
    5. Calgary
    5. Adelaide
    7. Sydney
    8. Perth
    9. Auckland
    10. Helsinki
    10. Zurich

    All 11 cities are in the Anglo-Germanic world, including one each from Austria and Finland. Needless to say, no Latin cities made the list.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/08/daily-chart-5

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don’t.

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don’t.
     
    Oh I wouldn't say that. Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true "Southern Europeans". There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the "Core" European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.
     
    Nope. I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.
    , @Jim
    Why do you describe Finland as "Anglo-Germanic"?
  88. As Ireland became much wealthier and less rural, there was a huge and steady rise in Flynn-adjusted IQ, showing an almost perfect correlation with time.

    Ten IQ points in forty years, apparently.

    Read More
  89. @Hector_St_Clare
    "I've never seen an African with a hobby. They're different."

    This is of course bullsh*t. I lived in Africa for three years, in a mostly peasant and fishing community: I knew plenty of people who had hobbies. This is a pitch-perfect example of HBD people shooting themselves in the foot by making outrageous, exaggerated, and clearly falsifiable claims (almost on par with James Watson's remarks about African employees).

    To put my cards on the table, I'm a working biologist, and though my politics tend far left, I'm strongly hereditarian when it comes to esplaining IQ and personality differences. (I like to call myself a neoreactionary communist, drawing left-wing conclusions from right wing premises). And I'm agnostic on the broader question of whether racial differences in IQ are due to genetic factors or something else (and quite hostile to cultural liberalism in general). That having been said, that one of the supposed leading lights of HBD would make such a statistically sloppy and easily falsified remark doesn't exactly help your 'movement', to say the least.

    almost on par with James Watson’s remarks about African employees

    I use the reaction to this statement as a mental shibboleth. Although a lot of them seem to be operating from the right side of the curve, I am not sure how many of the HBDers understand what that remark indicates about his thinking and the flaw therein.

    I am looking forward to reading your blog.

    Read More
  90. @jeppo
    When HBD Chick and I say “Northwest Europeans”, we typically exclude the Celts. Ireland for example sits firmly outside the Hajnal line.

    Yes, Ireland sits firmly outside the Hajnal line, as do Finland and most of Austria too. Meanwhile, France and most of Italy, Spain and Portugal sit firmly inside the Hajnal line, making a mockery of the term "Northwest European" to describe the nations inside the line. Maybe we need another term to accurately describe these culturally akin nations other than the geographically vague "NW European." Right now I'm leaning towards "Anglo-Germanic."

    I made the case that Ireland, Finland and Austria belong with the Anglo-Germanic/NW European group of countries, and that France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don't, here:

    http://www.unz.com/jman/national-prosperity/#comment-1064964
    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/a-genetic-marker-for-empathy/#comment-1082073

    Since then a couple of new studies have been released that confirm my belief. The Fraser Institute came out with their Human Freedom Index, using 76 distinct indicators of personal and economic freedom. All 17 Anglo-Germanic nations (not including Liechtenstein) finish in the top 22. This is how the 7 nations in question ranked:

    #3. Finland
    #8. Ireland
    #12. Austria
    #25. Portugal
    #33. France
    #34. Italy
    #37. Spain

    http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/publications/human-freedom-index-preliminary-report.pdf

    The Economist came out with their annual list of the world's most liveable cities. Here are the top ten (actually 11 because two cities are tied for tenth place):

    1. Melbourne
    2. Vienna
    3. Vancouver
    4. Toronto
    5. Calgary
    5. Adelaide
    7. Sydney
    8. Perth
    9. Auckland
    10. Helsinki
    10. Zurich

    All 11 cities are in the Anglo-Germanic world, including one each from Austria and Finland. Needless to say, no Latin cities made the list.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/08/daily-chart-5

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don't.

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don’t.

    Oh I wouldn’t say that. Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true “Southern Europeans”. There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the “Core” European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.

    Nope. I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jeppo
    Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true “Southern Europeans”. There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the “Core” European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    Sure. The north-south gradients in Italy and Spain are particularly extreme. But I'm more interested in the differences *between* countries than within them. Northwest Europe has Nordic-Germanic-Protestant core that consists of Scandinavia, Germany, Holland and Britain, and a periphery that includes Finland, the Alpine States, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland and the Anglo settler societies. So even though Finland, Ireland and Austria are partial outliers in a cultural sense, they clearly belong to the Anglo-Germanic family of nations in a way that the Latin countries don't.

    I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    No one's doubting your Hajnal expertise. But I'm arguing that the Hajnal line divides Eastern Europe from Western Europe as a whole, not just Northwest Europe. You say that there is variation within the Hajnal line region. Absolutely. Above all, there is a major cultural fault line that divides Nordic-Germanic-Protestant Northwest Europe from Mediterranean-Latin-Catholic Southwest Europe, and the Hajnal line divides both from Alpine-Slavic-Orthodox Eastern Europe.

    One major difference between Northwest and Southwest Europeans is racial phenotype. The latter are generally shorter and darker than the former. All of the Anglo-Germanic nations average 50% or more of their native (or white in the case of the Anglo settler societies) population having either light-coloured hair (blond, red, light brown) or light-coloured eyes (blue, green, grey). None of the Latin nations do.

    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?35882-New-Hair-and-Eye-color-statistics-(2011)

    Of the 7 nations in question, the percentage of each having light-coloured hair or eyes is:

    Finland: 85%
    Ireland: 60%
    Austria: 54%
    France: 43%
    Italy: 23%
    Spain: 19%
    Portugal: 16%

    As for average height (in this case for 20 year-old males), the Anglo-Germanic nations all fall between 174.3 and 181 cms. The tallest Latin nation is shorter than the shortest Anglo-Germanic nation. Here's how the 7 nations in question fared:

    Finland: 178.4 cms
    Austria: 177 cms
    Ireland: 175 cms
    France: 174.1 cms
    Italy: 173.2 cms
    Spain: 172 cms
    Portugal: 170.5 cms

    https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=120DzHmKJOgO9k5lTlIBh0WALCz-MpXOuoXwznyM#rows:id=1

    A couple more economic lists, both taken from Wikipedia, showing that Finland, Ireland and Austria cluster with the other Anglo-Germanic nations near the top, and consistently beat France, Italy, Spain and Portugal in these crucial indices.

    Per Capita Income:

    Ireland: $53,462
    Austria: $51,307
    Finland: $49,497
    France: $44,538
    Italy: $35,823
    Spain: $30,278
    Portugal: $22,130

    Unemployment Rate:

    Austria: 5.7%
    Finland: 9.4%
    Ireland: 9.7%
    France: 10.5%
    Italy: 12.4%
    Portugal: 13%
    Spain: 22.7%

    And finally, from your post on the worldwide distribution of personality:

    http://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/colorcodingmjgsmall1.gif

    The Anglo-Germanic nations, including Finland, Ireland and Austria, all cluster near the Linear-Active cultural type, while the Latin nations lean towards the Multi-Active node.

    So in terms of racial phenotype, linguistic group, religious heritage, history, geography, culture, politics, economics, intelligence, trustworthiness, personality, temperament etc etc, Finland, Ireland and Austria are clearly part of the Anglo-Germanic/Northwest European world. And--just as clearly--the Latin nations are not. There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.
    , @jeppo
    I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    Nobody is questioning your Hajnal expertise. The "variation within the Hajnal line region" that you're talking about is actually two very distinct cultures: the Anglo-Germanic one in the northwest (which includes Ireland, Finland and Austria), and the Latin one in the southwest.
  91. @Ron Unz

    So if we’re to take that 1972 IQ test as gospel, where the Irish scored a paltry 87, then this is truly an astonishing development. Splitting the difference between Lynn & Vanhanen, Rindermann, PISA and TIMSS, let’s say that Ireland now has an average IQ of 97. That’s a gain of 10 points, or two-thirds of a standard deviation in just four decades...

    2) Has something like this ever happened anywhere else? Is there any other country where average intelligence has risen so sharply and quickly?

    Yet the Irish have miraculously jumped from African American levels of intelligence to European levels in a mere four decades. Allegedly.
     
    Since you wrote such a lengthy and dumbstruck response to my brief comment, perhaps you should have bothered reading the numerous links I had conveniently provided? I did publish something like 25,000 words on these issues...

    But the simple answer to your silly question is YES. As Ireland became much wealthier and less rural, there was a huge and steady rise in Flynn-adjusted IQ, showing an almost perfect correlation with time. The IQs of lots and lots of other European countries and European immigrant groups have demonstrated almost exactly the same pattern of massive increases over time, and the same is true of Hispanic immigrant groups today.

    That's because IQ obviously has a *huge* environmental/cultural/socio-economic component. The massive, overwhelming evidence is available in plain sight in all of Lynn's books, though for ideological reasons neither Lynn nor any of his silly acolytes ever noticed it until I pointed it all out.

    I exhaustively covered all of this years ago, and I'm too busy with other things to waste any more time on this subject now, but here are a few links to begin your necessary (re)education:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-irish-iq-chinese-iq/

    http://www.unz.com/article/race-iq-and-wealth/

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-super-flynn-effects-in-germans-jews-and-hispanics/

    Incidentally, the notion that Lynn "estimated" the Irish IQ as being 95 is utterly, *utterly* ridiculous, as you'll see if you bother reading my articles.

    That’s because IQ obviously has a *huge* environmental/cultural/socio-economic component. The massive, overwhelming evidence is available in plain sight in all of Lynn’s books, though for ideological reasons neither Lynn nor any of his silly acolytes ever noticed it until I pointed it all out.

    Tested IQ, yes (plenty of ways bounce test results in one direction or another). The g-factor (and hence, the part of IQ that is “real”), not so much. Future post.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Tested IQ, yes (plenty of ways bounce test results in one direction or another). The g-factor (and hence, the part of IQ that is “real”), not so much.
     
    Well, I'd hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I'm arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.

    Let's leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.

    It's very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years...
  92. @JayMan

    Peaceful? Puh-lease, the British empire like the latter American one is flush with violence. And not just random violence(that too), but highly organized, industrialized, state sanctioned(with most of the entire population behind you) violence.
     
    That's just it: there's a big difference between interpersonal violence and organized, state-directed violence. See:

    Western Europe, state formation, and genetic pacification - The Unz Review

    Did people become more pacified because the State took over and monopolized the violence?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Did people become more pacified because the State took over and monopolized the violence?
     
    Partly, yes.
  93. @Biff
    Did people become more pacified because the State took over and monopolized the violence?

    Did people become more pacified because the State took over and monopolized the violence?

    Partly, yes.

    Read More
  94. @JayMan

    That’s because IQ obviously has a *huge* environmental/cultural/socio-economic component. The massive, overwhelming evidence is available in plain sight in all of Lynn’s books, though for ideological reasons neither Lynn nor any of his silly acolytes ever noticed it until I pointed it all out.
     
    Tested IQ, yes (plenty of ways bounce test results in one direction or another). The g-factor (and hence, the part of IQ that is "real"), not so much. Future post.

    Tested IQ, yes (plenty of ways bounce test results in one direction or another). The g-factor (and hence, the part of IQ that is “real”), not so much.

    Well, I’d hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I’m arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.

    Let’s leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.

    It’s very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years…

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "It’s very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years…"

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe. Draining the swamps and marshes of Europe was a massive public works project that lasted over a millennium, but it became especially important about a century ago, when people realized that lethargy is a way of life where hookworm is endemic, and that that was no coincidence. (According to the hygiene hypothesis, the subsequent reduction of swamp and marshland parasites also possibly spurred the rise of Crohn's disease, hyper-allergies, and other autoimmune disorders in recent generations, given that human immune systems that had evolved to battle such parasites now go haywire and attack the host. It's always something.)

    http://rockefeller100.org/exhibits/show/health/eradicating-hookworm

    The newfound awareness of parasites also had deep political implications, as both Nazis and Communists incorporated the concept of parasitism into their ideologies. Not much has changed in that regard, judging from the comments sections of unz.com. I am curious whether the hygiene hypothesis, as it becomes better known, will have some similar impact on the political Zeitgeist.

    , @JayMan

    Well, I’d hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I’m arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.
     
    Well, g is not exactly the genetic component of IQ (although it is the most heritable). It is the "active" component. The predictive validity of IQ tests comes from the g-factor. Non-g-loaded IQ gains don't seem to translate into anything in the real world.

    You can see all sorts of variation in IQ scores, primarily due to some form of measurement error. Measurement error can be random (e.g., the type that attenuates the heritability in trait studies) or non-random (e.g., IQ tests losing g-loadings). The Flynn effect is likely mostly due to this latter factor.


    Let’s leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.
     
    Some (probably most) of that is due to testing error (like language difficulties). But some of it is also due to intermixing (and likely selective migration/attrition). Few of those groups are "pure" today but are heavily admixed with each other and previous White Americans.

    In any case, I'll go into much more detail on this in a future post.

  95. @JayMan

    . Again, people are free to discount the notion of choice and free will (excuse the logical quandary in that statement)
     
    Yup, and you bet I do:

    No, You Don't Have Free Will, and This Is Why


    but in any case, that just means they have some other way of characterizing that remaining hon-heritable contribution.
     
    Randomness. Flukes. Luck. Call it what you will.

    But, in the end, culture doesn't exist somehow divorced from genes, nor can it. Genes influence culture which in turn influences genes (through selective forces). This is gene-culture co-evolution.

    “But, in the end, culture doesn’t exist somehow divorced from genes, nor can it. Genes influence culture which in turn influences genes (through selective forces). This is gene-culture co-evolution.”

    It is true that emotions will always be with us – but more and more our knowledge based culture makes our decisions regarding the future.

    As time is progressing biological evolution is waning as a changer of the future. Biological selection is coming to a halt. For the most part Western babies do not die – cultural science keeps them alive. And the top 80% of the gene pool have only two children – if that! All over the globe cultures are migrating to the Western knowledge culture.

    There is one good biological thing happening, people are marring out of their local gene pool – this is a good thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    As time is progressing biological evolution is waning as a changer of the future. Biological selection is coming to a halt.
     
    Not a chance. Evolution is on-going.

    But isn't that claim contradicted by this?


    For the most part Western babies do not die – cultural science keeps them alive. And the top 80% of the gene pool have only two children – if that! All over the globe cultures are migrating to the Western knowledge culture.
     
    In any case, see:

    Who’s Having the Babies? - The Unz Review

  96. @HA
    "There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years."

    There was apparently room enough for berserkers and seal-hunting igloo dwellers for a good portion of those millennia, and neither group cared all that much for intellectual pursuits (in comparison with contemporaneous Hittites, Egyptians, Sumerians, etc.).

    According to Robin Dunbar brothers of berserkers didn’t get murdered very often. No one wanted to mess with a psycho. here. Killing and revenge attacks were far from rare among the Inuit. It only pays to be harmless in a peaceful environment. So the idea that “sociopathy (and “hysteria”) are or have been adaptive traits in men and women respectively in some times and places is relevant.

    Read More
  97. @Ron Unz

    Tested IQ, yes (plenty of ways bounce test results in one direction or another). The g-factor (and hence, the part of IQ that is “real”), not so much.
     
    Well, I'd hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I'm arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.

    Let's leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.

    It's very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years...

    “It’s very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years…”

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe. Draining the swamps and marshes of Europe was a massive public works project that lasted over a millennium, but it became especially important about a century ago, when people realized that lethargy is a way of life where hookworm is endemic, and that that was no coincidence. (According to the hygiene hypothesis, the subsequent reduction of swamp and marshland parasites also possibly spurred the rise of Crohn’s disease, hyper-allergies, and other autoimmune disorders in recent generations, given that human immune systems that had evolved to battle such parasites now go haywire and attack the host. It’s always something.)

    http://rockefeller100.org/exhibits/show/health/eradicating-hookworm

    The newfound awareness of parasites also had deep political implications, as both Nazis and Communists incorporated the concept of parasitism into their ideologies. Not much has changed in that regard, judging from the comments sections of unz.com. I am curious whether the hygiene hypothesis, as it becomes better known, will have some similar impact on the political Zeitgeist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe. Draining the swamps and marshes of Europe was a massive public works project that lasted over a millennium, but it became especially important about a century ago, when people realized that lethargy is a way of life where hookworm is endemic, and that that was no coincidence.
     
    At some point, I'll look into the effects of parasites/infections on IQ.
    , @Ron Unz

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe.
     
    Sure, it seems plausible that the eradication of hookworm and various other low-level infections may partly explain the huge rise in some relative IQ scores, along with nutritional factors. But in the specific cases I mentioned, regarding the American-born children of Italian, Greek, Slavic, and other European immigrant groups, that factor doesn't seem likely.

    During the early decades of the 20th century, whites living in the Southern states, especially rural areas, were overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon in ancestry, while the Southern and Eastern European immigrant groups I'm discussing almost entirely lived in the North, mostly in the large Eastern and Midwestern urban centers such as New York, Chicago, and Boston. I doubt they suffered much from parasites or special nutritional deprivation, at least compared with rural America. That's why I strongly believe the main cause behind the very low IQ scores was "cultural" rather than "physical" deprivation.
  98. @Rifleman
    This stereotype of Swedish behavior is something I associate to varying degrees with other people of Northwest Euro background.

    Individualistic, orderly, rule following, needing "distance" from others.

    Societies succeed because they’ve built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.
    Immigrants who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society. Despite the gibberish of the lunatic left most people recognize this and quite rightly reject the attempt to destroy their society in pursuit of a crazed political fantasy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Societies succeed because they’ve built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.
     
    Not quite.

    Immigrants who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society.
     
    Immigrants aren't necessarily deleterious to a society.
  99. @JayMan

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don’t.
     
    Oh I wouldn't say that. Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true "Southern Europeans". There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the "Core" European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.
     
    Nope. I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true “Southern Europeans”. There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the “Core” European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    Sure. The north-south gradients in Italy and Spain are particularly extreme. But I’m more interested in the differences *between* countries than within them. Northwest Europe has Nordic-Germanic-Protestant core that consists of Scandinavia, Germany, Holland and Britain, and a periphery that includes Finland, the Alpine States, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland and the Anglo settler societies. So even though Finland, Ireland and Austria are partial outliers in a cultural sense, they clearly belong to the Anglo-Germanic family of nations in a way that the Latin countries don’t.

    I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    No one’s doubting your Hajnal expertise. But I’m arguing that the Hajnal line divides Eastern Europe from Western Europe as a whole, not just Northwest Europe. You say that there is variation within the Hajnal line region. Absolutely. Above all, there is a major cultural fault line that divides Nordic-Germanic-Protestant Northwest Europe from Mediterranean-Latin-Catholic Southwest Europe, and the Hajnal line divides both from Alpine-Slavic-Orthodox Eastern Europe.

    One major difference between Northwest and Southwest Europeans is racial phenotype. The latter are generally shorter and darker than the former. All of the Anglo-Germanic nations average 50% or more of their native (or white in the case of the Anglo settler societies) population having either light-coloured hair (blond, red, light brown) or light-coloured eyes (blue, green, grey). None of the Latin nations do.

    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?35882-New-Hair-and-Eye-color-statistics-(2011)

    Of the 7 nations in question, the percentage of each having light-coloured hair or eyes is:

    Finland: 85%
    Ireland: 60%
    Austria: 54%
    France: 43%
    Italy: 23%
    Spain: 19%
    Portugal: 16%

    As for average height (in this case for 20 year-old males), the Anglo-Germanic nations all fall between 174.3 and 181 cms. The tallest Latin nation is shorter than the shortest Anglo-Germanic nation. Here’s how the 7 nations in question fared:

    Finland: 178.4 cms
    Austria: 177 cms
    Ireland: 175 cms
    France: 174.1 cms
    Italy: 173.2 cms
    Spain: 172 cms
    Portugal: 170.5 cms

    https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=120DzHmKJOgO9k5lTlIBh0WALCz-MpXOuoXwznyM#rows:id=1

    A couple more economic lists, both taken from Wikipedia, showing that Finland, Ireland and Austria cluster with the other Anglo-Germanic nations near the top, and consistently beat France, Italy, Spain and Portugal in these crucial indices.

    Per Capita Income:

    Ireland: $53,462
    Austria: $51,307
    Finland: $49,497
    France: $44,538
    Italy: $35,823
    Spain: $30,278
    Portugal: $22,130

    Unemployment Rate:

    Austria: 5.7%
    Finland: 9.4%
    Ireland: 9.7%
    France: 10.5%
    Italy: 12.4%
    Portugal: 13%
    Spain: 22.7%

    And finally, from your post on the worldwide distribution of personality:

    http://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/colorcodingmjgsmall1.gif

    The Anglo-Germanic nations, including Finland, Ireland and Austria, all cluster near the Linear-Active cultural type, while the Latin nations lean towards the Multi-Active node.

    So in terms of racial phenotype, linguistic group, religious heritage, history, geography, culture, politics, economics, intelligence, trustworthiness, personality, temperament etc etc, Finland, Ireland and Austria are clearly part of the Anglo-Germanic/Northwest European world. And–just as clearly–the Latin nations are not. There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Sure. The north-south gradients in Italy and Spain are particularly extreme.
     
    But you miss the implications of this: measures (e.g. trust, civicness, etc.) that look at the Latin countries and take them as a whole are going to conflate the regional differences within them. Does Italy still cluster away from Germanic nations when you separate north and south?

    There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.
     
    You're getting too caught up in the minutia of lumping vs. splitting. If we want a broad assemblage of the world's WEIRDO populations, the southern areas of the Hajnal line region (France, N. Iberia, N. Italy) clearly belong and stand apart from everyone outside the Hajnal line area. Are there differences within? Yes. All human populations are distinct, but they cluster together in interesting ways.

    You've said enough here, I think. No more comments on this where you just restate your case.

    , @szopen
    So there is a anthropological difference between northwestern Europe and Southern; sure. But then, there is no such difference between Eastern Europe and Northern (at least, if you are claiming Ireland, England, Sweden and German all share common features; because all of those countries have different anthropological types). Percentage of light hair and light eyes in Poland is as high or even higher than in Germany, and while pure "nordic" type is rare, so is in Germany.

    Next, look at the regional variation of GDP:
    http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Gross_domestic_product_%28GDP%29_per_inhabitant,_in_purchasing_power_standard_%28PPS%29,_by_NUTS_level_2_region,_2013_%28%C2%B9%29_%28%25_of_the_EU-28_average,_EU-28_%3D_100%29_RYB15.png

    Suddenly you have Germanic-speaking regions which are poorer and more similar to French, Spanish or southern Italian regions (in terms of GDP). I bet you could produce similar maps depicting life quality etc.
    Moreover, here are some of the opinions about Germans from early XIX Germany, quoted after some Korean scientific paper about economy:

    QUOTE STARTS HERE

    "Before their economic
    take-off in the mid-19th century, the Germans were typically described by
    the British as “a dull and heavy people”9 “Indolence” was a word that was
    frequently associated with the Germanic nature.10 Mary Shelley, the author
    of Frankenstein, wrote in exasperation after a particularly frustrating
    altercation with her German coach-driver; “the Germans never hurry”.11 It
    wasn’t just the British. A French manufacturer who employed German
    workers complained that they “work as and when they please”.12
    The British considered the Germans also to be slow-witted.
    According to one John Russell, a travel-writer of the 1820s, the Germans
    were a “plodding, easily contented people … endowed neither with great
    acuteness of perception nor quickness of feeling”. In particular, according to
    Russell, they were not open to new ideas; “it is long before [a German] can
    be brought to comprehend the bearings of what is new to him, and it is
    difficult to rouse him to ardour in its pursuit.”. 13 No wonder that they were
    “not distinguished by enterprise or activity”, as another mid-19th century
    British traveller remarked.14

    Germans were also deemed to be too individualistic and unable to
    cooperate with each other. The Germans’ inability to cooperate was, in the
    view of the British, most strongly manifested in the poor quality and
    maintenance of their public infrastructure, which was so bad that John
    McPherson, a Viceroy of India (and therefore quite used to treacherous road
    conditions), wrote, “I found the roads so bad in Germany that I directed my
    course to Italy”.
    British travellers in the early 19th century also found the Germans
    dishonest – “the tradesman and the shopkeeper take advantage of you
    wherever they can, and to the smallest imaginable amount rather than not
    take advantage of you at all … This knavery is universal”

    (NOTE by szopen: In Polish, "oszwabić" comes from a derogatory term "szwab" used for a German and means "to cheat someone").

    observed Sir
    Arthur Brooke Faulkner, a physician serving in the British army.17
    Finally, the British thought the Germans to be overly emotional.
    Today many British seem to think that Germans have an almost genetic
    emotional deficiency. Yet talking about excessive German emotion, Sir
    Arthur observed that “some will laugh all sorrows away and others will
    always indulge in melancholy”.
  100. @Art
    “But, in the end, culture doesn’t exist somehow divorced from genes, nor can it. Genes influence culture which in turn influences genes (through selective forces). This is gene-culture co-evolution.”

    It is true that emotions will always be with us – but more and more our knowledge based culture makes our decisions regarding the future.

    As time is progressing biological evolution is waning as a changer of the future. Biological selection is coming to a halt. For the most part Western babies do not die – cultural science keeps them alive. And the top 80% of the gene pool have only two children – if that! All over the globe cultures are migrating to the Western knowledge culture.

    There is one good biological thing happening, people are marring out of their local gene pool – this is a good thing.

    As time is progressing biological evolution is waning as a changer of the future. Biological selection is coming to a halt.

    Not a chance. Evolution is on-going.

    But isn’t that claim contradicted by this?

    For the most part Western babies do not die – cultural science keeps them alive. And the top 80% of the gene pool have only two children – if that! All over the globe cultures are migrating to the Western knowledge culture.

    In any case, see:

    Who’s Having the Babies? – The Unz Review

    Read More
  101. @Bill Jones
    Societies succeed because they've built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.
    Immigrants who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society. Despite the gibberish of the lunatic left most people recognize this and quite rightly reject the attempt to destroy their society in pursuit of a crazed political fantasy.

    Societies succeed because they’ve built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.

    Not quite.

    Immigrants who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society.

    Immigrants aren’t necessarily deleterious to a society.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Don't read too well, do you?

    Missed the piece about "do not have that ingrained culture" did we?

    I am myself an immigrant in these here Untied States, but being English have an abundance, rather than an absence, of the ingrained culture.

    I am, I'm sure my wife would claim, destructive to many things, but social capital is not one of them.
  102. @Ron Unz

    Tested IQ, yes (plenty of ways bounce test results in one direction or another). The g-factor (and hence, the part of IQ that is “real”), not so much.
     
    Well, I'd hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I'm arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.

    Let's leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.

    It's very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years...

    Well, I’d hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I’m arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.

    Well, g is not exactly the genetic component of IQ (although it is the most heritable). It is the “active” component. The predictive validity of IQ tests comes from the g-factor. Non-g-loaded IQ gains don’t seem to translate into anything in the real world.

    You can see all sorts of variation in IQ scores, primarily due to some form of measurement error. Measurement error can be random (e.g., the type that attenuates the heritability in trait studies) or non-random (e.g., IQ tests losing g-loadings). The Flynn effect is likely mostly due to this latter factor.

    Let’s leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.

    Some (probably most) of that is due to testing error (like language difficulties). But some of it is also due to intermixing (and likely selective migration/attrition). Few of those groups are “pure” today but are heavily admixed with each other and previous White Americans.

    In any case, I’ll go into much more detail on this in a future post.

    Read More
    • Replies: @matt

    Non-g-loaded IQ gains don’t seem to translate into anything in the real world
     
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000105
    , @Ron Unz

    You can see all sorts of variation in IQ scores, primarily due to some form of measurement error.
     
    Well, if all the numerous 1920s IQ tests of Italian-Americans, Greek-Americans, Slavic-Americans, etc. showed them to score 25-30 points lower than mainstream, mostly Northwest-European-Americans, the apparent 2 SD "measurement error" must have been a very remarkable set of coincidences, and call into question the validity of the tests.

    But some of it is also due to intermixing (and likely selective migration/attrition).
     
    That seems extremely unlikely. As far as I know, there's absolutely *zero* evidence that the many millions of mostly "unmixed" Italian-Americans and Greek-Americans today have mean IQs of 75 or whatever. Though admittedly our friend "Jefferson" might be an one example of that...
  103. @HA
    "It’s very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years…"

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe. Draining the swamps and marshes of Europe was a massive public works project that lasted over a millennium, but it became especially important about a century ago, when people realized that lethargy is a way of life where hookworm is endemic, and that that was no coincidence. (According to the hygiene hypothesis, the subsequent reduction of swamp and marshland parasites also possibly spurred the rise of Crohn's disease, hyper-allergies, and other autoimmune disorders in recent generations, given that human immune systems that had evolved to battle such parasites now go haywire and attack the host. It's always something.)

    http://rockefeller100.org/exhibits/show/health/eradicating-hookworm

    The newfound awareness of parasites also had deep political implications, as both Nazis and Communists incorporated the concept of parasitism into their ideologies. Not much has changed in that regard, judging from the comments sections of unz.com. I am curious whether the hygiene hypothesis, as it becomes better known, will have some similar impact on the political Zeitgeist.

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe. Draining the swamps and marshes of Europe was a massive public works project that lasted over a millennium, but it became especially important about a century ago, when people realized that lethargy is a way of life where hookworm is endemic, and that that was no coincidence.

    At some point, I’ll look into the effects of parasites/infections on IQ.

    Read More
  104. @Ron Unz

    If I read the linked post correctly, in between the grumbling and the hemming and hawing, she’s actually saying she can’t find anything obviously wrong with the low ’72 Irish scores, which means the mystery of the extreme rise remains unsolved. (She does say, basically, that she’d trust the scores more if they were more trustworthy, but come on, this is social science — when is that not the case?) I’m not knocking her, or saying her issues with the low scores are not valid, but this hardly amounts to a refutation.
     
    Yes, when I originally came out with my big Race/IQ article and follow-up series a couple of years ago, "HBD*Chick" was one of my most energetic critics, with a long sequences of agitated posts. But when the dust cleared, I believe that my analysis was proven correct in virtually every individual case and particular.

    The ultimate story regarding that extremely large Irish IQ study turned out to be particularly ironic. About six months after the heated dispute regarding the study's contested validity had died down, she (or maybe it's "he") dropped me a note that the original academic author had learned of the dispute, gotten in touch, and confirmed the extreme precision of the methodology:

    http://www.ronunz.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/IrishIQ-HBDChick.pdf

    Given the enormously large sample size and our detailed knowledge of the apparently remarkable scrupulousness with which the study was conducted, I think a case can be made that the 1972 Irish IQ study is just about the single best IQ datapoint we have anywhere. So if we know anything at all about IQ anywhere in the history of the world, it's that the Flynn-adjusted Irish IQ was 87(!) in 1972.

    Here's my short 2013 column in which I mentioned this along with a couple of other amusing codas:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-revised/

    And for those so interested, here's a link to my original article plus the 20,000 words of follow-up columns, summarizing the very long and contentious debate:

    http://www.unz.com/author/ron-unz/topic/race-iq/?ItemOrder=ASC

    Dear Ron,

    1. The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.

    2. I’ve read through the controversy, but I haven’t seen anyone yet prove something of vital importance to the debate: the average IQ of the Irish who left. The assumption is that Irish IQ was low because of a prolonged brain drain. What proof is there that those who left were smarter than those who stayed? It’s flattering to Irish Americans, surely, but the fact is Ireland is a great place to be if you’re smart, well connected, and well off. One could just as easily argue the poorer (and thus less intelligent?) had greater cause to leave. Indeed, the famine Irish, at least, were largely from the poorer West (also the most native Gaelic). This cohort forms the bulk of the Irish American community. Still, even excluding the Famine, the areas of Ireland which had (have) the highest emigration levels are in the west and southwest.
    As genetic data show an East-West divide within Ireland, and as it is argued that the former (being more Anglo/Norman) is more intelligent than the latter (being more Gaelic), perhaps due to earlier rates of outbreeding, it doesn’t make sense that the less intelligent Irish in Ireland became more intelligent abroad than the more intelligent Irish at home.
    Whether Irish IQ increased dramatically, the case that the halting of the brain drain caused that increase is dubious at best.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    1. The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.
     
    Well, here's my handy chart of all the 60-odd European (and European-derived) national IQ studies in Richard Lynn's big IQ book:



    Looking at the age ranges, the overwhelming majority of the samples include children younger than 13, and that's the case for nearly all the IQ samples you find elsewhere as well. So you're basically saying that we should throw out nearly all our existing national IQ datasets, past and present, as invalid.

    For all I know, you might be correct, but wouldn't burning all the empirical IQ books by Lynn and everyone else tend to eliminate any meaningful scientific debate....
    , @Ron Unz

    The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.
     
    Actually, I had one further thought regarding the important testing-age question you raised. I should emphasize that I have *zero* professional expertise in psychometics, but here's something obvious to consider...

    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years, and I noted that the vast majority of the IQ studies he cites include children younger than 13, which would be odd if he and his colleagues regarded such results as of doubtful validity. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves why the trained psychometricians who conducted the hundreds of such worldwide studies catalogued in his various books would have wasted their time and money producing such invalid data, and the same is true for most of the IQ studies I've seen elsewhere.

    So while my own ignorance prevents me from judging the validity of IQ tests at such ages, the overwhelming empirical evidence is that nearly all professional psychometricians do regard such scores as being reasonably valid...
  105. @Jay
    Regarding Harpending's claim that much of educational spending does not improve the quality nor quantity of knowledge gained by students, my father went to school for about 6 months annually between 1908-1916 in rural Alabama. After completing the 8th grade, he got his father's permission to leave school to work. He began as a shipping clerk in a commercial bakery and rose to be the general manager. Later he set up and managed other bakeries and automobile dealerships. His success was certainly greater than average, but several generations of Americans got sufficient education in one- and two-room school houses to play their roles in creating the wealthy and civilized society that is the envy of the world. It is the attitude and aptitude of the students, together with the curriculum, that determines educational outcome, not the physical plant nor the teachers' salaries. Observations during twenty-five years as a college professor did nothing but reinforce this early opinion of mine.

    I think that attitude sure would kill the attitude that has lead to school mergers in small-town America

    Read More
  106. @War for Blair Mountain
    The SPLC is a hyper-ethnic Jewish Organization waging hyper-ethnic Jewish warfare against The Historic Native Born White Christian American Majority.

    The SPLC is funded completely by hyper-ethnic Jewish multi-$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$aires. The SPLC management is 98 percent Jewsish.

    Remember the USS Liberty!!!!!!!!!

    We must remember the USS Liberty. It was a spectacularly hatefilled attempt to kill non-Jewish allies and leave no trace, for perceived gain. Luckily it failed, except for the killing part.

    Even if the IDF had succeeded in sinking the Liberty, with no survivors, various countries’ Intelligence listening posts, even as far away as Scotland, had heard and recorded much of the horror, so Israel would not have gotten off Scot (ahem) free. Still they pretty much got away with it.

    Read More
  107. Coincidentally, I recently received Harpending (and Cochrane)’s The 10,000 Year Explosion from Amazon, though I am only on the first chapter. But I’ve read the SPLC website extensively, and read its critics, and what really troubles me is why?

    I understand that it is a money making machine for an expert at direct mail, and is humorously referred to as a hedge fund, if it is not actually a hedge fund – but why? Why does it have such a bizzare ideology?

    Either they actually believe in what they are doing, in which case they often lie to further the good cause, which is accepted as virtuous by the Left and in the Talmud, or they really don’t believe, but have found an exploitable market segment that does believe … And so, money.

    Read More
  108. @JayMan

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don’t.
     
    Oh I wouldn't say that. Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true "Southern Europeans". There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the "Core" European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.
     
    Nope. I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    Nobody is questioning your Hajnal expertise. The “variation within the Hajnal line region” that you’re talking about is actually two very distinct cultures: the Anglo-Germanic one in the northwest (which includes Ireland, Finland and Austria), and the Latin one in the southwest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    The “variation within the Hajnal line region” that you’re talking about is actually two very distinct cultures: the Anglo-Germanic one in the northwest (which includes Ireland, Finland and Austria), and the Latin one in the southwest.
     
    Distinct, but similar.

    Degree my friend, degree.

  109. @JayMan

    Well, I’d hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I’m arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.
     
    Well, g is not exactly the genetic component of IQ (although it is the most heritable). It is the "active" component. The predictive validity of IQ tests comes from the g-factor. Non-g-loaded IQ gains don't seem to translate into anything in the real world.

    You can see all sorts of variation in IQ scores, primarily due to some form of measurement error. Measurement error can be random (e.g., the type that attenuates the heritability in trait studies) or non-random (e.g., IQ tests losing g-loadings). The Flynn effect is likely mostly due to this latter factor.


    Let’s leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.
     
    Some (probably most) of that is due to testing error (like language difficulties). But some of it is also due to intermixing (and likely selective migration/attrition). Few of those groups are "pure" today but are heavily admixed with each other and previous White Americans.

    In any case, I'll go into much more detail on this in a future post.

    Non-g-loaded IQ gains don’t seem to translate into anything in the real world

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000105

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan


    Non-g-loaded IQ gains don’t seem to translate into anything in the real world
     
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000105
     
    This is a useful paper, but there's more than a little genetic confounding going on.
  110. @JayMan

    Societies succeed because they’ve built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.
     
    Not quite.

    Immigrants who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society.
     
    Immigrants aren't necessarily deleterious to a society.

    Don’t read too well, do you?

    Missed the piece about “do not have that ingrained culture” did we?

    I am myself an immigrant in these here Untied States, but being English have an abundance, rather than an absence, of the ingrained culture.

    I am, I’m sure my wife would claim, destructive to many things, but social capital is not one of them.

    Read More
  111. @HA
    "It’s very difficult for me to see a strictly hereditarian explanation for a 25-30 point rise in relative IQ scores in just 50-60 years…"

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe. Draining the swamps and marshes of Europe was a massive public works project that lasted over a millennium, but it became especially important about a century ago, when people realized that lethargy is a way of life where hookworm is endemic, and that that was no coincidence. (According to the hygiene hypothesis, the subsequent reduction of swamp and marshland parasites also possibly spurred the rise of Crohn's disease, hyper-allergies, and other autoimmune disorders in recent generations, given that human immune systems that had evolved to battle such parasites now go haywire and attack the host. It's always something.)

    http://rockefeller100.org/exhibits/show/health/eradicating-hookworm

    The newfound awareness of parasites also had deep political implications, as both Nazis and Communists incorporated the concept of parasitism into their ideologies. Not much has changed in that regard, judging from the comments sections of unz.com. I am curious whether the hygiene hypothesis, as it becomes better known, will have some similar impact on the political Zeitgeist.

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe.

    Sure, it seems plausible that the eradication of hookworm and various other low-level infections may partly explain the huge rise in some relative IQ scores, along with nutritional factors. But in the specific cases I mentioned, regarding the American-born children of Italian, Greek, Slavic, and other European immigrant groups, that factor doesn’t seem likely.

    During the early decades of the 20th century, whites living in the Southern states, especially rural areas, were overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon in ancestry, while the Southern and Eastern European immigrant groups I’m discussing almost entirely lived in the North, mostly in the large Eastern and Midwestern urban centers such as New York, Chicago, and Boston. I doubt they suffered much from parasites or special nutritional deprivation, at least compared with rural America. That’s why I strongly believe the main cause behind the very low IQ scores was “cultural” rather than “physical” deprivation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    "...regarding the American-born children of Italian, Greek, Slavic, and other European immigrant groups, [the eradication of hookworm and various other low-level infections] doesn’t seem likely...I strongly believe the main cause behind the very low IQ scores was “cultural” rather than “physical” deprivation."

    That's a fair point, but given how long those swamps had been around, I maintain that the local culture was also likely to have been impacted by those low-level infections, in inelastic ways, and therefore, there is more to consider than just the direct physical effects. Culture develops differently in a society where a significant portion of the collective blood supply ends up inside some parasite's gut. People do not expect anyone to mach schnell, like they do up north. They do not expect anyone will arrive for an appointment on time, or make an effort, etc. They even speak more slowly. And voilà, IQ scores are depressed. Of course, warmer temperatures are responsible for some of that sloth, and that has to be separated out. But once that casual attitude works itself into the culture, those habits will not instantaneously revert once the parasites go away or someone crosses the Atlantic. There may well be a more gradual shift.

    Admittedly that's a lot of supposition, but I think it's worth considering. Perhaps in the future that can be tested by comparing Flynn effect of African (or Chinese or Indian) rural immigrants from both highland and lowland altitudes, assuming that the latter areas are generally more malarial and full of parasites.

    Anyway, if Mussolini had lived a few decades earlier, he might have found it much more difficult to get those proverbial trains to run on time, given that there were considerably more swamps back then.

  112. @JayMan

    Well, I’d hardly deny that the genetic component of intelligence is unaffected by environmental factors, which is a merely syllogism. All I’m arguing is that the results of IQ tests seem subject to massive socio-economic influences, and the evidence for that hypothesis seems absolutely overwhelming.
     
    Well, g is not exactly the genetic component of IQ (although it is the most heritable). It is the "active" component. The predictive validity of IQ tests comes from the g-factor. Non-g-loaded IQ gains don't seem to translate into anything in the real world.

    You can see all sorts of variation in IQ scores, primarily due to some form of measurement error. Measurement error can be random (e.g., the type that attenuates the heritability in trait studies) or non-random (e.g., IQ tests losing g-loadings). The Flynn effect is likely mostly due to this latter factor.


    Let’s leave aside all those IQ scores in Europe I discussed and just focus on America for a moment. In the early decades of the 20th century, virtually all IQ studies, quite numerous in number, showed that children from Italian, Greek, Portugese, Slavic, and other Southern and Eastern European families in the U.S. scored 25-30 points below mainstream whites, yet today their IQ scores seemed to be pretty similar.
     
    Some (probably most) of that is due to testing error (like language difficulties). But some of it is also due to intermixing (and likely selective migration/attrition). Few of those groups are "pure" today but are heavily admixed with each other and previous White Americans.

    In any case, I'll go into much more detail on this in a future post.

    You can see all sorts of variation in IQ scores, primarily due to some form of measurement error.

    Well, if all the numerous 1920s IQ tests of Italian-Americans, Greek-Americans, Slavic-Americans, etc. showed them to score 25-30 points lower than mainstream, mostly Northwest-European-Americans, the apparent 2 SD “measurement error” must have been a very remarkable set of coincidences, and call into question the validity of the tests.

    But some of it is also due to intermixing (and likely selective migration/attrition).

    That seems extremely unlikely. As far as I know, there’s absolutely *zero* evidence that the many millions of mostly “unmixed” Italian-Americans and Greek-Americans today have mean IQs of 75 or whatever. Though admittedly our friend “Jefferson” might be an one example of that…

    Read More
  113. @jeppo
    I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    Nobody is questioning your Hajnal expertise. The "variation within the Hajnal line region" that you're talking about is actually two very distinct cultures: the Anglo-Germanic one in the northwest (which includes Ireland, Finland and Austria), and the Latin one in the southwest.

    The “variation within the Hajnal line region” that you’re talking about is actually two very distinct cultures: the Anglo-Germanic one in the northwest (which includes Ireland, Finland and Austria), and the Latin one in the southwest.

    Distinct, but similar.

    Degree my friend, degree.

    Read More
  114. @matt

    Non-g-loaded IQ gains don’t seem to translate into anything in the real world
     
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000105

    Non-g-loaded IQ gains don’t seem to translate into anything in the real world

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000105

    This is a useful paper, but there’s more than a little genetic confounding going on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @E. L. Armstrong
    Insofar as genetic effects are g-loaded, the genetic confound would tend to INCREASE the apparent correlation of these variables with g.

    Also see
    http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1001826

    There are likely many sources of domain-general ability in humans, and the g factor in one population represents a mix of these different sources. Thus, a highly general effect on a component of g that is not represented strongly in the general population could easily appear to not be g-loaded. I think that is going on with the studies above. I also think that is what is going on with (some of) the educational and Flynn effect gains. A corollary of this hypothesis, though, is that g has more environmental admixture in populations with poorer environmental quality, which entails that MCV between g and genetic variables will be weaker and between g and environmental variables stronger. To my knowledge this prediction has not been confirmed –– in fact, the available data tends to disconfirm it (if memory serves). I suspect an effect, though, and I am presently re-analyzing some Army test data from 1918, which might produce some relevant results.
  115. @Art
    “The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have, the Romans certainly could have done it, is that a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe.”

    This is ridicules – the reason the Industrial Revolution happened in the 1800’s is because of one man - Isaac Newton. His science and its practitioners made the Industrial Revolution possible. This was 100% an intellectual cultural advancement – not a biological evolutionary advancement.

    The place where it happened does have to do with evolution. Surviving in cold climates requires thinking, industriousness, and cooperation --- all intellectual traits. There is no room in the cold north for slackers. The intellectual northern culture does not value them. This evolution situation went on for thousands of years.

    There could easily have been an industrial revolution in Roman times. Take a look at this set of Roman water wheels in Syria at

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCNKLy_Diz8cCFQeWiAod0sIHLA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdepositphotos.com%2F3557876%2Fstock-photo-aqueduct-with-water-wheel-in.html&ei=G2ziVZKSD4esogTShZ_gAg&psig=AFQjCNFidSGp0C2Y4xSTqbxzApx9K-0WnA&ust=1440988436271936

    BTW they have been maintained and repaired by the Syrian government. They almost certainly are not the original wood.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Well if some idiot Roman hadn't murdered Archimedes imagine Roman engineering with calculus. He was working at the fringes and could have finished 2000 years ahead of Newton and Leibniz.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archimedes
  116. @Hector_St_Clare
    "I've never seen an African with a hobby. They're different."

    This is of course bullsh*t. I lived in Africa for three years, in a mostly peasant and fishing community: I knew plenty of people who had hobbies. This is a pitch-perfect example of HBD people shooting themselves in the foot by making outrageous, exaggerated, and clearly falsifiable claims (almost on par with James Watson's remarks about African employees).

    To put my cards on the table, I'm a working biologist, and though my politics tend far left, I'm strongly hereditarian when it comes to esplaining IQ and personality differences. (I like to call myself a neoreactionary communist, drawing left-wing conclusions from right wing premises). And I'm agnostic on the broader question of whether racial differences in IQ are due to genetic factors or something else (and quite hostile to cultural liberalism in general). That having been said, that one of the supposed leading lights of HBD would make such a statistically sloppy and easily falsified remark doesn't exactly help your 'movement', to say the least.

    My comment was about an anecdotal observation that I found interesting. It would be nice to have more data, in this case informative anecdotes even. I have no particular attachment to this particular “hypothesis”.

    Many of the “hbd crew” that I know have little or no interest in the politics of the matters. Human biological diversity is interesting enough without its hangers-on ever vigilant for symptoms of incorrect thought. (BTW I am not slamming you with this remark.)

    Read More
  117. @BubbaJoe
    Dear Ron,

    1. The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.

    2. I've read through the controversy, but I haven't seen anyone yet prove something of vital importance to the debate: the average IQ of the Irish who left. The assumption is that Irish IQ was low because of a prolonged brain drain. What proof is there that those who left were smarter than those who stayed? It's flattering to Irish Americans, surely, but the fact is Ireland is a great place to be if you're smart, well connected, and well off. One could just as easily argue the poorer (and thus less intelligent?) had greater cause to leave. Indeed, the famine Irish, at least, were largely from the poorer West (also the most native Gaelic). This cohort forms the bulk of the Irish American community. Still, even excluding the Famine, the areas of Ireland which had (have) the highest emigration levels are in the west and southwest.
    As genetic data show an East-West divide within Ireland, and as it is argued that the former (being more Anglo/Norman) is more intelligent than the latter (being more Gaelic), perhaps due to earlier rates of outbreeding, it doesn't make sense that the less intelligent Irish in Ireland became more intelligent abroad than the more intelligent Irish at home.
    Whether Irish IQ increased dramatically, the case that the halting of the brain drain caused that increase is dubious at best.

    1. The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.

    Well, here’s my handy chart of all the 60-odd European (and European-derived) national IQ studies in Richard Lynn’s big IQ book:

    Looking at the age ranges, the overwhelming majority of the samples include children younger than 13, and that’s the case for nearly all the IQ samples you find elsewhere as well. So you’re basically saying that we should throw out nearly all our existing national IQ datasets, past and present, as invalid.

    For all I know, you might be correct, but wouldn’t burning all the empirical IQ books by Lynn and everyone else tend to eliminate any meaningful scientific debate….

    Read More
    • Replies: @BubbaJoe
    From that list, I count 15 countries which have IQ scores from both adults and children (12 have only one data set, and 5 are only of children). Of the 15, ten show higher IQ scores for adults compared to children (Den, Czech, Bulg, W.Germ., Gre., Irel., Pol., Port., Sp., and Sweden) and five show higher IQ scores for children compared to adults (Belg., Fin., Fr., Italy, and Switz.).


    So you’re basically saying that we should throw out nearly all our existing national IQ datasets, past and present, as invalid.


    Maybe, maybe not. I'm no expert, and don't claim to be, but it is strange to group 5 year olds with 11 year olds. It seems more valid to wait for full brain maturation to occur before testing its ability, or at least test people of the same age- that's what PISA does. The 11+ was given at age 11, not 5. We don't do this in athletic ability- that's why we have adult and U-x leagues. Maybe children are smarter than adults. Maybe they're better soccer players too, and no one has noticed this yet. Personally, I don't think book burning is a good idea, but precision is important, especially with such a sensitive topic.
  118. @Ron Unz

    With regard to non-hereditarian explanations, eradicating parasites like hookworm in the early decades of the previous century is cited as a possible cause for the IQ rise in the Southern states of the US, and throughout Southern and Eastern Europe.
     
    Sure, it seems plausible that the eradication of hookworm and various other low-level infections may partly explain the huge rise in some relative IQ scores, along with nutritional factors. But in the specific cases I mentioned, regarding the American-born children of Italian, Greek, Slavic, and other European immigrant groups, that factor doesn't seem likely.

    During the early decades of the 20th century, whites living in the Southern states, especially rural areas, were overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon in ancestry, while the Southern and Eastern European immigrant groups I'm discussing almost entirely lived in the North, mostly in the large Eastern and Midwestern urban centers such as New York, Chicago, and Boston. I doubt they suffered much from parasites or special nutritional deprivation, at least compared with rural America. That's why I strongly believe the main cause behind the very low IQ scores was "cultural" rather than "physical" deprivation.

    “…regarding the American-born children of Italian, Greek, Slavic, and other European immigrant groups, [the eradication of hookworm and various other low-level infections] doesn’t seem likely…I strongly believe the main cause behind the very low IQ scores was “cultural” rather than “physical” deprivation.”

    That’s a fair point, but given how long those swamps had been around, I maintain that the local culture was also likely to have been impacted by those low-level infections, in inelastic ways, and therefore, there is more to consider than just the direct physical effects. Culture develops differently in a society where a significant portion of the collective blood supply ends up inside some parasite’s gut. People do not expect anyone to mach schnell, like they do up north. They do not expect anyone will arrive for an appointment on time, or make an effort, etc. They even speak more slowly. And voilà, IQ scores are depressed. Of course, warmer temperatures are responsible for some of that sloth, and that has to be separated out. But once that casual attitude works itself into the culture, those habits will not instantaneously revert once the parasites go away or someone crosses the Atlantic. There may well be a more gradual shift.

    Admittedly that’s a lot of supposition, but I think it’s worth considering. Perhaps in the future that can be tested by comparing Flynn effect of African (or Chinese or Indian) rural immigrants from both highland and lowland altitudes, assuming that the latter areas are generally more malarial and full of parasites.

    Anyway, if Mussolini had lived a few decades earlier, he might have found it much more difficult to get those proverbial trains to run on time, given that there were considerably more swamps back then.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    That’s a fair point, but given how long those swamps had been around, I maintain that the local culture was also likely to have been impacted by those low-level infections, in inelastic ways, and therefore, there is more to consider than just the direct physical effects. Culture develops differently in a society where a significant portion of the collective blood supply ends up inside some parasite’s gut.
     
    Yes, it's a very reasonable possibility that at least a good fraction of Southern European economic and cultural underdevelopment has been due to a long history of greater endemic disease and parasitic infestations, much like Africa. And that underdevelopment could impact IQ scores for a couple of generations, even after the families had moved to northern cities in the U.S.

    But very much the same depressed IQ scores seem to have also occurred in Slavic immigrants, who were impoverished and uneducated, but whose colder European countries didn't have the same sorts of problems with parasites. Even more notably, the Ireland Irish IQ was still quite low as late as the 1970s, long after endemic disease had been eradicated throughout Europe. Furthermore, Lynn found that IQs in Southern Italy and Sicily were still around 90 or so as late as 2010.

    The hypothesis I raised in my 2013 paper and follow-up columns were that rural life, especially in the pre-electronic era, produced the sort of "cultural deprivation" that artificially depressed IQ scores. The evidence really seems quite strong, and I'm surprised others don't seem to have previously noticed it:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-the-ruralurban-divide/
  119. @Ron Unz

    What is the current IQ of the Irish? Have there been any recent studies?
     
    Well, why don't you bother taking a look at the links I copiously supplied upthread? A couple of years ago I published something like 25,000 words on all these issues, leading to a very widespread debate on this and related topics. Here's one of my columns focusing on the Irish IQ issue in particular:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/raceiq-irish-iq-chinese-iq/

    Why did you get all defensive for asking a simple question?

    I read them later but I didn’t think my question was out of order.

    Thanks for the links in previous and this post.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Why did you get all defensive for asking a simple question?
     
    Well, I'm sorry for getting irritated and being a bit snappish. But I did publish a major article and a long series of columns on all those issues a couple of years ago, which provoked a huge debate all across the Internet. The evidence about Irish IQ was one of the biggest aspects of that debate, and the article has been prominently displayed on this very website for the last year or two. In addition, I'd already provided links on this very comment-thread to all of that material, including everything we know about Irish IQ, so I got annoyed when you asked me "Do we know anything about current Irish IQ?"
  120. @Ron Unz

    1. The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.
     
    Well, here's my handy chart of all the 60-odd European (and European-derived) national IQ studies in Richard Lynn's big IQ book:



    Looking at the age ranges, the overwhelming majority of the samples include children younger than 13, and that's the case for nearly all the IQ samples you find elsewhere as well. So you're basically saying that we should throw out nearly all our existing national IQ datasets, past and present, as invalid.

    For all I know, you might be correct, but wouldn't burning all the empirical IQ books by Lynn and everyone else tend to eliminate any meaningful scientific debate....

    From that list, I count 15 countries which have IQ scores from both adults and children (12 have only one data set, and 5 are only of children). Of the 15, ten show higher IQ scores for adults compared to children (Den, Czech, Bulg, W.Germ., Gre., Irel., Pol., Port., Sp., and Sweden) and five show higher IQ scores for children compared to adults (Belg., Fin., Fr., Italy, and Switz.).


    So you’re basically saying that we should throw out nearly all our existing national IQ datasets, past and present, as invalid.

    Maybe, maybe not. I’m no expert, and don’t claim to be, but it is strange to group 5 year olds with 11 year olds. It seems more valid to wait for full brain maturation to occur before testing its ability, or at least test people of the same age- that’s what PISA does. The 11+ was given at age 11, not 5. We don’t do this in athletic ability- that’s why we have adult and U-x leagues. Maybe children are smarter than adults. Maybe they’re better soccer players too, and no one has noticed this yet. Personally, I don’t think book burning is a good idea, but precision is important, especially with such a sensitive topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan
    @BubbaJoe:

    Maybe, maybe not. I’m no expert, and don’t claim to be, but it is strange to group 5 year olds with 11 year olds. It seems more valid to wait for full brain maturation to occur before testing its ability, or at least test people of the same age- that’s what PISA does.
     
    The two upsides of testing children are that you presumably get a more representative sample (tests on adults tend to under-sample low-scorers because they are less likely to participate in the test) and that you get to view a younger cohort.

    The downside is that IQ tests are unreliable with children (shared environment effects haven't yet dissipated).

  121. @Leftist conservative
    I agree with most of what you say here, but there are some huge points you fail to consider...

    1) blacks ARE capable of doing most jobs...the value of IQ is overrated when it comes to how blacks perform MOST jobs...you don't need to be a genius to be a bartender, a waiter, a mechanic..
    2) you and most of the dissident right greatly underrate the power of behavioural conditioning, i.e., propaganda, which is after all, an environmental factor. Look at how brainwashed the liberals and conservatives are! That should be proof right there that environmental factors are a huge aspect of human behavior.

    “you don’t need to be a genius to be . . . a mechanic”

    But it helps to be smart. At least, I prefer those diagnosing my car’s problems to be smart. Saves return trips.

    Read More
  122. @BubbaJoe
    From that list, I count 15 countries which have IQ scores from both adults and children (12 have only one data set, and 5 are only of children). Of the 15, ten show higher IQ scores for adults compared to children (Den, Czech, Bulg, W.Germ., Gre., Irel., Pol., Port., Sp., and Sweden) and five show higher IQ scores for children compared to adults (Belg., Fin., Fr., Italy, and Switz.).


    So you’re basically saying that we should throw out nearly all our existing national IQ datasets, past and present, as invalid.


    Maybe, maybe not. I'm no expert, and don't claim to be, but it is strange to group 5 year olds with 11 year olds. It seems more valid to wait for full brain maturation to occur before testing its ability, or at least test people of the same age- that's what PISA does. The 11+ was given at age 11, not 5. We don't do this in athletic ability- that's why we have adult and U-x leagues. Maybe children are smarter than adults. Maybe they're better soccer players too, and no one has noticed this yet. Personally, I don't think book burning is a good idea, but precision is important, especially with such a sensitive topic.

    Maybe, maybe not. I’m no expert, and don’t claim to be, but it is strange to group 5 year olds with 11 year olds. It seems more valid to wait for full brain maturation to occur before testing its ability, or at least test people of the same age- that’s what PISA does.

    The two upsides of testing children are that you presumably get a more representative sample (tests on adults tend to under-sample low-scorers because they are less likely to participate in the test) and that you get to view a younger cohort.

    The downside is that IQ tests are unreliable with children (shared environment effects haven’t yet dissipated).

    Read More
    • Replies: @BubbaJoe
    Are IQ tests more or less predictive at age 5 or at age 11? What is the reason/value behind giving IQ tests to a range of child ages as opposed to one set age?
  123. @HA
    "...regarding the American-born children of Italian, Greek, Slavic, and other European immigrant groups, [the eradication of hookworm and various other low-level infections] doesn’t seem likely...I strongly believe the main cause behind the very low IQ scores was “cultural” rather than “physical” deprivation."

    That's a fair point, but given how long those swamps had been around, I maintain that the local culture was also likely to have been impacted by those low-level infections, in inelastic ways, and therefore, there is more to consider than just the direct physical effects. Culture develops differently in a society where a significant portion of the collective blood supply ends up inside some parasite's gut. People do not expect anyone to mach schnell, like they do up north. They do not expect anyone will arrive for an appointment on time, or make an effort, etc. They even speak more slowly. And voilà, IQ scores are depressed. Of course, warmer temperatures are responsible for some of that sloth, and that has to be separated out. But once that casual attitude works itself into the culture, those habits will not instantaneously revert once the parasites go away or someone crosses the Atlantic. There may well be a more gradual shift.

    Admittedly that's a lot of supposition, but I think it's worth considering. Perhaps in the future that can be tested by comparing Flynn effect of African (or Chinese or Indian) rural immigrants from both highland and lowland altitudes, assuming that the latter areas are generally more malarial and full of parasites.

    Anyway, if Mussolini had lived a few decades earlier, he might have found it much more difficult to get those proverbial trains to run on time, given that there were considerably more swamps back then.

    That’s a fair point, but given how long those swamps had been around, I maintain that the local culture was also likely to have been impacted by those low-level infections, in inelastic ways, and therefore, there is more to consider than just the direct physical effects. Culture develops differently in a society where a significant portion of the collective blood supply ends up inside some parasite’s gut.

    Yes, it’s a very reasonable possibility that at least a good fraction of Southern European economic and cultural underdevelopment has been due to a long history of greater endemic disease and parasitic infestations, much like Africa. And that underdevelopment could impact IQ scores for a couple of generations, even after the families had moved to northern cities in the U.S.

    But very much the same depressed IQ scores seem to have also occurred in Slavic immigrants, who were impoverished and uneducated, but whose colder European countries didn’t have the same sorts of problems with parasites. Even more notably, the Ireland Irish IQ was still quite low as late as the 1970s, long after endemic disease had been eradicated throughout Europe. Furthermore, Lynn found that IQs in Southern Italy and Sicily were still around 90 or so as late as 2010.

    The hypothesis I raised in my 2013 paper and follow-up columns were that rural life, especially in the pre-electronic era, produced the sort of “cultural deprivation” that artificially depressed IQ scores. The evidence really seems quite strong, and I’m surprised others don’t seem to have previously noticed it:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-the-ruralurban-divide/

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    The hypothesis I raised in my 2013 paper and follow-up columns were that rural life, especially in the pre-electronic era, produced the sort of “cultural deprivation” that artificially depressed IQ scores.
     
    Makes sense. The low-IQ Slavic immigrants were most likely products of centuries of serfdom, a situation not unlike that of Mexican peasants (and presumably Irish ones). Indeed Jensen found similarities between Mexicans and these types of Europeans, with respect to IQ.
    , @HA
    I agree that parasite reduction is an unlikely explanation for the observed (or apparent) rise in Irish IQ scores.

    That being said, the Rockefeller effort to rid the country of swamp parasites extended to outhouse management, and the discovery that cesspools needed to be 4 feet away from human contact:


    As Despommier tells it, in the early part of the 20th century, millionaire John D. Rockefeller set out to profit from southern industry, but was stymied by the lack of productivity from an unenergetic workforce. Rockefeller funded studies that discovered the cause: a microscopic hookworm which could travel up to 4 feet in soil from a site of defecation.
     
    http://endtheneglect.org/2012/01/how-the-outhouse-helped-save-the-south-and-what-it-can-do-for-the-worlds-bottom-billion/

    Ah yes, if one is to better exploit the working masses, then one will have to find a way around all that laziness. The invisible hand strikes again.

    I'm more familiar with the removal of European wetlands than the evolution of outhouse management over the same time, but when it comes to Flynn effect in rural areas, the latter is also worth looking into, though again, the effect was probably much larger in Southern Europe and the American South in the earlier decades of the last century, then it would have been in Ireland or the Northern Slavic countries.

  124. @Pure and Easy
    Why did you get all defensive for asking a simple question?

    I read them later but I didn't think my question was out of order.

    Thanks for the links in previous and this post.

    Why did you get all defensive for asking a simple question?

    Well, I’m sorry for getting irritated and being a bit snappish. But I did publish a major article and a long series of columns on all those issues a couple of years ago, which provoked a huge debate all across the Internet. The evidence about Irish IQ was one of the biggest aspects of that debate, and the article has been prominently displayed on this very website for the last year or two. In addition, I’d already provided links on this very comment-thread to all of that material, including everything we know about Irish IQ, so I got annoyed when you asked me “Do we know anything about current Irish IQ?”

    Read More
  125. @harpend
    There could easily have been an industrial revolution in Roman times. Take a look at this set of Roman water wheels in Syria at

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CAcQjRxqFQoTCNKLy_Diz8cCFQeWiAod0sIHLA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdepositphotos.com%2F3557876%2Fstock-photo-aqueduct-with-water-wheel-in.html&ei=G2ziVZKSD4esogTShZ_gAg&psig=AFQjCNFidSGp0C2Y4xSTqbxzApx9K-0WnA&ust=1440988436271936

    BTW they have been maintained and repaired by the Syrian government. They almost certainly are not the original wood.

    Well if some idiot Roman hadn’t murdered Archimedes imagine Roman engineering with calculus. He was working at the fringes and could have finished 2000 years ahead of Newton and Leibniz.

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

    Read More
  126. @Ron Unz

    That’s a fair point, but given how long those swamps had been around, I maintain that the local culture was also likely to have been impacted by those low-level infections, in inelastic ways, and therefore, there is more to consider than just the direct physical effects. Culture develops differently in a society where a significant portion of the collective blood supply ends up inside some parasite’s gut.
     
    Yes, it's a very reasonable possibility that at least a good fraction of Southern European economic and cultural underdevelopment has been due to a long history of greater endemic disease and parasitic infestations, much like Africa. And that underdevelopment could impact IQ scores for a couple of generations, even after the families had moved to northern cities in the U.S.

    But very much the same depressed IQ scores seem to have also occurred in Slavic immigrants, who were impoverished and uneducated, but whose colder European countries didn't have the same sorts of problems with parasites. Even more notably, the Ireland Irish IQ was still quite low as late as the 1970s, long after endemic disease had been eradicated throughout Europe. Furthermore, Lynn found that IQs in Southern Italy and Sicily were still around 90 or so as late as 2010.

    The hypothesis I raised in my 2013 paper and follow-up columns were that rural life, especially in the pre-electronic era, produced the sort of "cultural deprivation" that artificially depressed IQ scores. The evidence really seems quite strong, and I'm surprised others don't seem to have previously noticed it:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-the-ruralurban-divide/

    The hypothesis I raised in my 2013 paper and follow-up columns were that rural life, especially in the pre-electronic era, produced the sort of “cultural deprivation” that artificially depressed IQ scores.

    Makes sense. The low-IQ Slavic immigrants were most likely products of centuries of serfdom, a situation not unlike that of Mexican peasants (and presumably Irish ones). Indeed Jensen found similarities between Mexicans and these types of Europeans, with respect to IQ.

    Read More
  127. @Rifleman

    Actually no, they are not cultural Marxists. They are predatory globalists, they are after something different, this is why they support open borders as well.
     
    Good luck trying to convince them of this.

    The stupidity and denial and resistance of the White male idiots and their fetish for the threat of "Cultural Marxism" NEVER ENDS!!!

    They crave it like a baby craves his bottle!

    The globalist/free trade/open borders claque is more about turning the West into a giant 3rd world pest hole full of ignorant and docile laborers that are easily exploited for their corporations. Where they become a hereditary aristocracy answerable to no one.

    They are Orwell’s boot of the tyrant stomping on the face of humanity for eternity.
     
    Plain for all to see and yet.................."CULTURAL MARXISM!!!!!"

    Right wing White male paranoids have a well earned reputation for stupidity.

    As I've written on here endlessly:

    "I’ve been trying to communicate this on these various sites for a while.

    Especially when some White male whatnot, commentators and writers, claims CULTURAL MARXISM!!!!! is on the loose and subverting the White race, Europe and America!

    These dopes seem to have gotten the idea from one of right wing White America’s favorite dopes Glenn Beck, I’m not sure. But even people who should know better like Pat Buchanan, Paul Gottfried and Stevarino have pandered to these guys with the Cultural marxism nonsense.

    I put it right up there with the”women hate Beta males and love bad boys and jerks” line that seem to make these White guys’ “‘ginas tingle”.

    It’s CULTURAL CAPITALISM that is running things.

    I could say it a million times and they WILL NOT get it.

    Cultural Capitalism wants a webbed global network of labor, consumption, resources, production, information/patents, money/credit/debt across ALL national borders. They want this to maximize profit margins for corporations and family trusts.

    Doesn’t matter whether it’s Fox News or the NYTimes. Republicans or Democrats. La Raza or the Chamber of Congress. The Bush family or the Clinton family. Same all over Europe.

    To them the nation state is an antiquated but for now necessary device for the development of laws and monetary policy. They have to work with it.

    But they are not too happy about it nor are they happy about the upstart peasants and lumpen bourgeoisie that want to cling to their guns and gods and communities and national identity.


    Except…………when it comes to Israel. But of course , that is a special case."

    That is mighty white supremacist of you to say all that wisdom.

    Read More
  128. @Ron Unz

    That’s a fair point, but given how long those swamps had been around, I maintain that the local culture was also likely to have been impacted by those low-level infections, in inelastic ways, and therefore, there is more to consider than just the direct physical effects. Culture develops differently in a society where a significant portion of the collective blood supply ends up inside some parasite’s gut.
     
    Yes, it's a very reasonable possibility that at least a good fraction of Southern European economic and cultural underdevelopment has been due to a long history of greater endemic disease and parasitic infestations, much like Africa. And that underdevelopment could impact IQ scores for a couple of generations, even after the families had moved to northern cities in the U.S.

    But very much the same depressed IQ scores seem to have also occurred in Slavic immigrants, who were impoverished and uneducated, but whose colder European countries didn't have the same sorts of problems with parasites. Even more notably, the Ireland Irish IQ was still quite low as late as the 1970s, long after endemic disease had been eradicated throughout Europe. Furthermore, Lynn found that IQs in Southern Italy and Sicily were still around 90 or so as late as 2010.

    The hypothesis I raised in my 2013 paper and follow-up columns were that rural life, especially in the pre-electronic era, produced the sort of "cultural deprivation" that artificially depressed IQ scores. The evidence really seems quite strong, and I'm surprised others don't seem to have previously noticed it:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-the-ruralurban-divide/

    I agree that parasite reduction is an unlikely explanation for the observed (or apparent) rise in Irish IQ scores.

    That being said, the Rockefeller effort to rid the country of swamp parasites extended to outhouse management, and the discovery that cesspools needed to be 4 feet away from human contact:

    As Despommier tells it, in the early part of the 20th century, millionaire John D. Rockefeller set out to profit from southern industry, but was stymied by the lack of productivity from an unenergetic workforce. Rockefeller funded studies that discovered the cause: a microscopic hookworm which could travel up to 4 feet in soil from a site of defecation.

    http://endtheneglect.org/2012/01/how-the-outhouse-helped-save-the-south-and-what-it-can-do-for-the-worlds-bottom-billion/

    Ah yes, if one is to better exploit the working masses, then one will have to find a way around all that laziness. The invisible hand strikes again.

    I’m more familiar with the removal of European wetlands than the evolution of outhouse management over the same time, but when it comes to Flynn effect in rural areas, the latter is also worth looking into, though again, the effect was probably much larger in Southern Europe and the American South in the earlier decades of the last century, then it would have been in Ireland or the Northern Slavic countries.

    Read More
  129. @BubbaJoe
    Dear Ron,

    1. The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.

    2. I've read through the controversy, but I haven't seen anyone yet prove something of vital importance to the debate: the average IQ of the Irish who left. The assumption is that Irish IQ was low because of a prolonged brain drain. What proof is there that those who left were smarter than those who stayed? It's flattering to Irish Americans, surely, but the fact is Ireland is a great place to be if you're smart, well connected, and well off. One could just as easily argue the poorer (and thus less intelligent?) had greater cause to leave. Indeed, the famine Irish, at least, were largely from the poorer West (also the most native Gaelic). This cohort forms the bulk of the Irish American community. Still, even excluding the Famine, the areas of Ireland which had (have) the highest emigration levels are in the west and southwest.
    As genetic data show an East-West divide within Ireland, and as it is argued that the former (being more Anglo/Norman) is more intelligent than the latter (being more Gaelic), perhaps due to earlier rates of outbreeding, it doesn't make sense that the less intelligent Irish in Ireland became more intelligent abroad than the more intelligent Irish at home.
    Whether Irish IQ increased dramatically, the case that the halting of the brain drain caused that increase is dubious at best.

    The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.

    Actually, I had one further thought regarding the important testing-age question you raised. I should emphasize that I have *zero* professional expertise in psychometics, but here’s something obvious to consider…

    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years, and I noted that the vast majority of the IQ studies he cites include children younger than 13, which would be odd if he and his colleagues regarded such results as of doubtful validity. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves why the trained psychometricians who conducted the hundreds of such worldwide studies catalogued in his various books would have wasted their time and money producing such invalid data, and the same is true for most of the IQ studies I’ve seen elsewhere.

    So while my own ignorance prevents me from judging the validity of IQ tests at such ages, the overwhelming empirical evidence is that nearly all professional psychometricians do regard such scores as being reasonably valid…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Emil Kirkegaard

    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years, and I noted that the vast majority of the IQ studies he cites include children younger than 13, which would be odd if he and his colleagues regarded such results as of doubtful validity. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves why the trained psychometricians who conducted the hundreds of such worldwide studies catalogued in his various books would have wasted their time and money producing such invalid data, and the same is true for most of the IQ studies I’ve seen elsewhere.
     
    Psychometrician, no. Psychometrics is a mathematically centered field dealing with issues of measurement. Lynn has not, to my knowledge, made contributions to that field.

    Psychologists who studies group, particularly racial, differences, yes, he is the last of the three grand old men (Jensen and Rushton being the other two).

    Lynn's style is a broad stokes style (see the interview of Lynn by Nyborg). His focus is on the big picture. His books contains loads of errors, many of which has been pointed out on the internet. With errors corrected, the big picture remains the same however. For some more even-handed dealing with the errors, read the works by Jason Malloy. Malloy have done a series of high quality reviews of IQ and achievement scores by country. Malloy's style is clearly that of a perfectionists. The problem is that Malloy is such a slow worker that his reviews cover only a small fraction of nations.

    Generally, when using IQs, I use the LV12 ones with the corrections made by Malloy. Hopefully, more people will start doing these high quality reviews for countries, so that we can obtain more reliable measurements.
  130. @Ron Unz

    The Gill study was of children from the ages of 5-11. How valid are IQ tests in that age range? My understanding is that one should wait until at least 13 (the age Lynn incorrectly stated the children were) for IQ testing. I suspect that is the reason Lynn altered the age, and that deception explains his behavior more than sloppiness.
     
    Actually, I had one further thought regarding the important testing-age question you raised. I should emphasize that I have *zero* professional expertise in psychometics, but here's something obvious to consider...

    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years, and I noted that the vast majority of the IQ studies he cites include children younger than 13, which would be odd if he and his colleagues regarded such results as of doubtful validity. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves why the trained psychometricians who conducted the hundreds of such worldwide studies catalogued in his various books would have wasted their time and money producing such invalid data, and the same is true for most of the IQ studies I've seen elsewhere.

    So while my own ignorance prevents me from judging the validity of IQ tests at such ages, the overwhelming empirical evidence is that nearly all professional psychometricians do regard such scores as being reasonably valid...

    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years, and I noted that the vast majority of the IQ studies he cites include children younger than 13, which would be odd if he and his colleagues regarded such results as of doubtful validity. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves why the trained psychometricians who conducted the hundreds of such worldwide studies catalogued in his various books would have wasted their time and money producing such invalid data, and the same is true for most of the IQ studies I’ve seen elsewhere.

    Psychometrician, no. Psychometrics is a mathematically centered field dealing with issues of measurement. Lynn has not, to my knowledge, made contributions to that field.

    Psychologists who studies group, particularly racial, differences, yes, he is the last of the three grand old men (Jensen and Rushton being the other two).

    Lynn’s style is a broad stokes style (see the interview of Lynn by Nyborg). His focus is on the big picture. His books contains loads of errors, many of which has been pointed out on the internet. With errors corrected, the big picture remains the same however. For some more even-handed dealing with the errors, read the works by Jason Malloy. Malloy have done a series of high quality reviews of IQ and achievement scores by country. Malloy’s style is clearly that of a perfectionists. The problem is that Malloy is such a slow worker that his reviews cover only a small fraction of nations.

    Generally, when using IQs, I use the LV12 ones with the corrections made by Malloy. Hopefully, more people will start doing these high quality reviews for countries, so that we can obtain more reliable measurements.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz


    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years...
     
    Psychometrician, no. Psychometrics is a mathematically centered field dealing with issues of measurement. Lynn has not, to my knowledge, made contributions to that field.
     
    Well, this merely reinforces the point I'd made regarding my total ignorance of psychometrics...

    Prof. Richard Lynn seems to have published a vast number of scholarly articles and books on IQ issues, and indeed Prof. Helmuth Nyborg described Lynn and his frequent collaborator Prof. Tatu Vanhanen as "undisputed and widely respected leaders of the field" of IQ studies. A few years ago, a scholarly journal devoted its entire issue to his lifelong achievements in that topic, and last year John Derbyshire published a long article summarizing his long career as part of a Festschrift. Among numerous other things, Lynn seems to have been the original discoverer of the very important "Flynn Effect," which is therefore sometimes also called the Lynn-Flynn Effect.

    So Lynn certainly seems one of the world's leading scholars in IQ studies, and being ignorant of the nuances of that field, I tend to call him a "psychometrician," but perhaps there's a more appropriate term to use.
  131. My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years

    That tells us more of psychometricians than it does of Lynn.

    Read More
  132. @JayMan
    @BubbaJoe:

    Maybe, maybe not. I’m no expert, and don’t claim to be, but it is strange to group 5 year olds with 11 year olds. It seems more valid to wait for full brain maturation to occur before testing its ability, or at least test people of the same age- that’s what PISA does.
     
    The two upsides of testing children are that you presumably get a more representative sample (tests on adults tend to under-sample low-scorers because they are less likely to participate in the test) and that you get to view a younger cohort.

    The downside is that IQ tests are unreliable with children (shared environment effects haven't yet dissipated).

    Are IQ tests more or less predictive at age 5 or at age 11? What is the reason/value behind giving IQ tests to a range of child ages as opposed to one set age?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Are IQ tests more or less predictive at age 5 or at age 11? What is the reason/value behind giving IQ tests to a range of child ages as opposed to one set age?
     
    See the chart that appears here:

    More Behavioral Genetic Facts


    See that shared environment factor that diminishes with age? That introduces measurement error. IQ is more reliable when tested in adults, especially when you're looking at "environmental" impacts.

  133. @JayMan


    Non-g-loaded IQ gains don’t seem to translate into anything in the real world
     
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289614000105
     
    This is a useful paper, but there's more than a little genetic confounding going on.

    Insofar as genetic effects are g-loaded, the genetic confound would tend to INCREASE the apparent correlation of these variables with g.

    Also see

    http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1001826

    There are likely many sources of domain-general ability in humans, and the g factor in one population represents a mix of these different sources. Thus, a highly general effect on a component of g that is not represented strongly in the general population could easily appear to not be g-loaded. I think that is going on with the studies above. I also think that is what is going on with (some of) the educational and Flynn effect gains. A corollary of this hypothesis, though, is that g has more environmental admixture in populations with poorer environmental quality, which entails that MCV between g and genetic variables will be weaker and between g and environmental variables stronger. To my knowledge this prediction has not been confirmed –– in fact, the available data tends to disconfirm it (if memory serves). I suspect an effect, though, and I am presently re-analyzing some Army test data from 1918, which might produce some relevant results.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    To my knowledge this prediction has not been confirmed –– in fact, the available data tends to disconfirm it (if memory serves). I suspect an effect, though, and I am presently re-analyzing some Army test data from 1918, which might produce some relevant results.
     
    Sounds good. I look forward to your findings.
  134. @BubbaJoe
    Are IQ tests more or less predictive at age 5 or at age 11? What is the reason/value behind giving IQ tests to a range of child ages as opposed to one set age?

    Are IQ tests more or less predictive at age 5 or at age 11? What is the reason/value behind giving IQ tests to a range of child ages as opposed to one set age?

    See the chart that appears here:

    More Behavioral Genetic Facts

    See that shared environment factor that diminishes with age? That introduces measurement error. IQ is more reliable when tested in adults, especially when you’re looking at “environmental” impacts.

    Read More
  135. @E. L. Armstrong
    Insofar as genetic effects are g-loaded, the genetic confound would tend to INCREASE the apparent correlation of these variables with g.

    Also see
    http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1001826

    There are likely many sources of domain-general ability in humans, and the g factor in one population represents a mix of these different sources. Thus, a highly general effect on a component of g that is not represented strongly in the general population could easily appear to not be g-loaded. I think that is going on with the studies above. I also think that is what is going on with (some of) the educational and Flynn effect gains. A corollary of this hypothesis, though, is that g has more environmental admixture in populations with poorer environmental quality, which entails that MCV between g and genetic variables will be weaker and between g and environmental variables stronger. To my knowledge this prediction has not been confirmed –– in fact, the available data tends to disconfirm it (if memory serves). I suspect an effect, though, and I am presently re-analyzing some Army test data from 1918, which might produce some relevant results.

    To my knowledge this prediction has not been confirmed –– in fact, the available data tends to disconfirm it (if memory serves). I suspect an effect, though, and I am presently re-analyzing some Army test data from 1918, which might produce some relevant results.

    Sounds good. I look forward to your findings.

    Read More
  136. ““The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have, the Romans certainly could have done it, is that a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe, and probably northern Asia.”

    I would guess that the Renaissance, Enlightenment, and Industrial Revolution were knock-on effects of the Black Death. Yersinia pestis, the cause, helped reset Europe back to it’s Greco-Roman heyday by culling a substantial percentage of the barbarians-at-the-gates that undermined the abilities that made Greece and Rome great civilizations. The interplay of higher testosterone, aggressiveness, lower cerebral control and intelligence, and higher reproductive rates on civilization were reversed when the depressive effects of higher testosterone on the male immune system met Y. pestis in 14th century Europe.

    The takeaway: at a high enough percentage of representation, those who can’t create an advanced civilization will undermine one that already exists and removing that influence will allow an advanced civilization to rise again. The new kind of human was basically a replay of an old kind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    I would guess that the Renaissance, Enlightenment, and Industrial Revolution were knock-on effects of the Black Death.
     
    It was much more than just that:

    big summary post on the hajnal line | hbd chick

  137. @Emil Kirkegaard

    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years, and I noted that the vast majority of the IQ studies he cites include children younger than 13, which would be odd if he and his colleagues regarded such results as of doubtful validity. Furthermore, we must ask ourselves why the trained psychometricians who conducted the hundreds of such worldwide studies catalogued in his various books would have wasted their time and money producing such invalid data, and the same is true for most of the IQ studies I’ve seen elsewhere.
     
    Psychometrician, no. Psychometrics is a mathematically centered field dealing with issues of measurement. Lynn has not, to my knowledge, made contributions to that field.

    Psychologists who studies group, particularly racial, differences, yes, he is the last of the three grand old men (Jensen and Rushton being the other two).

    Lynn's style is a broad stokes style (see the interview of Lynn by Nyborg). His focus is on the big picture. His books contains loads of errors, many of which has been pointed out on the internet. With errors corrected, the big picture remains the same however. For some more even-handed dealing with the errors, read the works by Jason Malloy. Malloy have done a series of high quality reviews of IQ and achievement scores by country. Malloy's style is clearly that of a perfectionists. The problem is that Malloy is such a slow worker that his reviews cover only a small fraction of nations.

    Generally, when using IQs, I use the LV12 ones with the corrections made by Malloy. Hopefully, more people will start doing these high quality reviews for countries, so that we can obtain more reliable measurements.

    My impression is that Richard Lynn ranks as one of the most prominent psychometricians of the last fifty years…

    Psychometrician, no. Psychometrics is a mathematically centered field dealing with issues of measurement. Lynn has not, to my knowledge, made contributions to that field.

    Well, this merely reinforces the point I’d made regarding my total ignorance of psychometrics…

    Prof. Richard Lynn seems to have published a vast number of scholarly articles and books on IQ issues, and indeed Prof. Helmuth Nyborg described Lynn and his frequent collaborator Prof. Tatu Vanhanen as “undisputed and widely respected leaders of the field” of IQ studies. A few years ago, a scholarly journal devoted its entire issue to his lifelong achievements in that topic, and last year John Derbyshire published a long article summarizing his long career as part of a Festschrift. Among numerous other things, Lynn seems to have been the original discoverer of the very important “Flynn Effect,” which is therefore sometimes also called the Lynn-Flynn Effect.

    So Lynn certainly seems one of the world’s leading scholars in IQ studies, and being ignorant of the nuances of that field, I tend to call him a “psychometrician,” but perhaps there’s a more appropriate term to use.

    Read More
  138. IQ is very stable after the age of 7 or so, & is actually quite stable by age 4 or 5 for people with extreme scores. IQ test batteries have well established reliabilities listed right in their manuals – you can look them up! psych’s one contribution to science (besides for testing) is we can quantify uncertainty very accurately!

    if one’s IQ is at the 98th %ile of 5 year, 3 month olds, they’ll be at about the 98th %ile when age 29 (compared t0 a rigorously representative sample of 29 year olds). the reason IQ is a little less stable at the younger ages is simply b/c they cannot do as much yet, so we don’t measure them quite as precisely.

    The high reliability (& stability!) of 1:1 administered IQ type batteries is well known among psychometricians (!) an overly generic term, e.g., you get licensed as a psychologist in your state, not as a psychometrician. in the old movie “stand & deliver” the SAT guys refer to themselves as “just a couple of psychometricians from new jersey.” if your psych PhD concentrated on stats & measurement, you might call yourself a “psychometrician” but you would get licensed in your state as a “psychologist.”

    Read More
  139. @Drapetomaniac
    "“The reason the Industrial Revolution happened in 1800, rather than the year one thousand, or zero, which it could have, the Romans certainly could have done it, is that a new kind of human evolved in northern Europe, and probably northern Asia."

    I would guess that the Renaissance, Enlightenment, and Industrial Revolution were knock-on effects of the Black Death. Yersinia pestis, the cause, helped reset Europe back to it's Greco-Roman heyday by culling a substantial percentage of the barbarians-at-the-gates that undermined the abilities that made Greece and Rome great civilizations. The interplay of higher testosterone, aggressiveness, lower cerebral control and intelligence, and higher reproductive rates on civilization were reversed when the depressive effects of higher testosterone on the male immune system met Y. pestis in 14th century Europe.

    The takeaway: at a high enough percentage of representation, those who can't create an advanced civilization will undermine one that already exists and removing that influence will allow an advanced civilization to rise again. The new kind of human was basically a replay of an old kind.

    I would guess that the Renaissance, Enlightenment, and Industrial Revolution were knock-on effects of the Black Death.

    It was much more than just that:

    big summary post on the hajnal line | hbd chick

    Read More
  140. @JayMan

    Are IQ tests more or less predictive at age 5 or at age 11? What is the reason/value behind giving IQ tests to a range of child ages as opposed to one set age?
     
    See the chart that appears here:

    More Behavioral Genetic Facts


    See that shared environment factor that diminishes with age? That introduces measurement error. IQ is more reliable when tested in adults, especially when you're looking at "environmental" impacts.

    Thanks.

    Read More
  141. @jeppo
    Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true “Southern Europeans”. There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the “Core” European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    Sure. The north-south gradients in Italy and Spain are particularly extreme. But I'm more interested in the differences *between* countries than within them. Northwest Europe has Nordic-Germanic-Protestant core that consists of Scandinavia, Germany, Holland and Britain, and a periphery that includes Finland, the Alpine States, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland and the Anglo settler societies. So even though Finland, Ireland and Austria are partial outliers in a cultural sense, they clearly belong to the Anglo-Germanic family of nations in a way that the Latin countries don't.

    I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    No one's doubting your Hajnal expertise. But I'm arguing that the Hajnal line divides Eastern Europe from Western Europe as a whole, not just Northwest Europe. You say that there is variation within the Hajnal line region. Absolutely. Above all, there is a major cultural fault line that divides Nordic-Germanic-Protestant Northwest Europe from Mediterranean-Latin-Catholic Southwest Europe, and the Hajnal line divides both from Alpine-Slavic-Orthodox Eastern Europe.

    One major difference between Northwest and Southwest Europeans is racial phenotype. The latter are generally shorter and darker than the former. All of the Anglo-Germanic nations average 50% or more of their native (or white in the case of the Anglo settler societies) population having either light-coloured hair (blond, red, light brown) or light-coloured eyes (blue, green, grey). None of the Latin nations do.

    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?35882-New-Hair-and-Eye-color-statistics-(2011)

    Of the 7 nations in question, the percentage of each having light-coloured hair or eyes is:

    Finland: 85%
    Ireland: 60%
    Austria: 54%
    France: 43%
    Italy: 23%
    Spain: 19%
    Portugal: 16%

    As for average height (in this case for 20 year-old males), the Anglo-Germanic nations all fall between 174.3 and 181 cms. The tallest Latin nation is shorter than the shortest Anglo-Germanic nation. Here's how the 7 nations in question fared:

    Finland: 178.4 cms
    Austria: 177 cms
    Ireland: 175 cms
    France: 174.1 cms
    Italy: 173.2 cms
    Spain: 172 cms
    Portugal: 170.5 cms

    https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=120DzHmKJOgO9k5lTlIBh0WALCz-MpXOuoXwznyM#rows:id=1

    A couple more economic lists, both taken from Wikipedia, showing that Finland, Ireland and Austria cluster with the other Anglo-Germanic nations near the top, and consistently beat France, Italy, Spain and Portugal in these crucial indices.

    Per Capita Income:

    Ireland: $53,462
    Austria: $51,307
    Finland: $49,497
    France: $44,538
    Italy: $35,823
    Spain: $30,278
    Portugal: $22,130

    Unemployment Rate:

    Austria: 5.7%
    Finland: 9.4%
    Ireland: 9.7%
    France: 10.5%
    Italy: 12.4%
    Portugal: 13%
    Spain: 22.7%

    And finally, from your post on the worldwide distribution of personality:

    http://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/colorcodingmjgsmall1.gif

    The Anglo-Germanic nations, including Finland, Ireland and Austria, all cluster near the Linear-Active cultural type, while the Latin nations lean towards the Multi-Active node.

    So in terms of racial phenotype, linguistic group, religious heritage, history, geography, culture, politics, economics, intelligence, trustworthiness, personality, temperament etc etc, Finland, Ireland and Austria are clearly part of the Anglo-Germanic/Northwest European world. And--just as clearly--the Latin nations are not. There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.

    Sure. The north-south gradients in Italy and Spain are particularly extreme.

    But you miss the implications of this: measures (e.g. trust, civicness, etc.) that look at the Latin countries and take them as a whole are going to conflate the regional differences within them. Does Italy still cluster away from Germanic nations when you separate north and south?

    There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.

    You’re getting too caught up in the minutia of lumping vs. splitting. If we want a broad assemblage of the world’s WEIRDO populations, the southern areas of the Hajnal line region (France, N. Iberia, N. Italy) clearly belong and stand apart from everyone outside the Hajnal line area. Are there differences within? Yes. All human populations are distinct, but they cluster together in interesting ways.

    You’ve said enough here, I think. No more comments on this where you just restate your case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jeppo
    You’ve said enough here, I think. No more comments on this where you just restate your case.

    Sorry man. The reason I restated my case is because my initial reply to you (comment #101) just disappeared when I tried to post it. So I re-posted it in a much abbreviated form (#110) and figured that was the end of it. Then my initial reply miraculously showed up here a day and a half after I posted it.

    I'm not trying to harangue you about it. I just think that the uniqueness of Northwest European civilization is an important topic, as is a proper definition of what exactly constitutes it and what doesn't. But that's a discussion for another day.
  142. @jeppo
    Remember, there is regional variation in each of those countries (particularly, a north-south gradient in each). Northerners cluster close to the Germanic countries, while southerners make up the true “Southern Europeans”. There are plenty of ways where Ireland distinguishes itself from the “Core” European countries – and even within Ireland, there is a regional gradient (mostly east-west).

    Sure. The north-south gradients in Italy and Spain are particularly extreme. But I'm more interested in the differences *between* countries than within them. Northwest Europe has Nordic-Germanic-Protestant core that consists of Scandinavia, Germany, Holland and Britain, and a periphery that includes Finland, the Alpine States, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland and the Anglo settler societies. So even though Finland, Ireland and Austria are partial outliers in a cultural sense, they clearly belong to the Anglo-Germanic family of nations in a way that the Latin countries don't.

    I think I have been looking at this a lot longer than you have, and the Hajnal line demarcation works quite well. You just need to understand that there is variation within the Hajnal line region.

    No one's doubting your Hajnal expertise. But I'm arguing that the Hajnal line divides Eastern Europe from Western Europe as a whole, not just Northwest Europe. You say that there is variation within the Hajnal line region. Absolutely. Above all, there is a major cultural fault line that divides Nordic-Germanic-Protestant Northwest Europe from Mediterranean-Latin-Catholic Southwest Europe, and the Hajnal line divides both from Alpine-Slavic-Orthodox Eastern Europe.

    One major difference between Northwest and Southwest Europeans is racial phenotype. The latter are generally shorter and darker than the former. All of the Anglo-Germanic nations average 50% or more of their native (or white in the case of the Anglo settler societies) population having either light-coloured hair (blond, red, light brown) or light-coloured eyes (blue, green, grey). None of the Latin nations do.

    http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?35882-New-Hair-and-Eye-color-statistics-(2011)

    Of the 7 nations in question, the percentage of each having light-coloured hair or eyes is:

    Finland: 85%
    Ireland: 60%
    Austria: 54%
    France: 43%
    Italy: 23%
    Spain: 19%
    Portugal: 16%

    As for average height (in this case for 20 year-old males), the Anglo-Germanic nations all fall between 174.3 and 181 cms. The tallest Latin nation is shorter than the shortest Anglo-Germanic nation. Here's how the 7 nations in question fared:

    Finland: 178.4 cms
    Austria: 177 cms
    Ireland: 175 cms
    France: 174.1 cms
    Italy: 173.2 cms
    Spain: 172 cms
    Portugal: 170.5 cms

    https://www.google.com/fusiontables/DataSource?docid=120DzHmKJOgO9k5lTlIBh0WALCz-MpXOuoXwznyM#rows:id=1

    A couple more economic lists, both taken from Wikipedia, showing that Finland, Ireland and Austria cluster with the other Anglo-Germanic nations near the top, and consistently beat France, Italy, Spain and Portugal in these crucial indices.

    Per Capita Income:

    Ireland: $53,462
    Austria: $51,307
    Finland: $49,497
    France: $44,538
    Italy: $35,823
    Spain: $30,278
    Portugal: $22,130

    Unemployment Rate:

    Austria: 5.7%
    Finland: 9.4%
    Ireland: 9.7%
    France: 10.5%
    Italy: 12.4%
    Portugal: 13%
    Spain: 22.7%

    And finally, from your post on the worldwide distribution of personality:

    http://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/colorcodingmjgsmall1.gif

    The Anglo-Germanic nations, including Finland, Ireland and Austria, all cluster near the Linear-Active cultural type, while the Latin nations lean towards the Multi-Active node.

    So in terms of racial phenotype, linguistic group, religious heritage, history, geography, culture, politics, economics, intelligence, trustworthiness, personality, temperament etc etc, Finland, Ireland and Austria are clearly part of the Anglo-Germanic/Northwest European world. And--just as clearly--the Latin nations are not. There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.

    So there is a anthropological difference between northwestern Europe and Southern; sure. But then, there is no such difference between Eastern Europe and Northern (at least, if you are claiming Ireland, England, Sweden and German all share common features; because all of those countries have different anthropological types). Percentage of light hair and light eyes in Poland is as high or even higher than in Germany, and while pure “nordic” type is rare, so is in Germany.

    Next, look at the regional variation of GDP:

    http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Gross_domestic_product_%28GDP%29_per_inhabitant,_in_purchasing_power_standard_%28PPS%29,_by_NUTS_level_2_region,_2013_%28%C2%B9%29_%28%25_of_the_EU-28_average,_EU-28_%3D_100%29_RYB15.png

    Suddenly you have Germanic-speaking regions which are poorer and more similar to French, Spanish or southern Italian regions (in terms of GDP). I bet you could produce similar maps depicting life quality etc.
    Moreover, here are some of the opinions about Germans from early XIX Germany, quoted after some Korean scientific paper about economy:

    QUOTE STARTS HERE

    “Before their economic
    take-off in the mid-19th century, the Germans were typically described by
    the British as “a dull and heavy people”9 “Indolence” was a word that was
    frequently associated with the Germanic nature.10 Mary Shelley, the author
    of Frankenstein, wrote in exasperation after a particularly frustrating
    altercation with her German coach-driver; “the Germans never hurry”.11 It
    wasn’t just the British. A French manufacturer who employed German
    workers complained that they “work as and when they please”.12
    The British considered the Germans also to be slow-witted.
    According to one John Russell, a travel-writer of the 1820s, the Germans
    were a “plodding, easily contented people … endowed neither with great
    acuteness of perception nor quickness of feeling”. In particular, according to
    Russell, they were not open to new ideas; “it is long before [a German] can
    be brought to comprehend the bearings of what is new to him, and it is
    difficult to rouse him to ardour in its pursuit.”. 13 No wonder that they were
    “not distinguished by enterprise or activity”, as another mid-19th century
    British traveller remarked.14

    Germans were also deemed to be too individualistic and unable to
    cooperate with each other. The Germans’ inability to cooperate was, in the
    view of the British, most strongly manifested in the poor quality and
    maintenance of their public infrastructure, which was so bad that John
    McPherson, a Viceroy of India (and therefore quite used to treacherous road
    conditions), wrote, “I found the roads so bad in Germany that I directed my
    course to Italy”.
    British travellers in the early 19th century also found the Germans
    dishonest – “the tradesman and the shopkeeper take advantage of you
    wherever they can, and to the smallest imaginable amount rather than not
    take advantage of you at all … This knavery is universal”

    (NOTE by szopen: In Polish, “oszwabić” comes from a derogatory term “szwab” used for a German and means “to cheat someone”).

    observed Sir
    Arthur Brooke Faulkner, a physician serving in the British army.17
    Finally, the British thought the Germans to be overly emotional.
    Today many British seem to think that Germans have an almost genetic
    emotional deficiency. Yet talking about excessive German emotion, Sir
    Arthur observed that “some will laugh all sorrows away and others will
    always indulge in melancholy”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jeppo
    Percentage of light hair and light eyes in Poland is as high or even higher than in Germany

    Not quite. The percentage of people with light hair or light eyes in Germany is 68%, and in Poland it's 57%.

    So the Germans are "indolent," they "never hurry," they're "not distinguished by enterprise or activity," they're "unable to cooperate with each other," their infrastructure is of "poor quality," and they're "dishonest" and "overly emotional."

    LOL, talk about an inversion of stereotypes!
    , @Jim
    They certainly seemed very emotional at the Nuremberg rallies. Listening to Hitler's speeches, he seems to be anything but calm and unemotional.
  143. @Hector_St_Clare
    "I've never seen an African with a hobby. They're different."

    This is of course bullsh*t. I lived in Africa for three years, in a mostly peasant and fishing community: I knew plenty of people who had hobbies. This is a pitch-perfect example of HBD people shooting themselves in the foot by making outrageous, exaggerated, and clearly falsifiable claims (almost on par with James Watson's remarks about African employees).

    To put my cards on the table, I'm a working biologist, and though my politics tend far left, I'm strongly hereditarian when it comes to esplaining IQ and personality differences. (I like to call myself a neoreactionary communist, drawing left-wing conclusions from right wing premises). And I'm agnostic on the broader question of whether racial differences in IQ are due to genetic factors or something else (and quite hostile to cultural liberalism in general). That having been said, that one of the supposed leading lights of HBD would make such a statistically sloppy and easily falsified remark doesn't exactly help your 'movement', to say the least.

    Out of curiosity, what were some of the hobbies you observed among Africans?

    Read More
  144. @jeppo
    When HBD Chick and I say “Northwest Europeans”, we typically exclude the Celts. Ireland for example sits firmly outside the Hajnal line.

    Yes, Ireland sits firmly outside the Hajnal line, as do Finland and most of Austria too. Meanwhile, France and most of Italy, Spain and Portugal sit firmly inside the Hajnal line, making a mockery of the term "Northwest European" to describe the nations inside the line. Maybe we need another term to accurately describe these culturally akin nations other than the geographically vague "NW European." Right now I'm leaning towards "Anglo-Germanic."

    I made the case that Ireland, Finland and Austria belong with the Anglo-Germanic/NW European group of countries, and that France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don't, here:

    http://www.unz.com/jman/national-prosperity/#comment-1064964
    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/a-genetic-marker-for-empathy/#comment-1082073

    Since then a couple of new studies have been released that confirm my belief. The Fraser Institute came out with their Human Freedom Index, using 76 distinct indicators of personal and economic freedom. All 17 Anglo-Germanic nations (not including Liechtenstein) finish in the top 22. This is how the 7 nations in question ranked:

    #3. Finland
    #8. Ireland
    #12. Austria
    #25. Portugal
    #33. France
    #34. Italy
    #37. Spain

    http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/publications/human-freedom-index-preliminary-report.pdf

    The Economist came out with their annual list of the world's most liveable cities. Here are the top ten (actually 11 because two cities are tied for tenth place):

    1. Melbourne
    2. Vienna
    3. Vancouver
    4. Toronto
    5. Calgary
    5. Adelaide
    7. Sydney
    8. Perth
    9. Auckland
    10. Helsinki
    10. Zurich

    All 11 cities are in the Anglo-Germanic world, including one each from Austria and Finland. Needless to say, no Latin cities made the list.

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/08/daily-chart-5

    These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don't.

    So using the Hajnal line seems pretty irrelevant to a useful definition of Northwest Europe. Using a common linguistic group works much better both in theory and in practice.

    Why do you describe Finland as “Anglo-Germanic”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jeppo
    Why do you describe Finland as “Anglo-Germanic”?

    Finland was under Swedish rule for nearly 700 years, and even when it was transferred to Russian control Swedish remained the sole official language of Finland for the next 50 years. Swedish is still a co-official language in Finland, and Swedish-Finns have played a hugely outsized role in all aspects of Finnish life: politics, the military, industry, trade, art, architecture, literature, science, music, and on and on, arguably even more so than Finnish-Finns have. And Finland since independence, especially since 1945, has aligned itself ever more closely with the rest of Scandinavia, so much so that it has at least partially subsumed its sovereignty to the Nordic Council, along with Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland.
  145. @JayMan

    Sure. The north-south gradients in Italy and Spain are particularly extreme.
     
    But you miss the implications of this: measures (e.g. trust, civicness, etc.) that look at the Latin countries and take them as a whole are going to conflate the regional differences within them. Does Italy still cluster away from Germanic nations when you separate north and south?

    There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.
     
    You're getting too caught up in the minutia of lumping vs. splitting. If we want a broad assemblage of the world's WEIRDO populations, the southern areas of the Hajnal line region (France, N. Iberia, N. Italy) clearly belong and stand apart from everyone outside the Hajnal line area. Are there differences within? Yes. All human populations are distinct, but they cluster together in interesting ways.

    You've said enough here, I think. No more comments on this where you just restate your case.

    You’ve said enough here, I think. No more comments on this where you just restate your case.

    Sorry man. The reason I restated my case is because my initial reply to you (comment #101) just disappeared when I tried to post it. So I re-posted it in a much abbreviated form (#110) and figured that was the end of it. Then my initial reply miraculously showed up here a day and a half after I posted it.

    I’m not trying to harangue you about it. I just think that the uniqueness of Northwest European civilization is an important topic, as is a proper definition of what exactly constitutes it and what doesn’t. But that’s a discussion for another day.

    Read More
  146. @szopen
    So there is a anthropological difference between northwestern Europe and Southern; sure. But then, there is no such difference between Eastern Europe and Northern (at least, if you are claiming Ireland, England, Sweden and German all share common features; because all of those countries have different anthropological types). Percentage of light hair and light eyes in Poland is as high or even higher than in Germany, and while pure "nordic" type is rare, so is in Germany.

    Next, look at the regional variation of GDP:
    http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Gross_domestic_product_%28GDP%29_per_inhabitant,_in_purchasing_power_standard_%28PPS%29,_by_NUTS_level_2_region,_2013_%28%C2%B9%29_%28%25_of_the_EU-28_average,_EU-28_%3D_100%29_RYB15.png

    Suddenly you have Germanic-speaking regions which are poorer and more similar to French, Spanish or southern Italian regions (in terms of GDP). I bet you could produce similar maps depicting life quality etc.
    Moreover, here are some of the opinions about Germans from early XIX Germany, quoted after some Korean scientific paper about economy:

    QUOTE STARTS HERE

    "Before their economic
    take-off in the mid-19th century, the Germans were typically described by
    the British as “a dull and heavy people”9 “Indolence” was a word that was
    frequently associated with the Germanic nature.10 Mary Shelley, the author
    of Frankenstein, wrote in exasperation after a particularly frustrating
    altercation with her German coach-driver; “the Germans never hurry”.11 It
    wasn’t just the British. A French manufacturer who employed German
    workers complained that they “work as and when they please”.12
    The British considered the Germans also to be slow-witted.
    According to one John Russell, a travel-writer of the 1820s, the Germans
    were a “plodding, easily contented people … endowed neither with great
    acuteness of perception nor quickness of feeling”. In particular, according to
    Russell, they were not open to new ideas; “it is long before [a German] can
    be brought to comprehend the bearings of what is new to him, and it is
    difficult to rouse him to ardour in its pursuit.”. 13 No wonder that they were
    “not distinguished by enterprise or activity”, as another mid-19th century
    British traveller remarked.14

    Germans were also deemed to be too individualistic and unable to
    cooperate with each other. The Germans’ inability to cooperate was, in the
    view of the British, most strongly manifested in the poor quality and
    maintenance of their public infrastructure, which was so bad that John
    McPherson, a Viceroy of India (and therefore quite used to treacherous road
    conditions), wrote, “I found the roads so bad in Germany that I directed my
    course to Italy”.
    British travellers in the early 19th century also found the Germans
    dishonest – “the tradesman and the shopkeeper take advantage of you
    wherever they can, and to the smallest imaginable amount rather than not
    take advantage of you at all … This knavery is universal”

    (NOTE by szopen: In Polish, "oszwabić" comes from a derogatory term "szwab" used for a German and means "to cheat someone").

    observed Sir
    Arthur Brooke Faulkner, a physician serving in the British army.17
    Finally, the British thought the Germans to be overly emotional.
    Today many British seem to think that Germans have an almost genetic
    emotional deficiency. Yet talking about excessive German emotion, Sir
    Arthur observed that “some will laugh all sorrows away and others will
    always indulge in melancholy”.

    Percentage of light hair and light eyes in Poland is as high or even higher than in Germany

    Not quite. The percentage of people with light hair or light eyes in Germany is 68%, and in Poland it’s 57%.

    So the Germans are “indolent,” they “never hurry,” they’re “not distinguished by enterprise or activity,” they’re “unable to cooperate with each other,” their infrastructure is of “poor quality,” and they’re “dishonest” and “overly emotional.”

    LOL, talk about an inversion of stereotypes!

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    57%? What's your source? My data tells me Germany is 70% with light eyes, Poland above 72+%. The light hair, OTOH, you may be right, as only 56+% according to my data has light hair. Still, the physical type is quite similar (as long as you are willing to say Austria, England, Germany and Sweden share similar physical type - as I think you will agree that percentage of Austrians with light hair and eyes is much smaller than in Poland).

    As for the stereotypes, well, they do change. Note i am not trying to argue that in early 19th century Germans actually were lazy, slow-witted and so on; only that they appear so to the British. I do not think the genetic composition of Germans changed that much within a century. Therefore, the changes to our current stereotypes simply had to be cultural. The answer to HBDchick question "where the culture comes from?" is "quite often it comes from the outside". Not every aspect of the culture is effect of biological characteristics of the population.
  147. @Jim
    Why do you describe Finland as "Anglo-Germanic"?

    Why do you describe Finland as “Anglo-Germanic”?

    Finland was under Swedish rule for nearly 700 years, and even when it was transferred to Russian control Swedish remained the sole official language of Finland for the next 50 years. Swedish is still a co-official language in Finland, and Swedish-Finns have played a hugely outsized role in all aspects of Finnish life: politics, the military, industry, trade, art, architecture, literature, science, music, and on and on, arguably even more so than Finnish-Finns have. And Finland since independence, especially since 1945, has aligned itself ever more closely with the rest of Scandinavia, so much so that it has at least partially subsumed its sovereignty to the Nordic Council, along with Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland.

    Read More
  148. @jeppo
    Percentage of light hair and light eyes in Poland is as high or even higher than in Germany

    Not quite. The percentage of people with light hair or light eyes in Germany is 68%, and in Poland it's 57%.

    So the Germans are "indolent," they "never hurry," they're "not distinguished by enterprise or activity," they're "unable to cooperate with each other," their infrastructure is of "poor quality," and they're "dishonest" and "overly emotional."

    LOL, talk about an inversion of stereotypes!

    57%? What’s your source? My data tells me Germany is 70% with light eyes, Poland above 72+%. The light hair, OTOH, you may be right, as only 56+% according to my data has light hair. Still, the physical type is quite similar (as long as you are willing to say Austria, England, Germany and Sweden share similar physical type – as I think you will agree that percentage of Austrians with light hair and eyes is much smaller than in Poland).

    As for the stereotypes, well, they do change. Note i am not trying to argue that in early 19th century Germans actually were lazy, slow-witted and so on; only that they appear so to the British. I do not think the genetic composition of Germans changed that much within a century. Therefore, the changes to our current stereotypes simply had to be cultural. The answer to HBDchick question “where the culture comes from?” is “quite often it comes from the outside”. Not every aspect of the culture is effect of biological characteristics of the population.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Therefore, the changes to our current stereotypes simply had to be cultural. The answer to HBDchick question “where the culture comes from?” is “quite often it comes from the outside”.
     
    Culture does not exist as an entity divorced from biology.

    Not every aspect of the culture is effect of biological characteristics of the population.
     
    Technically, that's impossible. Think about it.
  149. Yes, it’s interesting how many eminent “Finns” have been Swedish or descended from Swedes.
    Even Nevanlinna I think was from a Swedish descended family who changed their name to sound more Finnish.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Shaikorth
    Likely he's got Swedish, Finnish and other European ancestors within a recent timeframe as Finland-Swedes are a very cosmopolitan group. For hundreds of years Swedish was the administrative language of Finland as well as trade language in towns, and for Finns changing language from Finnish to Swedish and assimilating into the Swedish-speaking population was essential for social mobility, while for Swedish speakers there was no advantage in switching to Finnish. The end result would be a Swedish speaking population with very significant Finnish ancestry, as well as some Scottish, German and so on from foreign traders who settled in towns, and a Finnish speaking population with very little Swedish ancestry, especially further away from coastal regions.

    This has happened elsewhere in larger scale and is, for example, the reason why many Turks have ancestry from Armenia and the Balkans but the indigenous Armenians and Balkanites have very little Turkish ancestry despite having been under Turkish rule for a long time - those who mixed with the ruling Turks started speaking Turkish and assimilated.
  150. @szopen
    57%? What's your source? My data tells me Germany is 70% with light eyes, Poland above 72+%. The light hair, OTOH, you may be right, as only 56+% according to my data has light hair. Still, the physical type is quite similar (as long as you are willing to say Austria, England, Germany and Sweden share similar physical type - as I think you will agree that percentage of Austrians with light hair and eyes is much smaller than in Poland).

    As for the stereotypes, well, they do change. Note i am not trying to argue that in early 19th century Germans actually were lazy, slow-witted and so on; only that they appear so to the British. I do not think the genetic composition of Germans changed that much within a century. Therefore, the changes to our current stereotypes simply had to be cultural. The answer to HBDchick question "where the culture comes from?" is "quite often it comes from the outside". Not every aspect of the culture is effect of biological characteristics of the population.

    Therefore, the changes to our current stereotypes simply had to be cultural. The answer to HBDchick question “where the culture comes from?” is “quite often it comes from the outside”.

    Culture does not exist as an entity divorced from biology.

    Not every aspect of the culture is effect of biological characteristics of the population.

    Technically, that’s impossible. Think about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    "Culture does not exist as an entity divorced from biology."

    That is totally wrong - what does Newton's laws of motion have to do with biology - that is a cultural achievement.

    Biology says that tribalism is the natural way to live and organize ourselves. Extending personal freedom to your neighbor regardless of tribe is an cultural intellectual thing that goes counter our biological instincts.

    In your thinking you cannot divorce biology from chemistry, and chemistry from atoms. There are atoms, modules, and biology, and culture -- they are all different things at distinct different levels of natural organization. They must be thought of as different things, as different intellectual subjects - PERIOD.
    , @szopen
    Jayman,

    End of XVI century, Poland. Decent democracy, tolerant to the extent that When Italian papal envoy tries to incite a pogrom, he creates a shitstorm so large taht he then asks pope to revoke him for duty because he is universally hated. People from outside marvel how safe are the roads. Italians supposedly tell each other that they should not boast how many people they killed, because it's seen as a wrong thing in Poland.

    Just 50 years later. Polish brethren are expelled, there is rising support to remove "Warsaw Confederation" articles from king's oath (basically, a legal guarantee of freedom of religion). Democracy basically collapses, when each parliament is destroyed by corrupt envoys. Roads are full of bandits, there are basically numerous civil wars going on.

    100 years later - Poland is totally defunct country. Intolerancy is rampant. Last protestant envoy is removed from the parliament (because he was corrupted and proven to be financed by outer powers, but so were a lot of other envoys).

    First half of 19th century - romanticism, idealisation of sacrifice, Poland as "messiah of nations".

    Second half: positivism, Poles should just work as hard as Germans, and instead of fitghting in uprisings, they should strive to make "a better butter than German, better bread than German, have more clean house".

    I could go on and on. The changes to the culture are too big to be thought of as just a function of biological characteristics of Polish population. I do not deny there is a biologic factor to the culture and maybe some a population is limited in a choice of possible cultures it can create, or number of culture within it it can strive; but I argue than you cannot argue from the opposite, e.g. take a culture and argue everything within it comes from the biological characteristics of population (my favourite example is of course communism, where HBD chick and you argue there had to be something within Polish nation explaining why we have communism. Somehow, the fact that we were invaded from the east, communism was imposed by force and after tens of thousands of victims was jsut waved off with reaction I personally took as "yeah, but it's not interesting. let's talk about Poland being outside Hajnal line and that's why communism was in Poland.")
  151. @JayMan

    Therefore, the changes to our current stereotypes simply had to be cultural. The answer to HBDchick question “where the culture comes from?” is “quite often it comes from the outside”.
     
    Culture does not exist as an entity divorced from biology.

    Not every aspect of the culture is effect of biological characteristics of the population.
     
    Technically, that's impossible. Think about it.

    “Culture does not exist as an entity divorced from biology.”

    That is totally wrong – what does Newton’s laws of motion have to do with biology – that is a cultural achievement.

    Biology says that tribalism is the natural way to live and organize ourselves. Extending personal freedom to your neighbor regardless of tribe is an cultural intellectual thing that goes counter our biological instincts.

    In your thinking you cannot divorce biology from chemistry, and chemistry from atoms. There are atoms, modules, and biology, and culture — they are all different things at distinct different levels of natural organization. They must be thought of as different things, as different intellectual subjects – PERIOD.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    That is totally wrong – what does Newton’s laws of motion have to do with biology
     
    Newton's laws are a bad example, because they are laws of physics. Beings from the Andromeda Galaxy would have the same laws.

    The only thing special here is that Newton discovered them, and as I've asked before, where did Newton come from?


    Biology says that tribalism is the natural way to live and organize ourselves. Extending personal freedom to your neighbor regardless of tribe is an cultural intellectual thing that goes counter our biological instincts.
     
    You might want to read this post:

    The Rise of Universalism


    In your thinking you cannot divorce biology from chemistry, and chemistry from atoms.
     
    Well you can't, actually. Hence the question where does culture come from?
  152. @Wizard of Oz
    Though I knew of the SPLC as a leftist propaganda outfit I had never heard of Morris Dees. So I have looked him up. There appears to be no Jewish ancestry so why bring "Jewish hate group" into your hypothetical response? Is that based on some unstated facts?

    I think I read many years ago (can’t recall where or when) that Morris Dees was Jewish, but I didn’t give much thought to the issue. Here is what Wikipedia says:

    “Morris Seligman Dees, Jr. (born December 16, 1936) is the co-founder and chief trial counsel for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), and a former market engineer for book publishing.[3] Along with his law partner, Joseph J. Levin Jr., Dees founded the SPLC in 1971,[4] the start of a legal career dedicated to suing organizations in discrimination cases. . . Dees was born in 1936 in Shorter, Alabama, the son of Annie Ruth (Frazer) and Morris Seligman Dees, Sr., tenant cotton farmers.[3][5] His family was Baptist.[6] His father was named “Morris Seligman” after a Jewish friend of Dees’ grandfather.[7] After graduating magna cum laude from the University of Alabama School of Law in 1960, he returned to Montgomery, Alabama and opened a law office. ”

    So, technically he is not Jewish, but based on this sketchy outline of facts, it appears that he has had a close association with Jews over the years, to the extent that his first two names derive, through his father, from the name of a Jewish friend of his grandfather. But if what Haxo Angmark says is true, then Dees is a mere figurehead of SPLC, and the organization is actually controlled by Jews. In any event, I agree that SPLC is an organization that lives off shakedowns, sort of like Jesse Jackson’s organization.

    Read More
  153. @Big Bill

    Our [African] employees were so adamant to show me the truth that they pooled their money so they could take me to the local witch doctor, who would turn me into a frog. ‘Of course he can do that, it is easy for them to do, even to white people
     
    A Brit columnist from Kenya writing in The Spectator several years ago showed that secret ballots, a fundamental part of Western democracy were impossible in Africa.

    He discussed an upcoming election in Kenya with Western - educated Negro engineers from Kenya. They explained that a witch-doctor candidate would win. The witch-doctor could make himself invisible, fly through the air, and lurk unseen looking over the shoulders of everyone casting a vote in a voting booth.

    Since the witch-doctor threatened to curse those who voted against him, it was too dangerous to vote for anyone else.

    “Our [African] employees were so adamant to show me the truth that they pooled their money so they could take me to the local witch doctor, who would turn me into a frog. ‘ ”

    I think I saw that guy in the Budweiser beer commercials a number of years ago. As I recall, he was really funny. I think his name was Larry, but I may be confusing him with one of the chameleons. The one important life lesson I got from those commercials was “never send a ferret to do a weasel’s job.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF5dZRooRWQ

    Read More
  154. @Art
    "Culture does not exist as an entity divorced from biology."

    That is totally wrong - what does Newton's laws of motion have to do with biology - that is a cultural achievement.

    Biology says that tribalism is the natural way to live and organize ourselves. Extending personal freedom to your neighbor regardless of tribe is an cultural intellectual thing that goes counter our biological instincts.

    In your thinking you cannot divorce biology from chemistry, and chemistry from atoms. There are atoms, modules, and biology, and culture -- they are all different things at distinct different levels of natural organization. They must be thought of as different things, as different intellectual subjects - PERIOD.

    That is totally wrong – what does Newton’s laws of motion have to do with biology

    Newton’s laws are a bad example, because they are laws of physics. Beings from the Andromeda Galaxy would have the same laws.

    The only thing special here is that Newton discovered them, and as I’ve asked before, where did Newton come from?

    Biology says that tribalism is the natural way to live and organize ourselves. Extending personal freedom to your neighbor regardless of tribe is an cultural intellectual thing that goes counter our biological instincts.

    You might want to read this post:

    The Rise of Universalism

    In your thinking you cannot divorce biology from chemistry, and chemistry from atoms.

    Well you can’t, actually. Hence the question where does culture come from?

    Read More
  155. @JayMan

    I’m really shocked they have only found that 100 genes explain only 5% of iq. I get tthe sense we are missing something really important. There’s only 20k genes.
     
    84% of all genes are expressed in the brain.

    This reply to Jay Man seems to have got misplaced so I’ll try to find a workaround.

    You will no doubt agree that there is often a problem of interpretation when people quote percentages (right down to making one wonder whether the reduction of say 5 per cent means 20 per cent becomes 15 per cent or 18 per cent…). I find it a bit difficult to be sure I understand all the implications of such statements as that heredity explains 60 per cents of the variance in IQ – let alone remembering what the difference is if it is narrow sense heredity or broad. Any elucidation so that I would be prepared with answers to a range of “so that means that, if etc…” questions would be greatly welcomed. But, in the immediate context, what I am seeking is elaboration of the implications of “100 genes explain [only] 5 per cent of IQ”.
    Does that mean that, if you blocked the expression of those 100 genes what would have been an IQ of 100 would be an IQ of 95 and that 160 would become 152? or what?

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    what I am seeking is elaboration of the implications of “100 genes explain [only] 5 per cent of IQ”.
     
    We know that genes heavily affect IQ. We just don't know which genes do so. About 100 such genes have been identified, but the vast majority remain unknown and yet to be found.
  156. Shaikorth [AKA "Grelsson"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Jim
    Yes, it's interesting how many eminent "Finns" have been Swedish or descended from Swedes.
    Even Nevanlinna I think was from a Swedish descended family who changed their name to sound more Finnish.

    Likely he’s got Swedish, Finnish and other European ancestors within a recent timeframe as Finland-Swedes are a very cosmopolitan group. For hundreds of years Swedish was the administrative language of Finland as well as trade language in towns, and for Finns changing language from Finnish to Swedish and assimilating into the Swedish-speaking population was essential for social mobility, while for Swedish speakers there was no advantage in switching to Finnish. The end result would be a Swedish speaking population with very significant Finnish ancestry, as well as some Scottish, German and so on from foreign traders who settled in towns, and a Finnish speaking population with very little Swedish ancestry, especially further away from coastal regions.

    This has happened elsewhere in larger scale and is, for example, the reason why many Turks have ancestry from Armenia and the Balkans but the indigenous Armenians and Balkanites have very little Turkish ancestry despite having been under Turkish rule for a long time – those who mixed with the ruling Turks started speaking Turkish and assimilated.

    Read More
  157. @JayMan

    Therefore, the changes to our current stereotypes simply had to be cultural. The answer to HBDchick question “where the culture comes from?” is “quite often it comes from the outside”.
     
    Culture does not exist as an entity divorced from biology.

    Not every aspect of the culture is effect of biological characteristics of the population.
     
    Technically, that's impossible. Think about it.

    Jayman,

    End of XVI century, Poland. Decent democracy, tolerant to the extent that When Italian papal envoy tries to incite a pogrom, he creates a shitstorm so large taht he then asks pope to revoke him for duty because he is universally hated. People from outside marvel how safe are the roads. Italians supposedly tell each other that they should not boast how many people they killed, because it’s seen as a wrong thing in Poland.

    Just 50 years later. Polish brethren are expelled, there is rising support to remove “Warsaw Confederation” articles from king’s oath (basically, a legal guarantee of freedom of religion). Democracy basically collapses, when each parliament is destroyed by corrupt envoys. Roads are full of bandits, there are basically numerous civil wars going on.

    100 years later – Poland is totally defunct country. Intolerancy is rampant. Last protestant envoy is removed from the parliament (because he was corrupted and proven to be financed by outer powers, but so were a lot of other envoys).

    First half of 19th century – romanticism, idealisation of sacrifice, Poland as “messiah of nations”.

    Second half: positivism, Poles should just work as hard as Germans, and instead of fitghting in uprisings, they should strive to make “a better butter than German, better bread than German, have more clean house”.

    I could go on and on. The changes to the culture are too big to be thought of as just a function of biological characteristics of Polish population. I do not deny there is a biologic factor to the culture and maybe some a population is limited in a choice of possible cultures it can create, or number of culture within it it can strive; but I argue than you cannot argue from the opposite, e.g. take a culture and argue everything within it comes from the biological characteristics of population (my favourite example is of course communism, where HBD chick and you argue there had to be something within Polish nation explaining why we have communism. Somehow, the fact that we were invaded from the east, communism was imposed by force and after tens of thousands of victims was jsut waved off with reaction I personally took as “yeah, but it’s not interesting. let’s talk about Poland being outside Hajnal line and that’s why communism was in Poland.”)

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    End of XVI century, Poland. Decent democracy, tolerant to the extent that When Italian papal envoy tries to incite a pogrom, he creates a shitstorm so large taht he then asks pope to revoke him for duty because he is universally hated. People from outside marvel how safe are the roads. Italians supposedly tell each other that they should not boast how many people they killed, because it’s seen as a wrong thing in Poland.

    Just 50 years later. Polish brethren are expelled, there is rising support to remove “Warsaw Confederation” articles from king’s oath (basically, a legal guarantee of freedom of religion). Democracy basically collapses, when each parliament is destroyed by corrupt envoys. Roads are full of bandits, there are basically numerous civil wars going on.
     

    There has been much demographic change in that region of Europe. Looks like that's your culprit.

    but I argue than you cannot argue from the opposite, e.g. take a culture and argue everything within it comes from the biological characteristics of population (my favourite example is of course communism, where HBD chick and you argue there had to be something within Polish nation explaining why we have communism.
     
    Emmanuel Todd claims that communism didn't work as well in Poland as it did elsewhere (to the text that communism worked at all, which isn't very well). But a better example here, one that addresses your points quite well, is your neighbor Germany:

    Germania’s Seed?

    The differences between East and West run much deeper than communism.

  158. @Wizard of Oz
    This reply to Jay Man seems to have got misplaced so I'll try to find a workaround.

    You will no doubt agree that there is often a problem of interpretation when people quote percentages (right down to making one wonder whether the reduction of say 5 per cent means 20 per cent becomes 15 per cent or 18 per cent...). I find it a bit difficult to be sure I understand all the implications of such statements as that heredity explains 60 per cents of the variance in IQ - let alone remembering what the difference is if it is narrow sense heredity or broad. Any elucidation so that I would be prepared with answers to a range of "so that means that, if etc..." questions would be greatly welcomed. But, in the immediate context, what I am seeking is elaboration of the implications of "100 genes explain [only] 5 per cent of IQ".
    Does that mean that, if you blocked the expression of those 100 genes what would have been an IQ of 100 would be an IQ of 95 and that 160 would become 152? or what?

    what I am seeking is elaboration of the implications of “100 genes explain [only] 5 per cent of IQ”.

    We know that genes heavily affect IQ. We just don’t know which genes do so. About 100 such genes have been identified, but the vast majority remain unknown and yet to be found.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Thank you Jay Man, I am pleased and flattered to have your attention. But.... that is Jay Man with cruise control on.

    While you did pick the one of my explicit and implicit questions which arose directly from something already on this thread you didn't actually answer my question about the meaning (and implications) of such statements. Or were you being kind to my naiveté in supposing it *could* mean that, if you blocked the expression of that 5 per cent of IQ related genes, you would expect that to knock 5 per cent off the subject's IQ. Your answer was almost consistent with its meaning that we only know of 5 per cent of the estimated 2000 genes which give us our cognitive capacity but it surely doesn't mean that. (Or maybe it does because people whom one would hope know better make some pretty slipshod statistical and numeric statements).

    May I take the opportunity to raise another matter which you might care to comment on or elaborate That is the curious way in which the normal curve seems to be assumed to apply to large groups of people who cannot be sensibly regarded as single populations to whom one set of Gaussian parameters apply. I was really intrigued about 10 or 12 years ago when the great John McCarthy seemed to be ignoring the reality. You must have noticed this tendency and I would be interested to know if you have formed any systematic view as to when it matters. The issue is obviously not new. It clearly predates the Ivy League Dating Service. (And think what Jews must have done for the average Polish IQ before WW2!).

    Does it affect the calculation of regression to the mean or estimates of heritability? That could be important. Even the sds??? After all the popular tabloid science journalism version would just say that the average IQ of Americans (or white Americans: the point remains the same in principle) was 100 and SD 15 and make calculations which would suggest that they had never heard of Cyril Burt's undoubtedly good work which included finding a big bulge on the right side of the distribution at about the 170 mark amongst English school children. (Greg Clark's work goes a long way to explaining that as do all those family photographs circa 1860s to 1914 of the Midland - or Yorkshire or Lowland Scots - successful businessman and most of his 13 children. They mostly didn't marry milkmaids and waitresses).

    To digress a little... When I look back over 160+ years of my immigrant forebears, all entrepreneurs when newly arrived, and their descendants, it is actually quite intriguing to have discovered only recently that my most successful great-grandfather, whom legend had it was the illegitimate son of a Duke and a governess, and who probably has had no descendants with IQs under 1.3 times SD above average, seems to have been the son of an illiterate farm worker and his first cousin! Any generalisations clearly deserve to be viewed sceptically and cautiously - like family legends.

  159. @szopen
    Jayman,

    End of XVI century, Poland. Decent democracy, tolerant to the extent that When Italian papal envoy tries to incite a pogrom, he creates a shitstorm so large taht he then asks pope to revoke him for duty because he is universally hated. People from outside marvel how safe are the roads. Italians supposedly tell each other that they should not boast how many people they killed, because it's seen as a wrong thing in Poland.

    Just 50 years later. Polish brethren are expelled, there is rising support to remove "Warsaw Confederation" articles from king's oath (basically, a legal guarantee of freedom of religion). Democracy basically collapses, when each parliament is destroyed by corrupt envoys. Roads are full of bandits, there are basically numerous civil wars going on.

    100 years later - Poland is totally defunct country. Intolerancy is rampant. Last protestant envoy is removed from the parliament (because he was corrupted and proven to be financed by outer powers, but so were a lot of other envoys).

    First half of 19th century - romanticism, idealisation of sacrifice, Poland as "messiah of nations".

    Second half: positivism, Poles should just work as hard as Germans, and instead of fitghting in uprisings, they should strive to make "a better butter than German, better bread than German, have more clean house".

    I could go on and on. The changes to the culture are too big to be thought of as just a function of biological characteristics of Polish population. I do not deny there is a biologic factor to the culture and maybe some a population is limited in a choice of possible cultures it can create, or number of culture within it it can strive; but I argue than you cannot argue from the opposite, e.g. take a culture and argue everything within it comes from the biological characteristics of population (my favourite example is of course communism, where HBD chick and you argue there had to be something within Polish nation explaining why we have communism. Somehow, the fact that we were invaded from the east, communism was imposed by force and after tens of thousands of victims was jsut waved off with reaction I personally took as "yeah, but it's not interesting. let's talk about Poland being outside Hajnal line and that's why communism was in Poland.")

    End of XVI century, Poland. Decent democracy, tolerant to the extent that When Italian papal envoy tries to incite a pogrom, he creates a shitstorm so large taht he then asks pope to revoke him for duty because he is universally hated. People from outside marvel how safe are the roads. Italians supposedly tell each other that they should not boast how many people they killed, because it’s seen as a wrong thing in Poland.

    Just 50 years later. Polish brethren are expelled, there is rising support to remove “Warsaw Confederation” articles from king’s oath (basically, a legal guarantee of freedom of religion). Democracy basically collapses, when each parliament is destroyed by corrupt envoys. Roads are full of bandits, there are basically numerous civil wars going on.

    There has been much demographic change in that region of Europe. Looks like that’s your culprit.

    but I argue than you cannot argue from the opposite, e.g. take a culture and argue everything within it comes from the biological characteristics of population (my favourite example is of course communism, where HBD chick and you argue there had to be something within Polish nation explaining why we have communism.

    Emmanuel Todd claims that communism didn’t work as well in Poland as it did elsewhere (to the text that communism worked at all, which isn’t very well). But a better example here, one that addresses your points quite well, is your neighbor Germany:

    Germania’s Seed?

    The differences between East and West run much deeper than communism.

    Read More
  160. @JayMan

    what I am seeking is elaboration of the implications of “100 genes explain [only] 5 per cent of IQ”.
     
    We know that genes heavily affect IQ. We just don't know which genes do so. About 100 such genes have been identified, but the vast majority remain unknown and yet to be found.

    Thank you Jay Man, I am pleased and flattered to have your attention. But…. that is Jay Man with cruise control on.

    While you did pick the one of my explicit and implicit questions which arose directly from something already on this thread you didn’t actually answer my question about the meaning (and implications) of such statements. Or were you being kind to my naiveté in supposing it *could* mean that, if you blocked the expression of that 5 per cent of IQ related genes, you would expect that to knock 5 per cent off the subject’s IQ. Your answer was almost consistent with its meaning that we only know of 5 per cent of the estimated 2000 genes which give us our cognitive capacity but it surely doesn’t mean that. (Or maybe it does because people whom one would hope know better make some pretty slipshod statistical and numeric statements).

    May I take the opportunity to raise another matter which you might care to comment on or elaborate That is the curious way in which the normal curve seems to be assumed to apply to large groups of people who cannot be sensibly regarded as single populations to whom one set of Gaussian parameters apply. I was really intrigued about 10 or 12 years ago when the great John McCarthy seemed to be ignoring the reality. You must have noticed this tendency and I would be interested to know if you have formed any systematic view as to when it matters. The issue is obviously not new. It clearly predates the Ivy League Dating Service. (And think what Jews must have done for the average Polish IQ before WW2!).

    Does it affect the calculation of regression to the mean or estimates of heritability? That could be important. Even the sds??? After all the popular tabloid science journalism version would just say that the average IQ of Americans (or white Americans: the point remains the same in principle) was 100 and SD 15 and make calculations which would suggest that they had never heard of Cyril Burt’s undoubtedly good work which included finding a big bulge on the right side of the distribution at about the 170 mark amongst English school children. (Greg Clark’s work goes a long way to explaining that as do all those family photographs circa 1860s to 1914 of the Midland – or Yorkshire or Lowland Scots – successful businessman and most of his 13 children. They mostly didn’t marry milkmaids and waitresses).

    To digress a little… When I look back over 160+ years of my immigrant forebears, all entrepreneurs when newly arrived, and their descendants, it is actually quite intriguing to have discovered only recently that my most successful great-grandfather, whom legend had it was the illegitimate son of a Duke and a governess, and who probably has had no descendants with IQs under 1.3 times SD above average, seems to have been the son of an illiterate farm worker and his first cousin! Any generalisations clearly deserve to be viewed sceptically and cautiously – like family legends.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    While you did pick the one of my explicit and implicit questions which arose directly from something already on this thread you didn’t actually answer my question about the meaning (and implications) of such statements. Or were you being kind to my naiveté in supposing it *could* mean that, if you blocked the expression of that 5 per cent of IQ related genes, you would expect that to knock 5 per cent off the subject’s IQ.
     
    5% of population variance is a long way from variation in a given individual. So the short answer to your question is no.

    Does it affect the calculation of regression to the mean or estimates of heritability? That could be important. Even the sds??? After all the popular tabloid science journalism version would just say that the average IQ of Americans (or white Americans: the point remains the same in principle) was 100 and SD 15 and make calculations which would suggest that they had never heard of Cyril Burt’s undoubtedly good work which included finding a big bulge on the right side of the distribution at about the 170 mark amongst English school children.
     
    See here.

    To digress a little… When I look back over 160+ years of my immigrant forebears, all entrepreneurs when newly arrived, and their descendants, it is actually quite intriguing to have discovered only recently that my most successful great-grandfather, whom legend had it was the illegitimate son of a Duke and a governess, and who probably has had no descendants with IQs under 1.3 times SD above average, seems to have been the son of an illiterate farm worker and his first cousin! Any generalisations clearly deserve to be viewed sceptically and cautiously – like family legends.
     
    Statistics my friend, statistics.
  161. […] Jayman marvels that the very mild (and sweetly liberal!) Henry Harpending has been targeted by the SPLC. […]

    Read More
  162. @Wizard of Oz
    Thank you Jay Man, I am pleased and flattered to have your attention. But.... that is Jay Man with cruise control on.

    While you did pick the one of my explicit and implicit questions which arose directly from something already on this thread you didn't actually answer my question about the meaning (and implications) of such statements. Or were you being kind to my naiveté in supposing it *could* mean that, if you blocked the expression of that 5 per cent of IQ related genes, you would expect that to knock 5 per cent off the subject's IQ. Your answer was almost consistent with its meaning that we only know of 5 per cent of the estimated 2000 genes which give us our cognitive capacity but it surely doesn't mean that. (Or maybe it does because people whom one would hope know better make some pretty slipshod statistical and numeric statements).

    May I take the opportunity to raise another matter which you might care to comment on or elaborate That is the curious way in which the normal curve seems to be assumed to apply to large groups of people who cannot be sensibly regarded as single populations to whom one set of Gaussian parameters apply. I was really intrigued about 10 or 12 years ago when the great John McCarthy seemed to be ignoring the reality. You must have noticed this tendency and I would be interested to know if you have formed any systematic view as to when it matters. The issue is obviously not new. It clearly predates the Ivy League Dating Service. (And think what Jews must have done for the average Polish IQ before WW2!).

    Does it affect the calculation of regression to the mean or estimates of heritability? That could be important. Even the sds??? After all the popular tabloid science journalism version would just say that the average IQ of Americans (or white Americans: the point remains the same in principle) was 100 and SD 15 and make calculations which would suggest that they had never heard of Cyril Burt's undoubtedly good work which included finding a big bulge on the right side of the distribution at about the 170 mark amongst English school children. (Greg Clark's work goes a long way to explaining that as do all those family photographs circa 1860s to 1914 of the Midland - or Yorkshire or Lowland Scots - successful businessman and most of his 13 children. They mostly didn't marry milkmaids and waitresses).

    To digress a little... When I look back over 160+ years of my immigrant forebears, all entrepreneurs when newly arrived, and their descendants, it is actually quite intriguing to have discovered only recently that my most successful great-grandfather, whom legend had it was the illegitimate son of a Duke and a governess, and who probably has had no descendants with IQs under 1.3 times SD above average, seems to have been the son of an illiterate farm worker and his first cousin! Any generalisations clearly deserve to be viewed sceptically and cautiously - like family legends.

    While you did pick the one of my explicit and implicit questions which arose directly from something already on this thread you didn’t actually answer my question about the meaning (and implications) of such statements. Or were you being kind to my naiveté in supposing it *could* mean that, if you blocked the expression of that 5 per cent of IQ related genes, you would expect that to knock 5 per cent off the subject’s IQ.

    5% of population variance is a long way from variation in a given individual. So the short answer to your question is no.

    Does it affect the calculation of regression to the mean or estimates of heritability? That could be important. Even the sds??? After all the popular tabloid science journalism version would just say that the average IQ of Americans (or white Americans: the point remains the same in principle) was 100 and SD 15 and make calculations which would suggest that they had never heard of Cyril Burt’s undoubtedly good work which included finding a big bulge on the right side of the distribution at about the 170 mark amongst English school children.

    See here.

    To digress a little… When I look back over 160+ years of my immigrant forebears, all entrepreneurs when newly arrived, and their descendants, it is actually quite intriguing to have discovered only recently that my most successful great-grandfather, whom legend had it was the illegitimate son of a Duke and a governess, and who probably has had no descendants with IQs under 1.3 times SD above average, seems to have been the son of an illiterate farm worker and his first cousin! Any generalisations clearly deserve to be viewed sceptically and cautiously – like family legends.

    Statistics my friend, statistics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Thank you for the reference to La Griffe whose work, and geniality, I have enjoyed for many years. I don't remember having read the linked piece before.

    A natural follow up to consideration of Ashkenazi IQs by the threshold method would be to try out the method on Brahmins educated in the US or UK, Parsees ditto, Yankee Episcopalians who have remained so and married their kund, whether believing in God or not, for foyr generations, titled Germans etc.
  163. @JayMan

    While you did pick the one of my explicit and implicit questions which arose directly from something already on this thread you didn’t actually answer my question about the meaning (and implications) of such statements. Or were you being kind to my naiveté in supposing it *could* mean that, if you blocked the expression of that 5 per cent of IQ related genes, you would expect that to knock 5 per cent off the subject’s IQ.
     
    5% of population variance is a long way from variation in a given individual. So the short answer to your question is no.

    Does it affect the calculation of regression to the mean or estimates of heritability? That could be important. Even the sds??? After all the popular tabloid science journalism version would just say that the average IQ of Americans (or white Americans: the point remains the same in principle) was 100 and SD 15 and make calculations which would suggest that they had never heard of Cyril Burt’s undoubtedly good work which included finding a big bulge on the right side of the distribution at about the 170 mark amongst English school children.
     
    See here.

    To digress a little… When I look back over 160+ years of my immigrant forebears, all entrepreneurs when newly arrived, and their descendants, it is actually quite intriguing to have discovered only recently that my most successful great-grandfather, whom legend had it was the illegitimate son of a Duke and a governess, and who probably has had no descendants with IQs under 1.3 times SD above average, seems to have been the son of an illiterate farm worker and his first cousin! Any generalisations clearly deserve to be viewed sceptically and cautiously – like family legends.
     
    Statistics my friend, statistics.

    Thank you for the reference to La Griffe whose work, and geniality, I have enjoyed for many years. I don’t remember having read the linked piece before.

    A natural follow up to consideration of Ashkenazi IQs by the threshold method would be to try out the method on Brahmins educated in the US or UK, Parsees ditto, Yankee Episcopalians who have remained so and married their kund, whether believing in God or not, for foyr generations, titled Germans etc.

    Read More
  164. @szopen
    So there is a anthropological difference between northwestern Europe and Southern; sure. But then, there is no such difference between Eastern Europe and Northern (at least, if you are claiming Ireland, England, Sweden and German all share common features; because all of those countries have different anthropological types). Percentage of light hair and light eyes in Poland is as high or even higher than in Germany, and while pure "nordic" type is rare, so is in Germany.

    Next, look at the regional variation of GDP:
    http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/File:Gross_domestic_product_%28GDP%29_per_inhabitant,_in_purchasing_power_standard_%28PPS%29,_by_NUTS_level_2_region,_2013_%28%C2%B9%29_%28%25_of_the_EU-28_average,_EU-28_%3D_100%29_RYB15.png

    Suddenly you have Germanic-speaking regions which are poorer and more similar to French, Spanish or southern Italian regions (in terms of GDP). I bet you could produce similar maps depicting life quality etc.
    Moreover, here are some of the opinions about Germans from early XIX Germany, quoted after some Korean scientific paper about economy:

    QUOTE STARTS HERE

    "Before their economic
    take-off in the mid-19th century, the Germans were typically described by
    the British as “a dull and heavy people”9 “Indolence” was a word that was
    frequently associated with the Germanic nature.10 Mary Shelley, the author
    of Frankenstein, wrote in exasperation after a particularly frustrating
    altercation with her German coach-driver; “the Germans never hurry”.11 It
    wasn’t just the British. A French manufacturer who employed German
    workers complained that they “work as and when they please”.12
    The British considered the Germans also to be slow-witted.
    According to one John Russell, a travel-writer of the 1820s, the Germans
    were a “plodding, easily contented people … endowed neither with great
    acuteness of perception nor quickness of feeling”. In particular, according to
    Russell, they were not open to new ideas; “it is long before [a German] can
    be brought to comprehend the bearings of what is new to him, and it is
    difficult to rouse him to ardour in its pursuit.”. 13 No wonder that they were
    “not distinguished by enterprise or activity”, as another mid-19th century
    British traveller remarked.14

    Germans were also deemed to be too individualistic and unable to
    cooperate with each other. The Germans’ inability to cooperate was, in the
    view of the British, most strongly manifested in the poor quality and
    maintenance of their public infrastructure, which was so bad that John
    McPherson, a Viceroy of India (and therefore quite used to treacherous road
    conditions), wrote, “I found the roads so bad in Germany that I directed my
    course to Italy”.
    British travellers in the early 19th century also found the Germans
    dishonest – “the tradesman and the shopkeeper take advantage of you
    wherever they can, and to the smallest imaginable amount rather than not
    take advantage of you at all … This knavery is universal”

    (NOTE by szopen: In Polish, "oszwabić" comes from a derogatory term "szwab" used for a German and means "to cheat someone").

    observed Sir
    Arthur Brooke Faulkner, a physician serving in the British army.17
    Finally, the British thought the Germans to be overly emotional.
    Today many British seem to think that Germans have an almost genetic
    emotional deficiency. Yet talking about excessive German emotion, Sir
    Arthur observed that “some will laugh all sorrows away and others will
    always indulge in melancholy”.

    They certainly seemed very emotional at the Nuremberg rallies. Listening to Hitler’s speeches, he seems to be anything but calm and unemotional.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    They certainly seemed very emotional at the Nuremberg rallies.

    And Obama's German rally
  165. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I’ve run into this kind of thinking before. Several years ago I heard of a local academic in Halifax, NS, Canada who’d proved that negroid brains were in some way different from ‘white’ brains. I think it was on the basis of size. Of course the Liberals went mad until I pointed out that different is not better or worse. A person’s value in society is dictated by the fact that he is a human being and citizen. Science cannot make value judgements, better or worse, etc. That is our job (or God’s if you will). Science can say bigger or smaller, not better or worse. I suspect it was a lot of racist nonsense, but I never saw any peer reviews or commentaries about the assertion. There are of course no shortage of pseudo-scientist who claim to be able to prove racial”inferiority”, but without success.

    Read More
  166. Henry should approach the SPLC to fund a makeover for himself. They need a scary figure to get donations with, while he is just a professionally isolated academic with highly unfashionable views and stroke related disabilities. I’m sure the SPLC would love HH to be so much more.

    Read More
  167. @Jim
    They certainly seemed very emotional at the Nuremberg rallies. Listening to Hitler's speeches, he seems to be anything but calm and unemotional.

    They certainly seemed very emotional at the Nuremberg rallies.

    And Obama’s German rally

    Read More
  168. OT: “Where microaggressions really come from: A sociological account”

    Jonathan Haidt comments on a paper (by Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning), which attributes the rise of microaggressions to an emerging culture of victimhood and contrasts it to cultures of honor and cultures of dignity.

    http://righteousmind.com/where-microaggressions-really-come-from/

    The paper’s URL: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/15691330-12341332

    I’m curious about what a HBD explanation of this phenomenon would be.

    Read More
  169. @dk
    OT: "Where microaggressions really come from: A sociological account"

    Jonathan Haidt comments on a paper (by Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning), which attributes the rise of microaggressions to an emerging culture of victimhood and contrasts it to cultures of honor and cultures of dignity.

    http://righteousmind.com/where-microaggressions-really-come-from/

    The paper's URL: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/15691330-12341332

    I'm curious about what a HBD explanation of this phenomenon would be.

    I’m curious about what a HBD explanation of this phenomenon would be.

    Honor, Dignity, and Face: Culture as Personality Writ Large | Staffan’s Personality Blog

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All JayMan Comments via RSS