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

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Biome mean annual temperature

If people were crops, where would they be best planted?

Like many people, I have read some books which have led me astray. They were plausible, and although I could see errors in them, I continued reading so as to learn new things. I am willing to accept that authors can be wrong about some things, yet right about others. It is a matter of degree. Baloney detection is not that difficult, and some books have to be cast aside, lest they clutter one’s mind with nonsense.

As to “Guns, Germs and Steel” I could see that the author was wrong about intelligence, deliberately wrong, but I grimly understood that many public figures feel it politic to lie about such things, and I was willing to keep reading in order to learn about geography and flora and fauna, about which I know too little. Cavalli-Sforza also found it politic to dismiss intelligence in the early pages of “Genes, Peoples and Languages”, and then give his results anyway in the rest of his book. Perhaps he knew that most people read only the first 25 pages. The same is true of many psychology researchers who like to denigrate intelligence, particularly when it comes to group differences. Their secrets are safe with me. I have no wish to see them bothered, just because they muddy the waters and leave dots unconnected. Live and let live.

Geography has somewhat lapsed in popularity as a discipline. Perhaps this is due to a conceit that humans have mastered geography, so late their bounded home, and can now rise above it, into a totally secure, well insulated, air-conditioned world. Such over-confidence may account for people who live in flood zones being surprised when they are flooded.

But geography is a common thread in the great debate about what makes some nations richer, better organized and more agreeable than others. In his tome, Jared Diamond blamed geography for these differences, arguing that people were all alike, but had to deal with different circumstances. (In fact, without any supportive evidence, he announced that the residents of Papua New Guinea were the brightest, perhaps seeking virtue through perversity). The contrary position is a longer-term view, namely that over generations (at least 16 of them?) people become adapted to their circumstances, and change in their character and ability through natural selection.

On this point, researchers have usually looked at latitude as an indicator of geographic influences. Distance from the Equator is a good predictor of outcomes. Can one do better than this, and include other relevant measures to get a best-fit between human types and their regions of origin? In that last question lies a complication. Originally in ships, and now more swiftly and cheaply in wide-body jets, people move around. In fact, looking back over history, migrations are hardly new, though they took far longer to achieve prior to modern transport. It should be possible to trace back genetic groups to their geographies of origin. Cavalli-Sforza required his subjects to show settled residence traceable back to 1492, which is a mere 21 generations ago, if we estimate 4 generations per century. Of course, with genetic methods we should be able to do better. However, the work to be considered below does not take up that particular issue. Rather, it seeks to create a typology of biomes which may be related to intelligence. It is a work in progress, initially a conference presentation (see link below) with a set of explanatory notes which set out some of the arguments, and the matters which still need to be resolved. It explores some options, and may give us a better approach to the general discussion of which environments favour the development of intelligence.

Using biome mapping and weighting to more precisely predict biogeographic differences in intelligence
Steven C. Hertler, Mateo Peñaherrera-Aguirre

Latitude and mean annual temperature powerfully predict the biogeographic distribution of intelligence. As single metrics, latitude and mean annual temperature have only one another as competitors. Of course, they are highly inter-correlated, with obvious causal connections. Mean annual temperature may in fact be superior to latitude because of its more explicitly composite nature. This is especially true if mean annual temperature is measured in a sophisticated fashion, across multiple measurement points which are then amalgamated. If this is done, mean annual temperature can implicitly account for oceanic warming trends and high altitude steppes and mountain ranges. However, there are other physical ecological components for which mean annual temperature fails to account, or does so insufficiently. One example is moisture or hydrology. Countries in Saharan and sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, do not greatly vary in mean annual temperature, even while having contrasting amounts of available water. Another example is soil quality. Inceptisols (early soil formations) and other soil types can be found across great stretches of latitude, and so are present at a variety of mean annual temperatures. Climatic factors such as hydrology and soil type that remain outside the reach of the predictive powers of mean annual temperature, nonetheless, are of great import to human cognitive evolution.

To improve upon a meta-indicator of climate, in this case latitude, Figueredo and colleagues included a Temperate Broad Leaf Deciduous Forest Factor. This turned out to be a powerful composite predictor variable because Temperate Broadleaf Deciduous Forests only exist within certain parameters; specifically between 40 and 60 degrees north latitude, within a particular band of temperature values, bounded in the north by permafrost, and in the south by competing coniferous tress. Their presence also denotes moderate moisture and rich brown alfisols (typically under a hardwood forest cover) which may be particularly productive of early agricultural yields, while discouraging helminth endo-parasites (worms). The presence of temperate broadleaf deciduous forest biomes seems particularly valuable in accounting for some nations with high outlying intelligence. Notwithstanding these observations, temperate forests are not present in the majority of regions or nations. Accordingly, the present study uses a global biome map made available by the World Wildlife Federation to extend the Temperate Broadleaf Deciduous Forest Factor into a broadly applicable biome classification system that can compass the full range of selective regimes. We present ordinarily ranked biomes via a hypothesized relationship to cognitive evolution. To the extent that the present distribution of cross-national intelligence is analysed, it is analysed in light of migration, population heterogeneity and predicted migration routes. The heuristic value of such a method is compelling. Physical ecology is to some extent better predicted while community ecology is directly measured.

At this point you might chose to look at the conference slides, and then come back to the notes.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3c4TxciNeJZTVUzWGtZanZDazg

Soils can be ranked by differences in fertility, and these vary considerably in different parts of the world.

Biome soils

Hertler cites the following passages from Walter & Breckle (1999), which are illustrative of the readings contributing to his biome model.

Though tropical rainforest soils are very old and often deep, they are of the oxisol and utisol types in about two third of coverage. Oxisols and utisols have only moderate to low fertility. Moreover, seven percent of tropical area is then comprised of “quartz sand-rich alluvial terrace” which is weathered and leeched and so nutrient deficient. Consequently, “present day agricultural practices are only possible on about 20% of the tropical soils, namely the younger volcanic soils (alfisols) and the rich alluvial soils in large river valleys…”

“Soils are usually extremely poor in nutrients and are acid (pH=4.5-5.5), which would, at first sight, appear to be contradicted by the luxuriance of the vegetation. In fact, almost the entire nutrient reserves required by the forest are contained in the above ground phytomass. Each year, a part of this phytomass dies off and is rapidly mineralised, and the nutritional elements thereby released are immediately taken up again by the roots. Despite the high rainfall, there is almost no loss of nutrients due to leaching; the water in the streams has the electrical conductivity of distilled water and is, at most, coloured slightly brown by humus colids”

This explains the paradox. It is comparable to landed wealth…no liquid capital (ground nutrients available and stored in soil) but only sequestered capital (embodied in trees, and so not available for growth). Rapid cycling by termites and other organisms, and then rapid reuptake keep minerals sequestered; but the key is that clearing the forests will result in rapid decomposition followed by leeching, making the soils unfit for sustained agriculture. In contrast, Temperate Broadleaf Deciduous Forests with their slower rate of decomposition which comes from less and less speciose decomposers that can only work half the season, like a slow release drug…slowly cycling back nutrients into the soil.

With such a rapid cycling of nutrients, the rain forest can grow for thousands of years on the same site, but as soon as it is deforested and the wood burned, intensive leaching of the suddenly mineralized nutritional reserves occurs. Only a small portion is adsorbed by the soil colids and can be utilized for a few years by cultivated plants. If cultivation is discontinued, a secondary forest develops; these forests, however, never attain the luxuriant habit of the original forest. If this is once more cleared for temporary cultivation, a fresh loss of nutrients takes place due to leaching until, after a series of such exploitations, the soil is capable only of supporting bracken. After the burning of such areas, grasses, for example, alang-alang (Imperata) which have limited nutrient requirements, can gain a foothold. These grasses are of no value for grazing.

“The tropical rain forest growing in poor soils is inhospitable to human settlements and is usually avoided by people. It is often a refuge of aboriginal tribes. In Africa these are the Pygmies, and in Latin America, original Indian tribes. Even in South-East Asia some of the original tribes have survived. In contrast to these habitats, the remnants of former rain forests on nutrient-rich, young volcanic soils are densely populated cultivated lands (for example Java, Central America). Only in these areas is it possible to maintain long-term agriculture. Tree felling in all other areas leads to a catastrophic loss of nutrients, expressing very clearly the “ecological” disadvantage of the tropics (Weischet 1980). Deforested areas are worthless after a few years, as they are subject to erosion and soon covered by Gleichenia or Imparata thickets of no value.

One of the more interesting findings is how poor tropical soils are. I expected them to be rich, but their nutrients are sequestered within the biomass and then lost and leached rapidly upon slashing and burning. In contrast, temperate forests keep this rich and deep nutrient layer generated from the constant cycling of leaves; and this provides centuries worth of fecund cultivation even after the forests are cleared.

Some soils really are better than others for the cultivation of crops and people.

As regards the biome/intelligence link implied by the maps of Japan, Hertler explains:

I would be interested to see a more complete IQ map for Japan. I see in this incomplete one a patch of low IQ in red on the right map. This falls on a tropical section, which corresponds with the theory. Generally, I would think both the few tropical sections, as well as the north most island has lower IQ than the central portion. In part this is due to historical distribution of different peoples (I recall the northern island being occupied by genetically distinct persons). In part, however, it is due to intelligence and high K people competing for and occupying the most desirable climatic zone and those that comport with the evolutionary conditions in which their civilization and ancestors evolved. What data there is shows high IQ in the TBDF Temperate Broadleaf Deciduous Forest Zones.

As to the theoretical justifications for a Biome Classification in which biomes are ranked by capacity to encourage the growth of intelligence, Hertler admits this is ad hoc and theoretical, rather than systematic or empirical. (He has a more elaborate explanation of the weighting system).

Biomes 14

As presented in Table 3, these biomes are ordinarily ranked from one to fourteen, via a hypothesized relationship to cognitive evolution. The overarching underpinnings of this ordering is an adaptation of cold winters theory. As per cold winters theories (Lynn, 1991; Rushton, 1995), the evolution of high cognitive ability derived from post migration exposure to extreme cold within Eurasian climates. Tool use, shelter construction, and new heights of cooperative big game hunting were among the cognitively demanding necessities that theoretically drove cognitive gains. Later use of cold winters theory laid even more stress on seasonality (Hertler, 2015; 2016). The predictably cycling between permissive warmth and exacting cold demanding greater conscientiousness as per this theory. And conscientiousness carries with it cognitive connotations, in that the conscientiousness are inherently more future oriented and exhibit more self-control. Being more likely to subordinate the present to the future, one might say that those in northerly environments have more executive control and the behavioral correlates of that executive control that we commonly call conscientiousness within the personality literature (Hertler, 2105).

Following from these observations, the relation between intelligence and cold is herein predicted to be curvilinear. In consequence, it is the temperate biomes that are placed most highly: Temperate Broadleaf & Mixed Forests (TBMF), Temperate Coniferous Forests (TCF), Mediterranean Forests, Woodlands & Scrubs (MFWS), and Temperate Grasslands, Savannas & Shrublands (TGSS). In accordance with this curvilinear prediction, these four biomes are purposefully placed above the Boreal Forests/Taiga (BFT) and Tundra (T) biomes. Nevertheless, for the purposes of the present analysis, this point is more or less moot as Boreal Forests/Tundra is absent from this data set and Tundra is only present as a minority portion of China’s territory. On the other hand, generally speaking, there are warm climates. These come to predominate along the equator. Cold becomes rarer, and seasonality, if it is present, often relates more to water availability than to temperature fluctuation. And it is, in fact, water availability to separates these subtropical and tropical climates most distinctly. The combination of hot and wet gives rise to the Tropical & Subtropical Moist Broadleaf Forests (TSMBF) for instance, which does not positively pull for intellectual development as per cold winters theory, but which also engenders a hive of biological activity, much of it detrimental to human life. Following this, Deserts & Xeric Shrublands (DXS) exert the action of heat, but do not compound heat with excessive water availability.

Singapore is an outlier among outliers. The demographics of Singapore make it a prime candidate for exclusion, not because it is a positive outlier that is nearly twice as extreme as the next positive outlier, but because in the 1800s there was a large influx of Chinese who now make up approximately seventy percent of the total population. So while Singapore lies on the equator, it is not populated by persons that evolved in that territory. Certainly, there are other instances where migration will significantly affect the predictive power of biome analysis, but these less extreme instances will be left for post hoc analysis using other methods.

Averaging biomes for large countries with multiple biomes like South Africa, and most especially China, will likely prove problematic. China’s population, for instance is located on the east coast amidst largely temperate biomes, even while a great proportion of its interior is desert.

In summary, the argument that geography affects the development of humans and their civilizations need not be a bone of contention between hereditarian and environmentalist perspectives, so long as environmentalists are willing to agree that long-term habitation in a particular biome could lead to evolutionary changes over generations. Singapore, rather than being an exception, may be the embodiment of the rule.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3c4TxciNeJZTVUzWGtZanZDazg

 
• Category: Science • Tags: Genetic Diversity, Geography, IQ 
Hide 422 CommentsLeave a Comment
422 Comments to "Growing Intelligence"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. so long as environmentalists are willing to agree that long-term habitation in a particular biome could lead to evolutionary changes over generations.

    I don’t see why this is so hard to agree with. It’s just ‘common sense/knowledge’.

    Some soils really are better than others for the cultivation of crops and people.

    This wasn’t too surprising to learn for me. This is also another reason for malnutrition in Africa.

    “The tropical rain forest growing in poor soils is inhospitable to human settlements and is usually avoided by people. It is often a refuge of aboriginal tribes. In Africa these are the Pygmies, and in Latin America, original Indian tribes.

    And these peoples evolved in places that lack energy, so their body size reflects their evolutionary history (See Daniel Lieberman’s 2013 book The Story of the Human Body for more information).

  2. Singapore, rather than being an exception, may be the embodiment of the rule.

    Singapore couldn’t be the embodiement of anything else but the fact that a tax-haven city state located on the busiest maritime trade route in the world has to be a successful nation.

    But:
    -Singapore is not the richest city-state in the world
    -Not the richest tax-heaven in the world
    -Not the richest center of trade.

    A better vindication would be Hawaii with the plurality of its population being descended from Japanese coolies. Hawaii is definitely not Singapore, not even close to.

    Also, disease burden correlates with IQ much better than latitude or temperature.

    The biome ranking that you show just reflects habitability (Disease burden, soil fertility, temperature, precipitation…) and closely matches the distribution of world population density.

    It all makes sense without evolutionary just-so stories.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  3. If people were crops, where would they be best planted?


    Or before widespread modern medicine

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  4. @Afrosapiens

    Since we’re talking about crops

    Agricultural suitability:

    Soil fertility:

  5. Averaging biomes for large countries with multiple biomes like South Africa, and most especially China, will likely prove problematic. China’s population, for instance is located on the east coast amidst largely temperate biomes, even while a great proportion of its interior is desert.

    And lol, seeing how high desert environments I ranked, I’m thinking those simple minded authors counted middle eastern and north African countries as deserts. That’s retarded.

    -The Maghreb is mostly desert, but the population is concentrated on the coastal areas that enjoy a Mediterranean climate, same applies to the Levant.

    -Egypt and Sudan as well as Mesopotamia are mostly desert, but the population lives on the banks of the Nile, the Euphrates and the Tigris, which are cooler wetlands

    -Arabia is mostly desert, but most of the population lives in the highlands of Hejaz and Yemen. Plus the gulf states have large numbers of non-Arab immigrants.

    This is trash research as usual.

  6. Mactoul says:

    If people were crops, where would they be best planted?

    To be optimized for quantity i.e. population–then China and India are the best historically and currently.
    If optimized for quality aka IQ, then temperate lands win.

  7. Someone says:

    Good soil > Agriculture > Sedentary life > Dense Population > Higher degree of Outlier IQs (both lower and higher ones) > Selection.
    But then, of the 3 lifestyles of the post-Ice Age, Hunting/Gathering, Agriculture and Pastoralism, Pastoralism was also incredibly succesful in different stances, more even than Agriculture or on par/competing. Why? Well, people are starting to speculate that Pastoralism was a richer lifestyle commoditie-wise and commercialy-wise, and that’s why the people who adopted it were as sucesful, smart and whatever else as Agriculturalists.
    Wouldn’t this break the Geography model?

    Reality is: Selection is everything, and the lifestyle a people have (based, influenced or whatever by the Geography/Environment they live) drives the selection of the group – to favour intelligence, stay neutral to it or neglect it.

    Everyone who has traveled the world, had pets, children, worked in a “diverse” place can pinpoint perfectly that Genetics is everything.
    But then, why these Genetics ended up that way? Something external must have guided it to the way it is today – a slow, multi-generational process.
    So yes, externalities matter for different selections, but they matter for what has already been selected? Say, you? What you are? No.
    They will matter for the future generations, who may or may not carry “you” in them.
    I don’t know if I made myself clear but that’s it.

    • Agree: CanSpeccy
    • Disagree: Afrosapiens
  8. “Geography has somewhat lapsed in popularity as a discipline.”

    Some of that IMHO is down to “Human Geography” becoming a much more salient part of the curriculum. Now obviously land use and human impacts (dredging/embankment of rivers, desertification, deforestation etc) rightly belongs there. But what about these, from June 2016 A level papers?

    Option 6 – Contemporary Conflicts and Challenges

    Figure 6a shows the location of Crimea within its regional setting. Figure 6b offers some key information about Crimea up to 2014.

    Using Figures 6a and 6b comment on the basis of the conflict in Crimea.[7 marks]

    Describe the environmental and economic issues associated with one international conflict that you have studied.[8 marks]

    Discuss the reasons for, and consequences of, separatism.[10 marks]

    Discuss the issues associated with the development of multicultural societies in the UK.[40 marks]

    3 (b)In relation to the concerns set out in Item 6, discuss how the regulation of fracking could be improved.[10 marks]

    (and absent from Figure 6b is the really important geopolitical information that the Crimea is where the Black Sea Fleet is based). Bring back the oxbow lake and the Continental Climate !

    The good news is that geology is almost untouched by this tendency.

  9. m___ says:

    Magnum effort, way beyond my first superficial comprehension.

    One remark though, a mega one, not specific to the article, as broad-raking as is.

    “The differences in IQ between individuals is on a scale major to differences in groups. More complex, dynamic societies as over the last two hundred years, will find value and pertinence first in mining individual IQ talents.

    The group differences planetary, will have no longer the same pertinent impact, certainly not on modern timescales, dozens of years, as compared to centuries and dozens of generations.

    All other factors will abide by these superior IQ ‘compensations’ as a first.”

    This impressive research is probably of historical value only, which is in itself a layer of further comprehension of course, but the results will probably not point into the future consequently. Said otherwise, as a tool for prediction it might fail.

  10. Why the Unz mania for this intelligence stuff? This is utterly devoid of any scientific merit and all proceeds from wanting to confirm a belief. Ir’s on a par with Birtherism.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Santoculto
    , @Anon
  11. JimH says:

    I can see the usual Northern Hemisphere bias in a lot of this. The fact is there are a lot of places other than Eurasia that have either cold winters and/or winters when you can’t grow anything. New Zealand gets snow, southern Africa has 6 months of the year with no rain at all (Mar-Sep), Argentina has both; and yet the locals never even thought of the wheel. S America and Australasia didn’t even have iron.

    Added to that is, the tech and political systems all developed either in the dry subtropics (fertile crescent) or the Mediterranean.

    It’s the genes, stupid!

  12. Extreme climates more than increase it limitates …. creativity, what we are really talking about, [increasing of intelligence at point to also increase higher creativity]. So, too dry, too cold or too hot, and it’s likely that instead a challenge to increase intelligence [and creativity], to win the environment, this harsh conditions will force living beings to maximize their adaptations = reduction of phenotypical variability as well superlativities; increase of pragmatic adaptative approach.

    Maybe it’s not:

    humans were exposed to cold regions and became smarter but firstly, how they got there* During this expansion to polar regions, humans becoming smarter/aka self-controlled while when this expansion was limited for harsh climate they stoped to increase their intelligence.

    Even seems interesting to compare how fitted climates/biomas tend to be with personality types. ”equatorial personality”…

    bad grammar,
    still breathe…

  13. @JimH

    I am unsure of the Inca, but the Maya didn’t use the wheel for transportation since it wasn’t conducive to their city state layouts. They knew of the wheel and its use, however, since they made children’s toys with wheels. It’s also worth noting that the Maya used the concept of “0″ without outside influence as well.

    It’s worth noting that civilization popped up independently in a few places, with the Maya being one of them. Writing was also only invented without influence in five areas: Meso America (the Maya), the Chinese, the Sumerians, the Harrapan, and the Egyptians.

    So yea, peoples can understand a concept of something without using it in their society due to their environment/city layout. I wouldn’t attribute this to genes. Because if you’re going on just where things were invented, you’re going to have a bad time.

    Added to that is, the tech and political systems all developed either in the dry subtropics (fertile crescent) or the Mediterranean.

    Which is why civilization only popped up in areas with the right climate that could sustain large populations with food production. Areas like this are where writing was invented independently without any outside influence.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
    , @Jim
  14. The government is spraying toxic chemicals into the skies of America and the world known as chemtrails and this spray is composed of nano aluminum and barium and strontium , etc. and is going into the air we breathe and the soil we grow our crops in and the water we drink.

    This is weather control on steroids and the gov is using HAARP and LASERS to heat the atmosphere and to guide storms ie hurricanes and tornados which they did in the recent ones in Texas and Florida and Porte Rico and they have been doing this for decades, but recently have gone all out on this weather control agenda to achieve their goal of global warming as per UN AGENDA 21 and the deindustrialization of America.

    The aluminum in the chemtrails is toxic to humans and goes every aspect of our life ie air, water and soil and is poisoning each of these and we the people who are on earth.

    For details on this see GEOENGINEERING WATCH.ORG

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  15. Hu Mi Yu says:
    @JimH

    (Argentine) locals never even thought of the wheel. S America and Australasia didn’t even have iron.

    Wheels are not much use without roads and fairly level terrain. S. America developed more than its share of food crops. I can’t imagine what European food was like before they had potatoes and tomatoes. Rice came from China along with many high-tech inventions such as iron, rockets, and gun powder.

    Added to that is, the tech and political systems all developed either in the dry subtropics (fertile crescent) or the Mediterranean.

    That is the semitic view of civilization with the Bible being the world’s oldest book etc etc. Modern archaeology contradicts this. Comparably old developed societies were located in India and China and probably other places as well.

    • Agree: RaceRealist88
    • Replies: @szopen
    , @Pat Boyle
  16. songbird says:
    @Afrosapiens

    I would question that early distribution in the proximal area of Germany. Could be a wrong interpretation, but I’ve heard the Roman era Germans described as being somewhat similar to age of contact Native Americans. Living mostly in heavily forested areas and sowing snatch crops.

    I think that would be close to a certainty before 1000 BC. Old growth oak trees in harsh winter climates can probably only be cut by iron, not bronze.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  17. @RaceRealist88

    Look up at the sky and see those planes spraying white lines across the sky and making giant X and tic tac toe grids across the sky , etc. and these planes are configured just like the planes that sprayed AGENT ORANGE over the jungles of Vietnam and all the people of Vietnam and our troops.

    I have personally witnessed this chemtrail spraying here in Montana for 30 years and again yesterday this spraying turned a blue sky into a haze of white streaks by noon from the dozen or more planes that were spraying and this spray is affecting not only our air but the water and the soil and the plants and trees.

    Read the book ANGELS DONT PLAY THIS HAARP by Nick Begich , it can be had on amazon.com.

    • Replies: @Chinookwind
  18. songbird says:

    I think a lot of people don’t realize how important farming was. What opened my eyes is the molecular clock on of the sickle cell mutation: about 7300 years ago. One theory is that people could not be infected by malaria for a long time, but that would still leave a large pre-farming window.

  19. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    That Hertler guy, is sound on forest ecology.

  20. @Santoculto

    It’s also worth noting that saying cold winter increased intelligence is the post hoc, ergo proper hoc fallacy.

    “Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is a Latin phrase for “after this, therefore, because of this.” The term refers to a logical fallacy that because two events occurred in succession, the former event caused the latter event.[1][2]

    In addressing a post hoc, ergo propter hoc argument, it is important to recognise that correlation does not equal causation.
    Magical thinking is a form of post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy, in which superstitions are formed based on seeing patterns in a series of coincidences. For example, “these are my lucky trousers. Sometimes good things happen to me when I wear them.”

    Here is the form of the argument:

    “Form of the argument[edit]
    P1: X happened before Y.
    P2: (unstated) Y was caused by something (that happened before Y).
    C1: Therefore, X caused Y.”

    It’s a pretty huge fallacy. Sure it’s a fancy way of saying ‘correlation doesn’t equal causation”, but, as you can see, the line of reasoning is logically fallacious.

  21. songbird says:

    I think cold selection is plausible in many ways, but it doesn’t work well as an overarching theory, particularly if you take the Ice Age as your major selective pressure. That would have given the genes a long opportunity to spread. I think at the very least, there are forces which have selected against higher intelligence in certain areas.

    It is more than likely that there were a lot of different selective pressures. Several positive and several negative. And soil type has got to be near the top of the list.

  22. @James Thompson

    Who’s the originator of “correlation may not be causation, but it’s the way to bet“?

    Is it a Sailerism?

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  23. @James Thompson

    Thanks for the links.

    That doesn’t change the fallacious reasoning though. Just because X happened before Y doesn’t not prove Z (this instance variable X being cold winter, Y being brain size increase and Z being an increase in IQ due to cold winter and brain size increase), that’s the fallacious reasoning.

    It’s also worth noting that social competition has a higher correlation with intelligence/brain size than temperature does. Couple that with disease/parasite burden (which also has a higher correlation than temperature and distance from the savanna, see Eppig et al’s papers) and you’ll see that temperature theories for the intelligent increase do not make sense.

    There is a correlation between Haley’s comet appearance and ice cream sales. Which causes which? There is also a correlation between ice cream sales and murder. Crime does increase when it gets hotter out but only to a point, and begins decreasing as it gets too hot.

    I don’t think that temperature explains IQ differences, I believe differences in brain size reflects differences in tool use/making and capacity for expertise.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/03/14/brain-size-increased-for-expertise-capacity-not-iq/

  24. @songbird

    Could be a wrong interpretation, but I’ve heard the Roman era Germans described as being somewhat similar to age of contact Native Americans.

    If you’re referring to the Natives of the United States, I think ancient Celtic and Germanic peoples were more advanced than Native Americans, they were closer to West Africans, they had metal-working, larger settlements, more complex political organizations and I’d subjectively rate their artifacts as more advanced.

    But, the dense tree cover of the northern half of Europe must have prevented further development until the large scale deforestation during the Middle Ages.

    • Replies: @songbird
  25. @James Thompson

    There certainly are examples of correlation without causation. Take smoking. There is a strong correlation but the cause of cancer is an oncogene that, over time, can be activated by, amongst other things, tobacco smoking. Smoking merely increases the chances that the causal element will be activated.

    The question really is not whether there is some correlation, however weak, but whether there is a sufficiently strong correlation that it is worthwhile investigating a causal link.

    Correlation also depends on the structure of the sample used to look for correlation. Here is an interesting example from the website http://www.christopherspenn.com/2014/11/causation-can-exist-without-correlation/

    “One of the assumptions that lots of folks (including myself) have at a certain point in statistics is that while correlation does not equal causation, causation cannot exist without correlation. However, it turns out that this isn’t true. Causation can exist without correlation!

    “How is this possible, when a relationship would seem to be mandatory in order for a causal relationship to be present? It’s deceptively simple, and boils down to how you select data. Let’s take a fictitious example; let’s say that I worked for an alcohol company, and I wanted to prove that alcohol does not cause motor vehicle fatalities. For clarity’s sake, neither are true – I don’t work for an alcohol company, and driving while intoxicated is blatantly unsafe. Don’t do it.

    “If I were to do a correlation of a random, representative sampling of people, some of whom drank alcohol and operated a vehicle unsafely, and some of whom did not, you would indeed see that there’s a strong relationship between alcohol consumption and vehicular fatalities. That would seem to indicate that correlation was mandatory in order for there to be causation.

    “But suppose I restricted my “study” to people who were, in my inexpert opinion, most likely to drive drunk. Suppose I focused it only on people who had 10 or more drinks per day? What you might find would be a negative correlation, that in fact, the more you drink, the less likely it is you’ll die from drunk driving, and therefore driving while drunk must be safe. What’s really happening among that population of super-heavy drinkers? They’re likely dying of causes other than drunk driving. At 10+ drinks a day, that’s not too hard to imagine.

    “The reality is that by selecting a population with no variation – that is, no one in the study did NOT drink – you can create distortions in your data that can “prove” your point, even though they’re statistically invalid. We know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that drinking alcohol does cause an increase in vehicular deaths, but the data can be manipulated to “prove” otherwise.”

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  26. @James Thompson

    A famous example is yam production and national IQ, which across countries correlate negatively. It would be wrong to say that yam production somehow inhibits IQ, as the association will in fact turn out to be mediated by something like temperature and latitude.

    Or disease burden! Duh.

    The ideology is just too strong.

    Contrary to temperature and latitude, there is empirical evidence for the relationship between parasitic and infectious disease and IQ, as well as a stronger correlation between the two.

    Yes obviously causation requires correlation, but causation is confirmed by empirically testing, not by statistical adjustments that make a correlation stronger without proving stronger causation.

  27. Here is a mathematical proof put forward by Michael Lamar, Assistant Professor of Statistics at the link: https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-examples-of-causation-without-correlation

    Let X and Y be independent Bernoulli random variables with parameter 0.5. In other words, each is equally likely to be zero or one independently of the other.

    Now let Z=1
    if X=Y and let Z=0 if X≠Y. It shouldn’t take long to figure out that Z is also equally likely to be zero and one. But even though Z’s value is explicitly determined based on the value of X and Y, it turns out that Z is independent of each. To see why, for x∈{0,1}, we find that: P(Z=1|X=x)=P(X=Y|X=x)=P(Y=x|X=x)=P(Y=x)=0.5=P(Z=1)

    So the conditional distribution of Z
    given X is the same as the unconditional distribution of Z. So Z and X are independent (and thus uncorrelated). Similarly, Z and Y are independent (and thus uncorrelated). But clearly X and Y cause Z in the strongest sense of causation since the value of Z is completely determined by whether or not X and Y match.

    • Replies: @utu
  28. As a gardener I find the info on rainforest soil dynamics interesting. Not totally surprised though.

    Ecologically speaking burning down the rainforest isn’t the end of it. Eventually the decay of those low nutrient grasses will allow a succession of plants to build back up the forest. May take thousands of years by natural processes though.

  29. @YetAnotherAnon

    Not sure, but I can recall a commentator on my previous blog using it.

  30. @simplyamazed

    There certainly are examples of correlation without causation. Take smoking. There is a strong correlation but the cause of cancer is an oncogene that, over time, can be activated by, amongst other things, tobacco smoking. Smoking merely increases the chances that the causal element will be activated.

    Merely?

    • Replies: @simplyamazed
  31. On smoking, there are some cultures that smoke alot and very low instances of cancer. I’ve seen some convincing argument that whether or not smoking increases risk of cancer may itself depend on genetics, meaning smoking may greatly increase risk for some and have no effect on the risk for others. It makes sense if you believe in human biodiversity that some genes would handle the effects of smoking better or worse than others.

    • Replies: @res
  32. res says:
    @James Thompson

    Thanks for the additional links.

    In your first link a number of people mentioned Pearl but possibly without enough detail to follow up. The reference is to Judea Pearl whose best known work in this area is https://www.amazon.com/Causality-Reasoning-Inference-Judea-Pearl/dp/052189560X
    Here is a 50 page overview of Causal inference in statistics he published in 2009 (also known as R-350): https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ssu/1255440554

    Timothy Bates’ comment 9 there also mentioned Eysenck and Fisher in this context. Can anyone recommend particular works of theirs covering causality?

    Regarding the challenge in your second link:

    “Sure, correlation does not equal causation, but find me just one single instance of a causal relationship where there is no correlation (just one would suffice).”

    As befits a challenge, I will be offering the traditional bottle of wine to the best instance. Woodley judges, I arbitrate if required, and provide the bottle of wine.

    For a simple contrived example just use any purely quadratic relationship across a range covering negative and positive numbers equally. For example, y = x^2 over integers [-2, 2]. Looking at a relationship which is strongly quadratic with Z-score might prove fruitful as an example.

    For a somewhat less contrived example consider the relationship of acceleration and velocity. Looking at a series of positive and negative accelerations over time (netting to roughly 0 final velocity and covering both + and – v). I saw a correlation of -0.07. I don’t have the patience to reduce that to essentially 0, but I am pretty sure it is possible.

    There is another slightly more real world example (which relies on an unobserved intermediate variable) at the bottom of https://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/causation-without-correlation-is-possible/

    I don’t think any of those are bottle of wine worthy though. Did anyone give you a serious contender?

    I suspect an example exists in the genome of a trait/SNP combination which has near zero linear effect (correlation of # alleles with trait) but has some quadratic effect (is causal). Speculation primarily based on the likelihood of strange cases given the number of possibilities. But one in a million or more chances don’t really disprove Woodley’s point.

    • Replies: @Bill
  33. @RaceRealist88

    I don’t said this, read again what i wrote.

  34. res says:
    @Lars Porsena

    On smoking, there are some cultures that smoke alot and very low instances of cancer.

    Is that true for lung cancer? The lung cancer – smoking connection is compelling for multiple reasons:
    - low base rate compared to rate for smokers
    - obvious physical connection of carcinogenic (in animals) smoke in lungs for extended periods

    Heart disease and smoking makes an interesting contrast. The heart disease base rate is high enough that even though a high absolute number of CVD deaths are attributed to smoking the relative hazard is fairly low and I think there is a decent chance there is a relevant genetic component.

    Here are some numbers. Notice how much higher the hazard ratios are for lung cancer:

    Full paper at http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/484996

    Worth mentioning that genetic predisposition to smoke will likely matter less in populations where many people smoke (1960s America) than in a population where relatively few smoke (2010s America) due to inconvenience, expense, stigma, etc.

  35. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    The problem with arguing that the answer lies in the soil, is that human evolution has likely been driven primarily by cultural factors, especially social constructs such as religion, which can yield powerful group selective advantage, as I just happen to have discussed elsewhere today.

  36. @RaceRealist88

    They also fall for the fallacy of single cause:

    The fallacy of the single cause, also known as complex cause, causal oversimplification, causal reductionism, and reduction fallacy,[1] is a fallacy of questionable cause that occurs when it is assumed that there is a single, simple cause of an outcome when in reality it may have been caused by a number of only jointly sufficient causes.

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

    Simply torturing data and cherry-picking variables to confirm their already made conclusions.

    In this article, the funny thing is that they use biomes as the variable and biome is closely related to race to the point that they’re basicallyinterchangeable. Then they calculate the correlation between biomes and racially biased and therefore biome biased IQ estimates.

    Mr Thompson, why don’t you address the many stronger correlates of IQ like education or disease?

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
    , @YetAnotherAnon
  37. Res,

    It seems to me the low base rate is a statistical problem in and of itself. Lung cancer is a very rare disease as I understand it that most people simply never get. Even the vast majority of smokers never get lung cancer from it (and some non-smokers also get it anyway). So if statistics show that people who smoke get higher instances of lung cancer, OK, but are those instances evenly distributed amongst the whole population or occurring in high risk subsets?

    I can’t claim to be an expert on health statistics but I have heard others make the case that it is true for lung cancer rates. Here is the first site with statistics I found googling and I don’t claim it shows anything. http://www.wcrf.org/int/cancer-facts-figures/data-specific-cancers/lung-cancer-statistics

    I have specifically heard Turkey and parts of the middle east used as the example of places where lung cancer rates are relatively overall low despite the culture being heavily chain smoking.

    • Replies: @res
    , @anon
  38. @James Thompson

    “Merely” in the sense that it is not a causal element, just a factor, however potent, that activates a causal element.

    Tumour suppressor genes when inactivated are causal factors for certain kinds of cancer when their function is absent. As a result, their correlation is extremely difficult to demonstrate using statistical methods; some describe the statistical correlation as statistically insignificant. They were discovered using functional analysis.

    • Replies: @res
    , @simplyamazed
  39. Bill says:
    @res

    Yes, Pearl is who you want on this stuff. The linked posts are not even a little bit persuasive to anyone who actually knows anything about causation. Multivariate methods are not a way to magically infer causation from correlation, for example.

    • Replies: @res
  40. res says:
    @Lars Porsena

    OK, but are those instances evenly distributed amongst the whole population or occurring in high risk subsets?

    High(er) risk subsets are likely relevant here IMHO. But unless those subsets are identifiable a priori (BTW, that’s a big part of why physicians care about family history) then we can only make decisions based on the broad trend.

    One thing you have to watch out for is people engaging in a variant of the single cause fallacy. That variant is that the existence of another possible cause (e.g. arsenic, genetics) somehow renders the cause under discussion (smoking) irrelevant or unimportant.

  41. @RaceRealist88

    Before you repeat this again try to understand what I wrote… And reply based on my statements and not by half of sentence you misunderstood.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  42. @Santoculto

    This quote from you is why I invoked the fallacy and linked the link on cold winter and intelligence from Psychology Today.

    humans were exposed to cold regions and became smarter

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Afrosapiens
  43. Okechukwu says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Mr Thompson, why don’t you address the many stronger correlates of IQ like education or disease?

    He can’t keep those pesky immigrants out if he does that. He needs to convince the world that they’re intellectually incapacitated genetically. And that they have immutable characteristics that are antithetical to western norms. It’s all a farce, actually.

    • Agree: Afrosapiens
    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    , @utu
  44. res says:
    @simplyamazed

    If you are going to make that kind of argument I think you should define your usage of “causal.”

    My working definition of “causal” tends to be something like Prob(event) < Prob(event|cause) AND there is a reasonable explanation both for why the "cause" should impact the "event" and why there is not a better underlying explanatory variable (see IQ/education as causal variables conversation, note that as there it is possible to have correlated variables both be causal, then the questions concern size and dependence of effects).
    (notational note, P or Prob(A | B) means the probability of A given B: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_probability )
    I also expect that < to be of a meaningful magnitude. Some ways to quantify "meaningful magnitude" are absolute difference, hazard ratios (e.g. if statistically significant and/or of a certain size), or percent variance explained.

    "Causal" does not imply either necessary or sufficient.

    Expanding on this, I think it is useful to look at identifiability, frequency and penetrance of "causes." Those can affect where it is useful to intervene. Something identifiable and frequent (e.g. smoking) may be the best place to intervene even if penetrance is low. For example, if that penetrance is dictated by unidentifiable genetics present in less than a percent of the population.

    Epidemiology provides another useful concept for quantifying ideas like this: Number needed to treat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_needed_to_treat
    It is important to note that like most statistical quantities NNT refers to a specific population. This is one reason improved screening (as discussed in an earlier thread here) can be so important.

    P.S. Seeing things like “some describe the statistical correlation as statistically insignificant. They were discovered using functional analysis.” might also be interpreted as something that is theoretically relevant but is not that important in practice (e.g. because very uncommon).

  45. szopen says:
    @Hu Mi Yu

    DO you sugges.t that _iron came to Europe from China_?

    First wheeled vehicles seem to be from northern Europe, though

  46. @RaceRealist88

    No, re read my comment. What you don’t understand ask me.

  47. res says:
    @Bill

    Yes, Pearl is who you want on this stuff. The linked posts are not even a little bit persuasive to anyone who actually knows anything about causation.

    I’d be interested in hearing more of your thoughts on this. I find the soil fertility argument compelling as a partial cause. It is hard to maintain a large (critical mass, not immense) functional society without adequate and robust enough soil fertility. One thing that seems to be a common theme in long-term successful societies is conventions that maintain the surrounding environment adequately (soil, fish, game animals, forests, etc.).

    That said, I find the arguments for proximity to seafood more compelling.

    I get the sense that here, as with so many things, the key is to be challenged (e.g. cold, agriculture) but not so much as to destroy the society at an extreme.

    Multivariate methods are not a way to magically infer causation from correlation, for example.

    Agreed they are not magic, and in particular can be troublesome when possible explanatory variables are highly correlated. What do you suggest instead? Multivariate methods are especially dangerous when there is a conscious effort to exclude likely causal variables in favor of effective proxies (which may also be causal in their own right, SES being a classic example).

    I haven’t engaged with Pearl’s work as much as I should. I became interested in probabilistic graphical models as a useful way to infer causation, but I have been disappointed at how little that is done.

    • Replies: @Bill
  48. szopen says:

    Isn’t it funny when one guy links to a paper written by someone else, and then clueless commenter attacks the guy and his motives, as if he was the one who wrote the thing?

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  49. Some co-relative relation can/may become causal. For example. Correlation between blue eyes and higher cognitive skills. Have blue eyes, seems, don’t cause increasing of cognitive skills but if you select strongly both variables in given population and don’t select non-blue eyed people with higher cognitive skills this correlation can become causal (??). Maybe we have direct and indirect causation.

  50. @Okechukwu

    The head author of a few of the parasitic load/disease burden papers has a Scientific American article on the matter. The sources for parasitic load and disease burden having higher correlations than temperature and Kanazawas savanna hypothesis are in the citations that Eppig provides.

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-is-average-iq-higher-in-some-places/

    Of course, a physiological explanation makes the most sense here. Having parasites and disease is metabolically demanding. Coupled with malnutrition and that’d be a huge cause for lower intelligence (whatever that is).

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  51. @Afrosapiens

    “why don’t you address the many stronger correlates of IQ like education or disease?”

    You could have given some links.

    There are loads of things which correlate with IQ as currently measured, but I would have thought they’re likely to be a result of high IQ rather than a cause. Car ownership, laptop ownership, golf courses per 100,000 people.

    Education’s a tricky one. I doubt average British IQ has changed much in the last 200 years, but far more people are educated there now than 200 years ago – and far more to degree level than fifty years ago.

    Disease – are you saying that treatable diseases are lowering average IQ in some places? Doesn’t seem improbable, are there any studies? Certainly in the UK iodine deficiency used to produce ‘slow’ people.

  52. Okechukwu says:
    @Santoculto

    humans were exposed to cold regions and became smarter

    That’s a cute theory but it’s at variance with the actual evidence. You know, evidence.

    During this expansion to polar regions, humans becoming smarter/aka self-controlled while when this expansion was limited for harsh climate they stoped to increase their intelligence.

    Humans only migrated when conditions became salubrious. The northern hemisphere then like now can get unbearably hot in summer. Then like now it was temperate, lush and green with nearly every square inch cultivable, grazable or forested. Winter snowfall actually stores moisture crops need for the growing season.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  53. @RaceRealist88

    Mr Thompson,

    If human intelligence evolved in adaptation to colder, or now you say temperate temperate climates. Then why are we closer to the chimpanzee of the rainforests of equatorial Africa (lowest ranked biome in your chart) instead of the Japanese macaque from your highest ranked temperate biome?

    And moreover, what empirical evidence can you provide that IQ (not intelligence) gave a survival advantage to pre-modern population and that it was strong enough for natural selection to operate?

    Also, does your biome theory explain the Flynn effect?

  54. utu says:
    @Okechukwu

    He needs to convince the world that they’re intellectually incapacitated genetically.

    Actually, he does not need to do much convincing. Most of the world including people in Africa for wrong or right reasons already believe that there is a significant cognitive deficit among Sub Saharan Africans. The prejudice is huge. People like Dr. Thompson or Davide Piffer or our res here would just like to get a scientific confirmation for this prejudice. The problem is that what they engage in is not that much of a science but unfortunately there is enough people who believe that it is valid scientific exploration and inquiry. If however iq phenotype will be correlated to within the twin studies heritability with the genotype and a significant racial differences will established then you and Afrosapiens are fucked. This will be the final nail in the coffin constructed by experiences and prejudices accumulated over centuries. Then you and Afrosapiens will be the first who will want to have their IQ tattooed on their foreheads to signal that you are above the expected value of your racial groups.

    But as far as immigration is concerned IQ is secondary. Obviously one does not want morons but at the same time one may not want geniuses either because they can really undermined the social fabric of culture and tradition. Still if the morons and geniuses have the same external phenotype as the majority they will not be disruptive and will be able to achieve perfect assimilation at first by practicing mimicry unless they have anti-social religious memes such as those in Islam or Judaism. However if people have strong external phenotypes like differs skin color or other external racial traits they should never be invited as immigrants.. They can get temporary work permits at best but in very low quantities. The external phenotypes make assimilation impossible and they make the so-called racial problem inevitable. Partly because mimicry is impossible. So sorry Okechukwu and Afrosapiens Europe is not really a place for you. Your presence there would be detrimental to harmonious existence of European customs and culture. I am sure you two could contribute a lot in Haiti and anywhere in Africa which is many times larger than Europe. Go South young men.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
    , @Okechukwu
  55. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    The demographics of Singapore make it a prime candidate for exclusion, not because it is a positive outlier that is nearly twice as extreme as the next positive outlier, but because in the 1800s there was a large influx of Chinese who now make up approximately seventy percent of the total population. So while Singapore lies on the equator, it is not populated by persons that evolved in that territory.

    But the Chinese who moved to Singapore evolved mainly in the subtropical climate of southern China. And yet today, Singaporeans have higher IQs than the northern Chinese, not to mention the Koreans and Japanese, who supposedly evolved in climates more favorable to the development of IQ.

  56. @YetAnotherAnon

    You could have given some links.

    Search Eppig et. al.

    There are loads of things which correlate with IQ as currently measured, but I would have thought they’re likely to be a result of high IQ rather than a cause. Car ownership, laptop ownership, golf courses per 100,000 people.

    Well, there is a problem with the hereditarian interpretation of correlations. For instance, when someone implies that SES partly causes differences in IQ, hereditarians say the effect is negligible. But when one say IQ causes differences in SES, the contribution suddenly becomes strong. Weird, nah?

    Correlations are just fine, but they’re not evidence, they just indicate a direction for empirical testing, one thing HBDers never do.

    Education’s a tricky one. I doubt average British IQ has changed much in the last 200 years, but far more people are educated there now than 200 years ago – and far more to degree level than fifty years ago.

    Ever heard about the Flynn effect?

    Disease – are you saying that treatable diseases are lowering average IQ in some places? Doesn’t seem improbable, are there any studies? Certainly in the UK iodine deficiency used to produce ‘slow’ people.

    Yes there are studies, my pal RaceRealists has some links, it’s too time-consuming for me.

    I said education and disease, but many other things affect IQ test scores, things like motivation, or yoga (yes, yoga). It’s kinda foolish to makeup evolutionary scenarios when you’re aware of that.

  57. Okechukwu says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Thanks. That’s a very useful article.

  58. @szopen

    Isn’t it funny when one guy links to a paper written by someone else,

    He did more than linking to a paper, he endorsed its conclusions.

    and then clueless commenter attacks the guy and his motives

    Who’s clueless? Is it me, or the guy that says Singapore confirmation of the theory as if Singapore was a normal country, and that other places like Hawaii (or North Korea and China) are strong refutations of the same theory.

    On attacking the guy, I did not attack him, but when questions are asked and not answered, I can reasonably assume that the author is not willing to engage in logical argumentation. Ironically, the only objection he addressed was the one recalling that correlation does not equal causation, which he still finds disputable even though it is one of the most basic facts of logic. Also, you can compare this attitude with Chanda Chisala’s well written posts and responses in the comments section. Nothing like the systematic dodging of pertinent remarks that we see here.

    This questionable attitude can’t be explained by genuine interest in science, the reason might be time constraints, or boredom, but you can also make an inference from the site on which the article is posted. It could be a coincidence, but this site doesn’t seem to be one that holds human equality and acceptance of diversity in high esteem.

    Once you’ve connected the dots (takes only a thousandth of a second), you can clearly see the motivations of the author. Amazing, isn’t it?

    • Replies: @Bill
  59. @Okechukwu

    Do you have sources about your statements?? How Eurasian environments were becoming salubrious without human activity??

    I don’t said “humans become smarter when they arrived to non-African environments” but that when they arrived in this places they already become smarter, read, specifically speaking, (more) self controlled and because the extreme nature of this subpolar regions the increase of this traits ceased.

    Firstly they were becoming more “future-oriented”: provide food during summer and preparing to winter, just like adapting to this tempered environment. Secondly, some of them will becoming more creative or the proportion of creative thinkers/strategists increase resulting in agriculture and civilization.

    I don’t believe no there future oriented people among Africans but that this people has been a minority among them/you while this type of people has been more selected firstly by natural environment and secondly by artificial environment.

    And again I’m saying humans were becoming “smarter”/future oriented during their migrations and not only in the coldest places. We are talking about creativity. In very harsh places creativity or creative people tend to be persona non grata and pragmatic thinking style become the golden rule.

  60. “When they arrived in COLDER non-African environments”. Correcting..

  61. @YetAnotherAnon

    You could have given some links.

    Disease – are you saying that treatable diseases are lowering average IQ in some places? Doesn’t seem improbable, are there any studies? Certainly in the UK iodine deficiency used to produce ‘slow’ people.

    Yes. It’s a physiological explanation. Disease/parasites cause the body to fight the infections first; energy gets diverted to fight the disease and other parts of the body, obviously, begin lacking in nutrients (think how the brain sucks 25 percent of our daily kcal intake).

    Here are cites for disaese/parasitic load:

    Support is provided for the finding that a national index of parasite burden and national IQ are strongly linked and temperature also features strongly in the models. However, we tentatively recommend a physiological – via impacts on host–parasite interactions – rather than evolutionary explanation for the effect of temperature. We present this study primarily to highlight the danger of ignoring autocorrelation in spatially extended data, and outline an appropriate approach should a spatially explicit analysis be considered necessary.

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTAxNi9qLmludGVsbC4yMDExLjA1LjAwMQ==/10.1016%40j.intell.2011.05.001.pdf

    Regions of Mexico that were the target of malaria interventions had higher IQs than those that were not targeted:

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTAxNi9qLmpoZWFsZWNvLjIwMTIuMDYuMDAz/10.1016%40j.jhealeco.2012.06.003.pdf

    And this holds in America too:

    As predicted, we found that the correlation between average state IQ and infectious disease stress was − 0.67 (p < 0.0001) across the 50 states. Furthermore, when controlling the effects of wealth and educational variation among states, infectious disease stress was the best predictor of average state IQ.

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTAxNi9qLmludGVsbC4yMDExLjAyLjAwOA==/10.1016%40j.intell.2011.02.008.pdf

    And finally:

    Using three measures of average national intelligence quotient (IQ), we found that the zero-order correlation between average IQ and parasite stress ranges from r = −0.76 to r = −0.82 (p < 0.0001). These correlations are robust worldwide, as well as within five of six world regions. Infectious disease remains the most powerful predictor of average national IQ when temperature, distance from Africa, gross domestic product per capita and several measures of education are controlled for. These findings suggest that the Flynn effect may be caused in part by the decrease in the intensity of infectious diseases as nations develop.

    http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/277/1701/3801

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-is-average-iq-higher-in-some-places/

  62. @utu

    Most of the world including people in Africa for wrong or right reasons already believe that there is a significant cognitive deficit among Sub Saharan Africans.

    Most of the world, especially in Africa would laugh at the idea of measuring intelligence. Most of the world, especially in Africa have other conceptions of human worth.

    Then you and Afrosapiens will be the first who will want to have their IQ tattooed on their foreheads to signal that you are above the expected value of your racial groups.

    LOL! I’d kill myself before doing something that stupid. I know it’s a metaphor that you’re using, but anyway, I’ve never felt that I had something to prove because I’m black, my accomplishments speak for themselves and they were effortless.

    So sorry Okechukwu and Afrosapiens Europe is not really a place for you. Your presence there would be detrimental to harmonious existence of European customs and culture. I am sure you two could contribute a lot in Haiti and anywhere in Africa which is many times larger than Europe. Go South young men.

    LMAO! I don’t give a damn about “harmonious existence blah blah blah”. All I care about is my girlfriend, my family and friends who need me here as much as I need them.

    Europeans really don’t need us to destroy each other. Without us, they’d be declining like Japan.

    • Agree: Okechukwu
  63. Jim says:
    @RaceRealist88

    The first writing in Mesoamerica is Olmec writing not Mayan. Olmec culture seems somewhat similar to Mayan but because the Olmec writing has never been deciphered who are not sure what their exact relation to the Maya was. Most other Mesoamerican cultures other than the Maya and Olmec also had writing.

    There is some evidence that Egyptian writing was derived from Mesopotamian writing and also that writing in China may have come from the west.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  64. Okechukwu says:
    @utu

    Actually, he does not need to do much convincing. Most of the world including people in Africa for wrong or right reasons already believe that there is a significant cognitive deficit among Sub Saharan Africans.

    Actually, no. Sub-Saharan Africans ultimately rejected colonialism because upon interaction with Europeans they didn’t find them to be cognitively superior. Often they found the opposite to be the case.

    As far as the rest of the world, I haven’t found that they ascribe the myriad problems in Africa to intellectual deficiencies. That’s hardly in the top 100 list of potential causes. The largest corporations in the world are making a beeline to Africa to leverage the intellectual capital there.

    People like Dr. Thompson or Davide Piffer or our res here would just like to get a scientific confirmation for this prejudice.

    Bingo! Jackpot! You are absolutely correct. But they will fail as their predecessors have failed for hundreds if not thousands of years.

    If however iq phenotype will be correlated to within the twin studies heritability with the genotype and a significant racial differences will established then you and Afrosapiens are fucked.

    Yeah, fucked among a tiny fringe of keyboard racists sitting in their trailer parks. Hardly fucked in the real world which enshrines individuality. Furthermore, no one disputes that intelligence has a heritable component. Establishing that fact in twin studies wouldn’t uphold supremacist ideologies.

    Then you and Afrosapiens will be the first who will want to have their IQ tattooed on their foreheads to signal that you are above the expected value of your racial groups.

    Haha. You should write for Hollywood. That’s a fictitious dystopian future that is just begging for a talented scriptwriter to treat. Big hint: It’ll never happen in the real world.

    Okechukwu and Afrosapiens Europe is not really a place for you

    I don’t live in Europe, as you know. I would never live in Europe because I can’t stand soccer. Afro seems to be doing just fine there, however, as are millions of other blacks. My own relatives live in England and get on just fine there. Some of them speak such a thickly accented British English that I can barely understand what they’re saying. Often when I drift off into peculiarly Southern California speech patterns, they say the same about me. Surely those are examples of mimicry, no?

  65. @Jim

    The first writing in Mesoamerica is Olmec writing not Mayan.

    I’m pretty certain the oldest date we have on Maya writing is between 200-300 BC.

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTEyNi9zY2llbmNlLjExMjE3NDU=/10.1126%40science.1121745.pdf

    For the Olmec, I believe the date is 500 BC. Do you have a paper to verify that claim?

    I know that the Maya and Olmecs traded people as well as culture too.

    Olmec culture seems somewhat similar to Mayan but because the Olmec writing has never been deciphered who are not sure what their exact relation to the Maya was.

    They intermingled, cultural exchange is noted:

    The site shows incipient plaza and pyramid construction beginning before those seen in the lowlands or Olmec areas, suggesting a broader cultural exchange through to the Pacific Coast as Mayan cultures evolved.

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTEyNi9zY2llbmNlLjEyMzQ0OTM=/10.1126%40science.1234493.pdf

    Most other Mesoamerican cultures other than the Maya and Olmec also had writing.

    Right, but I specified writing that was created independently.

    There is some evidence that Egyptian writing was derived from Mesopotamian writing

    Makes sense. Citation?

    writing in China may have come from the west

    Citation?

    http://chemsites.chem.rutgers.edu/~kyc/Five%20Original%20Writing%20Systems.html

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  66. Bill says:
    @res

    I don’t have an opinion on the question of how and why different levels of intelligence evolved in different places. Not something I know about.

    Agreed they are not magic, and in particular can be troublesome when possible explanatory variables are highly correlated. What do you suggest instead?

    Depends on the context. Experimental methods. Natural experiment methods. Instrumental variable (in the sense economists mean this phrase) methods.

    Failing all of those, you just have to make assumptions in order to identify the patterns of causation. Pearl’s stuff—I mean the applied stuff—is about guiding you through figuring out what exactly you have to assume in order to nail down the causation in any particular model.

  67. @RaceRealist88

    Some historians and anthropologists make a difference between independently inventing the idea of writing, and inventing a script. For this reason, they claim that Sumer and the Mayas are the only civilizations that independently invented the idea of writing, whereas China, Egypt, and the Harappans could have gotten the idea of writing by being exposed to it by outsiders and then developed an independent script.

  68. Bill says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Also, you can compare this attitude with Chanda Chisala’s well written posts and responses in the comments section. Nothing like the systematic dodging of pertinent remarks that we see here.

    That’s delusional.

    • Agree: res
    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
    , @Okechukwu
  69. @Bill

    That’s delusional.

    Care to elaborate?

  70. songbird says:
    @Afrosapiens

    That’s right: US Native Americans. No arguments that the Germans were not significantly more advanced. I mean more purely in the sense of population density. I would suppose ancient Germany was a very volatile area too. Probably lots of warfare, which would maybe keep numbers lower than on a peninsula or island.

  71. Okechukwu says:
    @Bill

    That’s delusional.

    Afrosapiens is correct. Chanda engages his detractors and, more often than not, wipes the floor with them. It helps when your assertions are rooted in reality and basic commonsense.

  72. I mean more purely in the sense of population density. I would suppose ancient Germany was a very volatile area too. Probably lots of warfare, which would maybe keep numbers lower than on a peninsula or island.

    I have no idea about warfare, however I agree with your remark on topography. Peninsulas, isthmuses islands, valleys and plateaus increase population densities and are conductive to civilization. Italy or Greece are what we most commonly think as peninsulas, but on a larger scale, Europe is a peninsula of Eurasia whereas North America is a typical continental mass. In addition to that, maps render higher latitude regions as larger than they actually are. The area between the Baltic and the North seas to the north and the Alps and the Carpathians to the south is actually much smaller than it looks on the maps. Germany is just as large as Montana.

  73. Factorize says:

    The mean average temperatures figure at the start of this thread made me think of Why Nations Fail.
    In this book the authors argue that colonies that were established in the tropics such as Haiti and others were based on an “extractive” model of development which used slave labor to harvest sugar cane and other intensive agricultural products.

    In contrast, in Canada and the Northern US only less intensive agriculture (e.g., wheat) could be grown. This difference, the authors propose, resulted in substantially different social outcomes centuries later. The economic and political power resulting from the farm economy in Canada and the Northern US allowed for more broadly egalitarian societies. Attempts were made in several colonies (including America and Australia) to impose elite rule enforced on penalty of violence, though local circumstances made these tactics untenable.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  74. @Factorize

    Europe also was a very unequal place with many people living in poverty. Indeed (industrialized) developed countries that enjoy very good standard living is a very recent thing. I’m not saying the economic model of colonies wasn’t a factor to explain partly this differences but I know it wasn’t only one.

  75. @DESERT FOX

    These chemtrails are definitely real and ” they” are doing it. I’ve never considered the angle of dumbing people down though , that’s a new one. I wouldn’t put it past them . I always figured chemtrails were for reducing solar gain.
    There is definitely evil involved. It’s the 21st century and we’re still talking about evil.

    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
  76. utu says:
    @simplyamazed

    It is an interesting mathematical construction but I do not think that it is of much practical consequence.

    In order to talk about correlation between X and Y both variables must have some representation in real numbers. In order to talk about causal relationship X–>Y it means that there must exist some function that maps X to Y, i.e., the value of X determines the value of Y. It is very easy to construct functions that produce zero correlation. In fact all periodic functions will do it, say Y=sin(X) if X varies over large number of periods. Periodic functions are not 1-to-1. Not all 1-to-1 functions produce non-zero correlation. However if we impose constraint that the function must be also monotonic, say increasing that if X1<X2 then f(X1)<f(X2) then certainly correlation will be non-zero. Monotonicity is a very reasonable and broad assumption.

    • Replies: @simplyamazed
  77. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Okechukwu

    Actually, no. Sub-Saharan Africans ultimately rejected colonialism because upon interaction with Europeans they didn’t find them to be cognitively superior.

    Don’t be absurd. Sub-Saharan Africans never accepted colonialism, they merely had to take it, because, as Hillaire Belloc wrote:

    Whatever happens,
    we have got.
    The Maxim gun,
    and they have not.

    Once, the Soviets supplied you lot with guns of your own, you kicked the colonial powers in the arse as any self-respecting people would. Well done. But don’t make nonsense of history by attributing what happened to racial differences in IQ.

  78. @Chinookwind

    A certain percent of the chemtrail spray is nano particles of aluminum and we are taking it in via the water and air and soil and aluminum is one of the causes of alzheimers , and that is destroying a persons brain, so if we connect the dots ie.

  79. This thread seems an appropriate place to ask for professional or otherwise considered and informed responses to this

    https://www.amren.com/ar/2009/02/

    “Morality and Abstract Thinking”.

    I don’t know anything about Gedallah Braun other than what he tells us about his experience of teaching philosophy over many years in Africa, including Nigeria, Kenya and South Africa where he apparently now lives.

    Some may find some of what he says offensively, stupidly wrong (Afrosapiens and Okechukwu maybe? As well of course as any interns at SPLC) but he does present actual observational evidence which he doesn’t very obviously put excessive weight on. So….

    To Dr JT in particular I would like to proceed on the assumption that much of what he reports is true and to seek to explain it and to consider its implications.

    Questions that particularly struck me were those which depended on people having a purely oral culture and correspondingly many fewer and probably less analysed words than those in longstanding literate cultures.

    Among the test questions would be ones relating to the age of a literate cultures as contributing to precision and sophistication, whether having an actively literate class which is at least X per cent of the population makes enough difference to distinguish societies where most people are illiterate from those where the language itself is not a written one.

    (I am interpolating here a question for linguists – something like a Sapir-Whorff question perhaps – which would distinguish languages according to how easy it is to coin an abstract expression by some simple suffix or other device).

    Then I would question Braun’s broad sweep in which the lack of abstract thinking he associates with not keeping promises e.g. is equated to a lack of abstract thinking about time, number and space. Why? Because Australian Aborigines are famous for their creation myths and dreamtime stories. (If someone wishes to say that those actually support the Braun thesis because that kind of thinking about the past is sui generis and without any connection to practical cause and effect thinking or to thinking about the future, then I am listening).

    Does abstract thinking correlate with IQ scores? I would expect so though partly because one of the explanations of the Flynn Effect advanced by Flynn himself. His example that stuck in my mind is what farmer and son might well have said in 1890 compared with 1990 in answer to the question “what do foxes and rabbits have in common?”. 1890 they say “hunting”. In 1990 they would have said “both are mammals”.

    Accepting that Braun’s observations are not totally vitiated by dishonesty or plain error it would be interesting to predict with justifying analysis how and why and how much change there will be in whatever of his valid observations make one concerned about Africans’ enjoying the best aspects of modernity in future.

    • Replies: @res
    , @Okechukwu
  80. @simplyamazed

    A clarification is in order. When I mentioned functional analysis I was using this description in a more general sense and had forgotten that it has a technical definition in mathematics.

    I should have made it clear that what I meant was analysis of actual intercellular function. Cellular proliferation is controlled in normal cells by what has been colloquially referred to as “accellerators” and “brakes”. Accellerators stimulate cellular proliferation whereas brakes stop or slow cellular proliferation. Tumour suppressor genes are associated with the “brakes”. Such functions operate in signalling pathways. Since the genes associated with “brakes” often are widely distributed in the body in many organs and structures, associating their disregulation (lack of function) with a particular cancer generates such a weak correlation that it can safely be judged as lack of correlation. However, studying their role in signalling pathways established a causal relationship between disregulation and tumour growth.

  81. @utu

    For a practical example of how this idea has meaning in the real world, we can look to control functions. Without causal relationships control is clearly impossible, but successful control means – roughly speaking – that some quantity is being maintained constant, which implies it won’t be correlated with anything, including whatever things are causing it to be constant.

    So in this situation, concluding no causal relationship from lack of correlation would be a mistake.

    I refer you to the following link for an interesting discussion of a real world example:

    http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/2012/07/why-are-almost-all-economists-unaware-of-milton-friedmans-thermostat.html

    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
    • Replies: @utu
  82. @Afrosapiens

    “declining like Japan”

    Very witty. I wish the UK could decline like Japan.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/08/opinion/sunday/the-true-story-of-japans-economic-success.html

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/02/the-myth-of-japans-lost-decades/71741/

    “At the heart of my analysis is a story of extraordinary progress by Japanese manufacturing. The reason you don’t hear much about Japanese manufacturers these days is that the best of them have moved from making consumer goods to concentrate on so-called producers’ goods — items that though invisible to the consumer happen to be critical to the world economy. Such goods include the highly miniaturized components, advanced materials, and super-precise machines that less sophisticated nations such as China need to make final consumer goods. The label on everything from cell phones to laptop computers may say “Made in China” but actually, via producers’ goods, highly capital-intensive and knowhow-intensive manufacturers in Japan have quietly done much of the most technologically demanding work.

    In the early years after World War II the United States utterly dominated the higher reaches of the producers’ goods business. Under pressure from foreign competition, however, American players one by one have closed down or outsourced in the last quarter of a century. The competition has come principally from Japan, which now enjoys broadly as dominant and geopolitically important a position as the United States did in the 1960s. Even if you don’t hear much about this from the Tokyo talking heads, it is hard to miss it in global trade figures. (Fact: America’s current account deficit multiplied five-fold in the 20 years to 2010 and the reason in large measure is because American corporations have exited the producers’ goods business.)”

    • Replies: @Anon
  83. Megalomaniacal levels of many, majority of Africans is impressive. “Africans don’t find European cognitively superior”. Even I’m against the way industrialization has been made, what??? And also keep in mind the very morally wrong (but logically correct/via food chain) law of stronger. European”s” dominate entire world until beginning of XX century. Western European civilization became synonyms of progress, standard of the best in technology humans has been capable to forge. Right now original westerners are losing this battle but not via direct confront among forces. Ok, so called Aryans has been proved a myth about its super human superiority, but…

  84. Factorize says:

    Santoculto, thank you for your reply.

    I had had no idea that the original plan for the new colonies in America, Canada, Australia and others was to establish new feudal states. All the American states attempted to enslave their white citizens, though with the endless frontier this was simply not possible.
    Democracies emerged in the New World only after it became very clear that elite rule would not be feasible.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  85. @Afrosapiens

    Very sad to see China’s constant decline, too. Need more Africans esp. unselected for skills and uninterested in sacrificing what Chinese call “blood and capital” for the future.

    • Replies: @Anon
  86. @Factorize

    Settlement and exploitation colonies is one of the first stuff we learn in history lessons and it’s have some or many grain of truth, no doubt about it, but…

    I really don’t know what was the original reasons to the european geographical adventures, it seems wasn’t well organized or deliberated because europeans don’t knew what they were going to find.

    To say: ”they wanted to create a feudal states in other places” seems incorrect.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  87. @Santoculto

    We learn that they [iberians] start this ”adventures” firstly to find a new route to the indian spices because mediterranean sea and sorrounds was dominated by ”arabs” merchants/middlemen. That’s explain or it was we have learned why they started to call ”american natives” as indians, because they believed they had arrived in India. About portuguese circumnavigation in african coasts, i don’t know why, maybe other way to find new routes to indian spices.

  88. res says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    That was interesting. Thanks. Braun wrote a book about this. Reviews available at: https://www.amazon.com/s/field-keywords=Gedaliah+Braun

    https://store.amren.com/product/racism-guilt/

    Does abstract thinking correlate with IQ scores?

    I think the simple answer is yes. The follow-on question is: how is that reflected in the subtests? Perhaps one of the more IQ test knowledgeable people here can comment on that?

    Some comments on the racial IQ gap from a book:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=LfTlBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA292

    The reference they give is https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19795259_Sex_race_residence_region_and_education_differences_on_the_11_WAIS-R_subtests

    That paper discusses sex and race differences (and more) for the 11 WAIS-R subtests and presents the results in a variety of ways. For sex differences I think Table 4 is easiest to interpret. It expresses the differences by sex for each age group and subtest as Cohen’s d. Females performed consistently better on the Digit Symbol subtest. Males performed better on Information, Arithmetic, Block Design (see below) and a few others.

    Black-White differences are shown in a similar form in Table 6.

    More about the WAIS-R and its subtests: http://www.cps.nova.edu/~cpphelp/WAIS-R.html

    This scoresheet specifically calls out subtests 6. Similarities and 9. Block Design as measuring verbal and nonverbal abstract reasoning respectively: http://www.htctu.net/publications/dsps/content/ldforms/WAIS-Rfo.pdf

    Block Design is the subtest showing the largest black-white gap (suggestive in the context of your comment IMHO), while Similarities is in the middle.

    Conclusion 3 observes that the popular Vocabulary-Block Design dyad short form test should be avoided because it unfairly penalizes blacks (their two relatively worst subtests).

    P.S. There is also detailed information about subtest scores by educational level. Table 12 presents this as correlations.

    P.P.S. Although that paper is old (1988) it was very interesting with detailed data presented.

  89. utu says:
    @simplyamazed

    In the real world no control function can maintain anything exactly constant.

    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
  90. Okechukwu says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Note the source: American Renaissance.

    The supremacist tendencies harbored by people like Braun and their dismissive attitudes toward non-whites have been devastating to the Europeans themselves. At Isandlwana, it resulted in 1300 British troops dying on the battlefield and crying for momma. Ultimately, it resulted in whites getting thrown out of Africa. It resulted in the tragedy of Vietnam, and more recently, Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems you folks will never learn that you’re not superior to anyone.

    Language, by the way, is an abstract system. That’s all human languages. I was exposed to two languages in equal measure growing up: English and Igbo. I found Igbo to be far more difficult to negotiate, far more complicated and complex. There are a million ways to convey in Igbo all the thoughts, ideas and concepts that Braun claims is missing in African languages.

    I also have a somewhat superficial fluency in Efik, my mother’s language. If I immersed myself in it over a period of a few months, I could speak it like a native. So with an admittedly small sample size of these two African languages, I haven’t found that they lack any of the accouterments of complex or abstract expression. Speaking of my mother, she is fluent in English, Igbo, Efik and Hausa. It seems to me that of these four languages, if English is the one that has imbued its native speakers with enhanced cognition, my mother’s own fluency in it would suffer — and it hasn’t. Her competency is well above average, or superior to the average native English speaker. And yet for her it’s a fourth language.

    What separates people is culture. As someone who has straddled two cultures I have intimate knowledge of this phenomenon. People’s brains literally aren’t wired differently but their experiences, histories and influences will shape how they interact with the world. There are aspects of European culture which seemed primitive, unrefined and unsophisticated to Africans. The notion of moving into an area and shooting everything that moves, for example. Europeans extincted animals with which Africans had lived in harmony for thousands of years. They are only now beginning to recognize that they were indeed backwards and that their alleged vaunted capacity for abstract thought could not conceive or foresee what Africans had known for millennia. That to destroy your environment is to destroy yourself. That nature has a fragile balance, and that to remove lions, for example, could collapse the entire system.

    From the article:

    I believe that morality requires abstract thinking—as does planning for the future—and that a relative deficiency in abstract thinking may explain many things that are typically African.

    You do realize that this indictment could easily be applied to white Europeans, right? Perhaps vastly more so than to Africans.

  91. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Okechukwu

    This is the most elaborate excuse for being constantly thrashed like little bitches i have read in some time. Also Afghanistan and Vietnam people aren’t ssa, you know.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  92. hyperbola says:
    @JimH

    Ancient Mound Excavation in Peru Leads to Groundbreaking Discovery of Advanced Civilization Dating Back 15,000 Years

    http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/ancient-mound-excavation-peru-leads-groundbreaking-discovery-advanced-021407?nopaging=1

    Hundreds of thousands of artifacts dating back as early as 15,000 years have been found at the ancient mound site of Huaca Prieta in Peru. The relics include elaborate hand-woven baskets and tools for deep-sea fishing, which would have necessitated the use of boats that could withstand rough waters, as well as evidence of large-scaled agricultural production and trade. The findings indicate that an early civilization existed in the region which was much more advanced than originally thought.
    “The mounds of artifacts retrieved from Huaca Prieta include food remains, stone tools and other cultural features such as ornate baskets and textiles, which really raise questions about the pace of the development of early humans in that region and their level of knowledge and the technology they used to exploit resources from both the land and the sea,” James M. Adovasio, Ph.D., D.Sc., co-author of the study and archaeologist at Florida Atlantic University told Phys.org. “These strings of events that we have uncovered demonstrate that these people had a remarkable capacity to utilize different types of food resources, which led to a larger society size and everything that goes along with it such as the emergence of bureaucracy and highly organized religion.”…..

  93. Okechukwu says:
    @Anonymous

    This is the most elaborate excuse for being constantly thrashed like little bitches i have read in some time. Also Afghanistan and Vietnam people aren’t ssa, you know.

    Is this supposed to mean anything? Maybe someone can explain what this character is trying to say.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  94. utu says:
    @Okechukwu

    Language of successful cultures and civilizations are actually often less complex in syntax. Chinese and English are good examples of languages with a very simple syntax. Complexity of language can be a hindrance.

    The notion of moving into an area and shooting everything that moves, for example.

    Obviously you simplify. Indigenous people were responsible for extinction of many species. It is matter of means. Africans just did not have means to kill everything that moves. Who killed mammoth in North America or large birds in New Zealand? Tell me about the thriving fauna in Haiti? During the Great Depression it was very hard to find deer in woods in America. Hunting was a necessity for survival for poor rural Americans. Now there is too many deer.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  95. Art says:

    Hardship drives intelligence. Living in cold climates requires smart people. It also requires cooperation.

    Cold requires industry. Only smart cooperative people survive in cold climates.

    Doesn’t moderate cold weather predict intelligence?

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
    , @Santoculto
  96. hyperbola says:
    @Okechukwu

    Language, by the way, is an abstract system. That’s all human languages. I was exposed to two languages in equal measure growing up: English and Igbo. I found Igbo to be far more difficult to negotiate, far more complicated and complex. There are a million ways to convey in Igbo all the thoughts, ideas and concepts that Braun claims is missing in African languages.

    Languages are a funny business. I have managed five so far, three of which are “european”, one of which is melanesian and one of which is Indian subcontinent. All of them were learned in situ, i.e. in the country where the language was in its home country. I find that there are things that are most fluidly expressed in one language – the same things can usually be expressed in other languages (sort of), but much more clumsily. These are mostly cultural differences, but they are real. As for English, whose English? I never learned Nigerian English, but I did manage to master four different local varieties of English in non-home countries. Tongue in cheek, I suggest that English is one of the more difficult languages to master (at high level – there are MANY local pidgin versions that are very simple to learn) because it is such a mongrel/bastard/stolen mixture of precision words from other languages with little or no phonetic or spelling regularity.

    As for homogenization – heaven forbid please. Nothing more boring than the world becoming culturally homogenized by hollywood.

  97. Okechukwu says:

    It is matter of means. Africans just did not have means to kill everything that moves.

    Of course they did. People at every level of technology can extinct any large animal. Are you seriously suggesting that if Africans made a concerted effort to get rid of lions or elephants that they would fail?

    Who killed mammoth in North America or large birds in New Zealand?

    You’re contradicting yourself here. In fact mammoths weren’t the only species to be killed off by prehistoric people.

    During the Great Depression it was very hard to find deer in woods in America. Hunting was a necessity for survival for poor rural Americans.

    Hunting for food, yes. But Europeans didn’t just hunt for food. They hunted for pelts or for target practice or just for fun. Often they hunted simply to clear the area of animals, which they didn’t believe had a right to life. There are efforts underway via genetic engineering and selective breeding to reintroduce many of the animals killed off by Europeans. Few of these animals were ever sources of food. These programs can never resurrect extinct species, but they can attempt to approximate their distinct physical characteristics.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  98. Okechukwu says:
    @Art

    Hardship drives intelligence. Living in cold climates requires smart people. It also requires cooperation.

    Cold requires industry. Only smart cooperative people survive in cold climates.

    Doesn’t moderate cold weather predict intelligence?

    The cold weather hypothesis is null and void.

    • Agree: RaceRealist88
    • Replies: @Art
  99. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Lars Porsena

    There are 2 types of smokers: Puffers and deep breathers.

    Puffers seem to go on forever. Deep breathing tobacco smoke?
    Not so much future in that.

  100. @Art

    I think people became cooperative or more future oriented before they arrived to subpolar regions and when they fixated in this regions they stop to EVOLVED to adapt to environmental challenges/changes and colder climate have similar effects as too dry or too hot climate. R selection make people more hyper sexual, sexually oriented because they no have time enough to create their houses and constitute families after. R selected people tend to be mostly maladapted in modern places at least to collect resources enough to give to their families very good standard life while they still are very adapted because r selection seems more generalist just like eucalyptus plants, they have little needs to start a family.

    Too harsh climates or regions instead push for constant evolution tend to limit it and push for constant conservation of winner phenotype/lifestyle. What push for real or literal evolution at least in natural scenarios is when the environment is not just harsh but unpredictable or less constant. Temperate climates and specially continental temperate climates seems a good place to increase both conservation and self actualization or evolution.

  101. @Okechukwu

    Actually, no. Sub-Saharan Africans ultimately rejected colonialism because upon interaction with Europeans they didn’t find them to be cognitively superior. Often they found the opposite to be the case.

    LOL. If by “rejected,” you of mean that European resolve to maintain colonialism declined due to Western moral debate. Portugal was a the major exception. Even then you needed Communist patronage to win.

    I’m Korean. I don’t have any delusion that Korea “rejected” Japanese colonialism. We received it due to the Allies defeating the Japanese Empire. South Korean independence from China has also depended on a U.S. presence.

    You state that the people with global transportation, civil engineering, medicine, and other technology were not “cognitively superior.” OK, in theory that could be true. But if that were true, then at least some African societies would have shown a rapid upwardly-mobile trajectory like the PRC, Taiwan, South Korea, or Japan, all of whom have IQs comparable, of not superior to Europeans. Asian states have flourished despite devastating wars and brutal internal violence directed at intellectuals like the Cultural Revolution.

    What was Subsahran Africans’ highest technological achievement prior to European colonialism? Since independence? What’s the most significant scientific paper published by a Subsahran African with no clear European admixture ever? Chisala has dodged that question when asked because it belies his thesis.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  102. Factorize says:

    K-drama, I find your comment about China’s conception of their ethnic identity to include Korea intriguing.

    Could you give me some idea how far China might make claims to an extended ethnic Asian nation?

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  103. @Okechukwu

    “Troll” would be a flattering response to him/her/it.

  104. @utu

    Yes, not one of his better points. Australia still had megafauna and many specieslong extinct when hunter gatherer people populated Australia….

  105. Art says:
    @Okechukwu

    The cold weather hypothesis is null and void

    Why did northern Italy produce industry and southern Italy the Mafia?

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  106. @utu

    You have a flair for the irrelevant. Well, yes, there’s no perfect absence of correlation, but that’s utterly beside the point.

    • Replies: @utu
  107. @Okechukwu

    I don’t think you are pounting to any valid distinction between Europeans and others wrt hunting. Much sport is plausibly described as a way of playing out old once useful instincts and hunting in its various guises should be seen in that light *unless one is referring to wanton destruction of a species* (cp. ISIS and Taliban cultural destruction). Apart from simulating old hunter practices there was a less primitive desire to decorate rooms with things of beauty like tiger skins of elephant tusks. Note that this was very much a class thing in the case of large animals. Indeed consideration of the way lower class poachers of game were punished in Europe from very early times refutes the idea of a European cultural tendency to deatroy species. (The loss of species in Australia since 1788 has been accidental though, like the continuing loases in the equatorial tropics everywhere, exacerbated by ignorance).

    Specifically your point that Africans could have wiped out lions and elephants is not in the end significant unless, contrary to fact, Europeans are being regarded as people who sought to wipe out rather than merely hunt game (for sport and status/prestige).

  108. Okechukwu says:
    @K-Drama Kumiho

    LOL. If by “rejected,” you of mean that European resolve to maintain colonialism declined due to Western moral debate. Portugal was a the major exception. Even then you needed Communist patronage to win.

    No. By rejected I meant that Africans never considered European supremacy a natural condition. They never bought into that concept. They understood fully that Europeans were superior technologically but not superior in intellectual potential. And there wouldn’t have been a western moral debate had Africans accepted their plight with docility.

    Africans’ reactions to Europeans weren’t attended by the same misguided awe that plagued other indigenous peoples. They didn’t appreciate Europeans as some sort of magical, divinely ordained super beings. From the African point of view, Europeans were just weird looking versions of themselves. Additionally, Africans were just as fanatical about land as the Europeans.

    Africa was never easy to conquer, which is why colonialism happened there so late, which is why the colonialists never gained an adequate foothold, which is why they were easier to kick out, unlike in the Americas or Australia. It’s not by coincidence that Europeans were only able to make inroads into Africa in the late 19th century after gaining a consequential advantage in weapons tech (Maxim machine guns, etc). Prior to that time Africans did engage and defeat European armies and settlers. Europeans were confined to small coastal enclaves and functioned as vassals to African kings. Europeans engaged in trade with Africans on equal terms because they couldn’t take anything by force, including slaves. They tried to raid African villages for slaves and were roundly defeated. Subsequent to that they made treaties and paid for the slaves.

    Portugal was a the major exception. Even then you needed Communist patronage to win

    And Portugal was supported to a much larger degree by the Western powers in addition to critical localized support from South Africa and Rhodesia. Your point?

    You state that the people with global transportation, civil engineering, medicine, and other technology were not “cognitively superior.”

    That’s right. Do you even know how human intelligence works? Were you Koreans, who were technologically primitive a few generations ago, cognitively inferior?

    But if that were true, then at least some African societies would have shown a rapid upwardly-mobile trajectory like the PRC, Taiwan, South Korea, or Japan

    First of all, why should they? Why should Africans, who existed in a different environment, who were subjected to differing social and political stresses, who had a multiplicity of ethnicities, languages and cultures on any given landmass 1/4 the size of Taiwan, nevertheless be expected to replicate precisely the same developmental path? But despite these difficulties, despite not being able to milk the cold war for aid the way the Asian countries did, despite wars and social upheaval wrought by and continuing to be instigated by former colonial powers, despite not abutting against major international shipping channels, the African Lion economies are on a faster developmental trajectory in comparison to their Asian Tiger counterparts.

    all of whom have IQs comparable, of not superior to Europeans.

    Says who? Who conducted these Asian IQ surveys? Who’s reporting the results? Who participated? Where, when and how? I suspect the Asian IQ data is just as fraudulent as the African ones. The IQ industry has a vested interest in promoting alleged high Asian IQ’s as a bulwark against charges of racism. Back in the day when Asians were considered dull, lazy and dimwitted their IQ scores were low in order to reflect those characterizations. Don’t take my word for it that Asians were once considered stupid. Just watch old movies and TV shows to see how they were depicted.

    Asian states have flourished despite devastating wars and brutal internal violence directed at intellectuals like the Cultural Revolution.

    No they haven’t. Which Asians? China has 1.4 billion people. With an equivalent number of people we can extrapolate U.S. GDP to around $100 trillion dollars, 5 times its current level. As things stand, hundreds of millions of black Africans are richer and live better than hundreds of millions of Chinese. And the South and Southeast areas of Asia certainly aren’t flourishing. By almost every metric a significant percentage of Black Africans are better off then they are.

    What was Subsahran Africans’ highest technological achievement prior to European colonialism? Since independence? What’s the most significant scientific paper published by a Subsahran African with no clear European admixture ever?

    That question would be better posed to you with respect to Asia. Do you realize that just a handful of Black Americans have invented and innovated more modern technology than all of Asia combined? That includes China, Japan and Korea. China was very innovative and inventive in the distant past, but in modern times Asians have busied themselves with copying, stealing and co-opting the intellectual production of others.

  109. @Okechukwu

    Thank you for that interesting reply.

    I am surprised that you do not point to the problem of much discussion by the likes of Lynn, Rushton and probably Braun that their data samples are far too small and limited to represent the enormous genetic variety within Africa that contrasts with the narrow out of Africa lineages of the rest of humanity. By accident and by mostly natural selection there could be mini Indias within African regions and maybe even within people of one language group that had castes. Aren’t Igbo known for being smart (“Jews of Africa” I see is treated as more than metaphorical by some)? And also as having castes?

    Perhaps Braun has detected a real connection between the kind of abstract thinking that supports morality in any but the simplest circumstances and IQ. That might have as much to do with class, with the Flynn Effect and with moves from rural to sophisticated urban lives as with genes for cognition.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  110. @Factorize

    I don’t believe that’s what he meant, more about “Chinese influence.”

    That I know of, the Chinese do not include the Koreans in their ethnic identity(though genetically, I believe its actually not very far from the Northeastern Chinese); however, China has traditionally considered all of Asia to be tributaries.

    Some version of this attitude might remain in a modernized fashion.

  111. @Okechukwu

    No they haven’t. Which Asians? China has 1.4 billion people. With an equivalent number of people we can extrapolate U.S. GDP to around $100 trillion dollars, 5 times its current level. As things stand, hundreds of millions of black Africans are richer and live better than hundreds of millions of Chinese

    This is a ridiculous way to measure it. A more accurate consideration is that despite covering over 1 billion people and with a huge variation in income, China has a higher GDP per capita than even South Africa and almost any measure ranging in metrics as far as military power to clean water distribution or power grid access is doing better(even in the poorest areas). And of course, has a obesity problem rather than malnutrition problem.

    If you think that a pan-African nation can do similar, well, good luck with the unification. Also, the power grid.

    However, you clearly have an agenda so its not really worth discussing further.

  112. @Art

    Again this example**

    Do you remember i already debated it with you*

  113. Factorize says:

    Afrosapiens, the series of figures for world population density that you posted at the top of this thread has greatly helped me locate the centers of human civilization over the last many thousands of years. As you move from one map to the next you can witness the developmental journey of humanity.

    The three founding pillars of human civilization (Europe, India, Asia) are conspicuous on these maps for 5,000 years. What I find especially of note is that comparatively recently (during the last century or two), there has emerged three other pillars of humanity (America, Brazil and Sub-Saharan Africa). Given the population densities shown in the current maps, Sub-Saharan Africa has now attained the demographic prerequisites for a self-perpetuating cycle of development.

    The same process of densification —> to cognitive complexity –> to selective force for higher intelligence, along with the creation of IQ outliers simply through increased population size has driven the founding civilizations forward for many thousands of years. The maps suggest to me that we are now entering an era in which the background forces that promote beneficial cognitive outcomes will become ubiquitous. However, the approaching wave of genetic modification will have a much greater impact on a much shorter timescale.

  114. @Okechukwu

    I pause for applause. The nitpicking can wait!

    But given that you probably accept that cogbitivw ability (whether phenotype omeasured as is including envirionmental influences or genotype) is distributed worldwide on a roughly Gaussian normal curve can you not deal with the probability that some extended family groups have very different averages ans sds

  115. I meant my # 118 as at present numbered to be a reply to this ….. and I meant to add at the end after “sds” the words “within [black or just sub-Saharan] Africa”. I think it’s time for some Igbo supremacism. :-)
    I assume that you don’t have a problem accepting that some intermarrying extended families have evolved heritable differences in cognitive ability as measured by the better IQ tests. It’s not difficult to see how the inbred literate Ashkenazi tribe of anything-but-peasants evolved the alleles for doing the kind of things IQ tests measure. Likewise Greg Clark’s “A Farewell to Alms; a Brief Economic History of the World” doesn’t emphasise the genetic aspects of NW European, particularly British, outbreeding of the lower classes by the post 1400 commercially and professionally successful (until it went into reverse 100 – 140 years ago) but leaves no other inference possible. Right?

  116. @Okechukwu

    Africans’ reactions to Europeans weren’t attended by the same misguided awe that plagued other indigenous peoples.

    This is unintentionally damning. You’re basically admitting to SSAs being incurious as a whole. Confucian Asians were pretty damn impressed by steam engines, organic chemistry, advanced firearms…because that’s the normal reaction of a person who values civilizational and technological progress.

    Were you Koreans, who were technologically primitive a few generations ago, cognitively inferior?

    No, but we were clearly culturally maladapted. As a woman, I hardly am wistful for pre-modern Korean culture. Koreans showed that as soon as we stopped holding ourselves back and joined the modern world, we caught up with and surpassed many Europeans within two generations. We now develop leading-edge consumer technology products; you might even be using one right now. And look what a mess we were in in 1953. We are betetr than Japan even in per capita production of per-reviewed scientific publications:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/20k5dk/top_40_countries_by_the_number_of_scientific/

    That’s not as flashy as specific inventions, but its part of how science and technology advance.

    Of course when I point out Africa’s trajectory over the same period you become defensive:

    First of all, why should they?…nevertheless be expected to replicate precisely the same developmental path?

    Nice strawman in the “precisely the same” misrepresentation of my challenge.

    In any case, if SSAs are of comparable or equivalent IQ to NE Asians and Europeans, then surely you must have accomplished something noteworthy in the thousands upon thousands of years before the White Devil showed up. Even South Asians, with lower recorded IQs, have some impressive achievements, starting with base-10 mathematics.

    When I asked you about SSA accomplishments, you again get defensive:

    That question would be better posed to you with respect to Asia. Do you realize that just a handful of Black Americans have invented and innovated more modern technology than all of Asia combined? That includes China, Japan and Korea.

    So as expected, you literally can’t name anything specific for SSA. Your counter-challenge is farcical. Here’s a list of Japanese inventions/discoveries (it’s a long one):

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

    Prior to European contact, Koreans invented our own alphabet suited for Korean and the first metal moveable-type printing press. We had sophisticated carpentry, luxury-quality cloth-making, fine ceramics, etc. Not much, but we were hardly savages.

    As for “all of Asia,” the list of Nobel Prize winners in physics, chemistry, and medicine speaks for itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Asian_Nobel_laureates. The only “African” winners in those fields are European. Ouch.

    Black Americans are an admixture with Europeans, but even then they can’t begin to match the accomplishments listed above. Feel free to try.

    Like Chisala, you use sophistry and Kangz-style bravado to ignore the elephant in the room.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Okechukwu
  117. utu says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    If you had a perfect controller like a thermostat that fixes temperature in the room to exactly T=74F regardless of ambient external temperature T_amb which varies between -40F and 105F what exactly do you want to correlate. Obviously covariance between T and T_amb is zero but the correlation is indeterminate because variance of T is zero. But the covariance zero tells us that there is no causal link between room temperature and ambient temperature. Which is correct because the thermostat is perfect. If some physical quantity remains constant the question of causality does not even arise.

    But we can correlate energy consumption of the heater-AC system versus the ambient temperature and establish convention that the energy is negative when AC is on and positive when heater is on. ± sign indicate the direction where energy is flowing in the system And obviously the consumption of energy is driven by the ambient temperature not other way around. However mathematics will not tell you that because covariance is a symmetric function. The causality you can establish from elsewhere like form the physical mechanism if you can understand but not from mathematics.

    I do not really see relevance of links given by simplyamazed to some people pontificating about the so-called Friedman thermostat. It is all very trivial what they talk about and as I can gather w/o a point. And the so-called Friedman thermostat does not demonstrate that correlation with w/o causality or causality w/o correlation do exits.

    I found this that illustrate the depth of profundity of people keep t=yapping about the Million Friedman thermostat (it all goes to the post of some Nick Rove):

    http://justinhohn.typepad.com/blog/2013/01/milton-friedmans-thermostat-analogy.html
    I came across this excerpt from the excellent Nick Rowe. It is an outline of a famous analogy made by Milton Friedman. It shows what can happen when a “variable” that you analyze by statistical methods isn’t varying.

    When variable is not varying it is not a variable and there is nothing to be analyzed. Then this blogger proceeds with example I gave above and speculate what some hypothetical economist would conclude form this situation. It is all nonsense and only show of what caliber people get into studying economics.

    In real world controllers are imperfect and they are unable keep the parameters they suppose to control constants when the external conditions keep changing. They work on feedback principle and simple or complex control functions that has delays and when the external forcing is stochastic no prediction can be made to anticipate changes thus the controlled parameter will not be constant. There will be overshoots and undershoots and oscillations. The profile of control parameter changes is a function of external forcing moderated by the control function, so mathematically T=f(T_amb)≠const, so we end up with correlation and an obvious causation.

    Can anybody prove an example of real world case where there is causation between two parameters X and Y that do not correlate? First please read my comment #80 because trivial cases of periodic function do not count.

    P.S. It seems that it was Matthew Yglesias who injected this banal Friedman thermostat into blogosphere that results in the echo chamber.

    P.P.S. Friedman came up with a metaphor of thermostat (2003) for Fed operations. Fed has several variables that they can tweak like interests rate. They may have several objectives like constant unemployment or constant inflation apart from making rich people even richer. They can increase interest rates and they can cause mass unemployment as Volcker did while he was “fighting” the so called inflation but actually it was the high worker’s wages he was fighting. So yes they do have some kind of thermostat and in this sense Friedman’s metaphor is apt. But to make it work like a thermostat they must have a feedback so they constantly must tweak interest rates so they do not overshoot or undershoot their target of , say unemployment too much. This is rather banal idea but useful for another reason. As it turns out during Volcker time in 1980′s when I began to understand what the fuckers where doing I was using a thermostat as metaphor to explain that by adjustment of one dial the fuckers are able to bust the whole Rust Belt. When Greenspan was pontificating in cryptic language and all analysts and talking heads where trying to decipher his occult wisdom and secret messages nobody confronted him and asked: Mr. Greenspan, you just have one dial. You can turn it up or turn it down. That’s all what you got. There is nothing to it. Please stop obfuscating this simple and banal truth. Would system collapse if people were to find this this banal truth that the king is and always was naked. Greenspan kind of told us he was naked when told some reporter how he liked to adjust his cold and hot water when taking a bath, presumably naked, with his toes. Perhaps he had his interest rated thermostat dial in his bathroom as well. But people believed because many were getting rich.

    Here is cartoon with the serenity prayer for Greenspan that illustrated the times when Greenspan was the God and the invisible hand of market was his right hand.

    http://www.art.com/products/p15063141112-sa-i6842934/warren-miller-and-please-let-alan-greenspan-accept-the-things-he-cannot-change-give-hi-new-yorker-cartoon.htm

  118. utu says:
    @K-Drama Kumiho

    Here at unz.com we have our own home grown philosopher Priss Factor who sometimes have interesting insights which often are buried in mishmash of fleeting ideas when his thought producing volcano erupts too much. In this case

    http://www.unz.com/imercer/taking-a-knee-is-akin-to-taking-a-pee/#comment-2025837

    he puts a finger on something what appeals to me because I am a strong skeptic of IQ cult as among others I have seen too many shenanigans the IQist can engage in. Here is what Priss wrote:

    Some say blacks fail at dealing with complexity because of lower IQ, but there are blacks with higher IQ, but their attitudes are much the same. Why? Their emotions outrun their intelligence. So, even if they are just as smart as whites or even smarter, their emotions are still stuck in ‘chuck a spear’ or ‘run like mofo’ mentality. This is why even smart blacks like Cornel West and Michael Dyson sound just like rappers.

    The concept that the emotions can totally sabotage your intelligence is obvious to anybody who got angry or scared and lost it. It is possible that some cultures for whatever reasons find themselves in the negative well of intellectual potential when the culturally unchecked and unmitigated emotions keep rationality that is the core of intelligence in arrested development? Is it possible that there is a genetic factor in it? Personally I prefer the former than the latter but I would not exclude the genetic factor possibility. If culture and environment does not keep emotions in check and does not reduce number of situation were people get anger or scared it is very hard to imagine that sober thinking and pondering with reflection, contemplation and introspection will develop. Fear and anger will wipe any developments every time they take hold of an individual or the whole community.

    So whatever causes this excessive emotionality whether it is a culture or some genes activating physiological process and hormone release it will preclude ability to perform on tasks which require patience and concentration like for example taking cognitive tests as well as harmonious cooperation that can’t succeed when outburst of emotions interrupt.

    I used to observe African Americans playing chess. Some of them were pretty good at it. However they were getting way too emotional and they were employing a tactic of trash talking to deconcentrate and intimidate opponents with theatrical and threatening body motions and gestures. So the the game had a strong physical component. By losing energy on this and by deconcentration obviously they could not have been as good as players who put all the energy just into the analyzing game. It is however possible that Karpov could lose in such high pressure environment of verbal abuse. His game would suffer. Clearly Blacks if they continue on this path which I consider is chiefly culturally determined, they will never maximize their intellectual potentials. So they will be on the suboptimal path. I am sure the IQist will not like this idea because they want to see Blacks locked up in the prison of their genes from which there is no escape. Ever. I on the other hand would like to see Blacks having a chance of escaping the prison of their culture which is pathological (for many reasons) and totally unsuitable for modern or modernizing society. While I can imagine that in Africa process of cultural evolution are taking place as a part of natural process however in the US the lowest stratum of Black society does not show any signs of improvement.

    Our interlocutor here Afrosapience who is Haitian by birth and naturalized French instead of telling us what Europe, Poland or Belarus should do to accommodate Blacks he could enlighten as whether culture changes in desirable direction happens in Haiti. Then our other interlocutor Okechukwu who, if I am not mistaken is Igbo but lives in the US, instead of making gleeful prophesies of the end of White race in Europe could tell us how this super rich language he claims Igo and other Nigerian posses helps them to make important and complex decisions like about how to divide budget in community and how they do not let emotion soutrun the intelligence in such situations.

    • Replies: @K-Drama Kumiho
  119. David Landes, in his economic history, thought that culture was the key. He did not go further to look at the progenitors of such cultures.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/david-landes-economic-historian

    Here is a speculation about a possible sequence:

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-puzzle-comes-before-solution

    Here is a somewhat differing view

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/does-culture-cultivate-or-do-you-need

    As to the relative strengths of cultures, one measure is what one culture borrows from another.

  120. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Singapore was unpopulated when the British got permission to make it their turf. The local Malay rulers were ‘tak apa’ about the whole deal. Singapore’s success is due to British systems and Chinese intelligence and work ethic.

    This is absolutely the exact same dynamic playing out in Malaysia, except that the economic success is lesser because the Chinese represent a much smaller percentage of the population and the Malays have monopolised the government and run it in their typical lackluster style. For further comparison, compare development along the Chinese-intensive areas of peninsular Malaysia like Penang Island and Malacca, with Malay-dominated regions like Perlis and Terengganu.

  121. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Santoculto

    Hot and cold is not the same.

    Excess heat is only a mortal threat in the absence of water and so is not a threat at all in many hot countries. It is still a massive evolutionary guide though as it encourages minimal heat generation and hence minimal energy expenditure. In tropical climates, planning for the future is detrimental since there will always be some kind of fruit in season and the best way to keep operating in the oppressive heat is to think as little as possible.

    Cold kills. Through exposure and through starvation. In climates where cold is a treat, thinking of ways to store food and avoid exposure is essential to survival.

    Too hot -> more stupid
    Too cold -> more intelligent

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  122. Svigor says:

    Why the Unz mania for this intelligence stuff? This is utterly devoid of any scientific merit and all proceeds from wanting to confirm a belief. Ir’s on a par with Birtherism.

    If one is concerned with manias, intelligence mania seems an odd choice for focus. Anti-HBD mania grips the entire Western world. The delusion of human group cognitive equality is easily the West’s most pervasive and deleterious anti-science mania.

    But you’re right, IQ fetishism is on par with Birtherism and Creationism; they don’t hold a candle to the mania for the delusion of human group cognitive equality.

    As for wanting to confirm a belief; don’t make me laugh. Leftist Creationism (delusion of human group cognitive equality) takes the cake, bakes another cake, and takes that one, too. The rest aren’t even crumbs next to that.

    Which is why civilization only popped up in areas with the right climate that could sustain large populations with food production. Areas like this are where writing was invented independently without any outside influence.

    What I find more interesting is the places where writing and literacy never became a thing, or much of one, despite contact with literate civilizations. Same goes for the rest of human innovation; my prediction is sub-Saharan Africans will continue to produce little of intellectual worth, despite having access to everything via their smartphones.

    It’s also worth noting that saying cold winter increased intelligence is the post hoc, ergo proper hoc fallacy.

    No, you are engaging in what I’ll call the reverse post hoc, ergo proper hoc fallacy: someone argues that something happened after something else, and you are using that fact to falsely attribute a post hoc, ergo proper hoc fallacy.

    He can’t keep those pesky immigrants out if he does that. He needs to convince the world that they’re intellectually incapacitated genetically. And that they have immutable characteristics that are antithetical to western norms. It’s all a farce, actually.

    This makes no sense. American Blacks are far more similar to African Blacks than they are to Whites. Bringing Blacks to a place in which Whites thrive has not made Blacks thrive. Whatever is “wrong” with Blacks, it is persistent. Ultimately I don’t give a shit if you call it disease or behavioral genetics.

    There is no way around Black “failure.” It’s something persistent, whether that something is disease, or IQ, or some pathology that prevents them from taking up education (which some dream is the horse drawing the IQ cart). Whatever. You can even blame it on YT, if you like; the cause is still irremediable. YT can no more cure his “causing” black “failure” than he can any of the other causes.

    Most of the world, especially in Africa would laugh at the idea of measuring intelligence. Most of the world, especially in Africa have other conceptions of human worth.

    There’s the tell. Leftists equate IQ to “worth,” a value judgement, and work backwards from there.

    Megalomaniacal levels of many, majority of Africans is impressive.

    If we could harness ego for energy, Blacks would have colonized Proxima Centauri by now.

  123. Svigor says:

    The concept that the emotions can totally sabotage your intelligence is obvious to anybody who got angry or scared and lost it. It is possible that some cultures for whatever reasons find themselves in the negative well of intellectual potential when the culturally unchecked and unmitigated emotions keep rationality that is the core of intelligence in arrested development? Is it possible that there is a genetic factor in it? Personally I prefer the former than the latter but I would not exclude the genetic factor possibility.

    It’s obvious that human behavior is genetically driven, and that differences in human group behavior are largely down to genetic differences. Blacks are more extraverted and aggressive, less conscientious or open to experience than other races, for example. Tell yourself it’s all cultural if it makes you happy, but Occam’s Razor cuts the other way.

  124. @Anonymous

    I know, obviously that they are not the same, but i’m talking about constancy. Colder climates is always cold, hotter climates is always hot [equatorial for example].

    Too hot -> more stupid
    Too cold -> more intelligent

    I don’t think we are talking about stupidity versus intelligence, but short term intelligence versus long term intelligence. I don’t find amerindians who live in Amazonia and african tribes who live in savannah ”stupid”.

    And many behaviors of short term-thinkers in long-term environments/societies is due to their maladaptations and not ”stupidity” [chronically apophenia) per si.

    We are always comparing apples with oranges.

    Hunter gatherers descendents versus post-”civilized’ ones.

  125. @Anonymous

    Hotter climates AND enormous biodiversity [insects, animals...] around tend to select to shorter thinking and not necessarily because it’s considerably less dangerous than in subpolar regions. It’s dangerous/difficult in different ways.

    Don’t make sense build a very solid house in tropical/equatorial regions.

    My main hypothesis is that humans were gaining their future-oriented intelligence [or increasing its frequency as well its expression] during their migrations and not after, when they arrived in extreme geographical areas. So when they arrived to this very colder areas, they stopped to increase/sophisticate their abstract/future-thinking intelligence. When we talk about civilization we are talking about creativity. Creativity seems fit perfectly in climatically inconstant regions with temperate climate as specially in continental temperate climate. Humans evolved and adapted psychologically and cognitively to each climate. Again i’m not saying creativity is not a universal human feature but it’s tend to be more required in places with many challenges. Even people who are not highly creative tend to be forced to think in divergent ways when they are strongly challenged, increasing their individual creative potential.

  126. Factorize says:

    We are at the very moment in which average human intelligence will dramatically increase. There is no precedent for what is about to happen. The Genetic Singularity has arrived.

    High tech is not required. Simple selection amongst embryos would increase
    geno-g by a single SD up to many SDs. If selection of individual chromosomes in gametes or embryos became possible, then the potential increase in IQ would be very large, perhaps 20 SD. The genetic potential for extremely high intelligence is embedded within everyone’s DNA.

    Why look in the rear view mirror when the road ahead is so promising?

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  127. Okechukwu says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    I am surprised that you do not point to the problem of much discussion by the likes of Lynn, Rushton and probably Braun that their data samples are far too small and limited to represent the enormous genetic variety within Africa that contrasts with the narrow out of Africa lineages of the rest of humanity.

    Well it’s already a foregone conclusion Lynn, Rushton, Braun et al. are frauds.

    You hit on an interesting point. If human populations are segmentable into intellectually superior and inferior then it’s entirely possible that we will find the smartest people in the world in Africa. Taking HBD theory to its proper conclusion, if we delineate human genes in the minutiae it’s not inconceivable that populations with richer gene pools are endowed with genes and frequencies for intelligence that are absent in other relatively bottlenecked and inbred populations.

    Aren’t Igbo known for being smart (“Jews of Africa” I see is treated as more than metaphorical by some)? And also as having castes?

    Yes, the smart Igbo is a stereotype. Of course, Igbos aren’t always smart but they have suffered collective persecution on account of being perceived as smart and “Jew-like.” The Biafran civil war often was framed by northern Muslims in terms of a battle against the Jews. I’m agnostic about the Jewish connection. Some of our cultural practices are eerily but probably coincidentally similar.

    Igbos don’t practice a caste system. Their overriding sensibility is devotion to family — broad, extended families that eventually encompasses all of Igboland and the diaspora. There is no Igbo equivalent of the word “cousin.” Even distant cousins are called brothers and sisters. To specifically identify someone as a cousin requires explication.

    Igbos do venerate education, achievement and success. That’s the closest thing to a caste system we have, with high achievers on top. The competition to get there and to outdo each other, even among siblings, can be vicious. It does promote successful outcomes but it also engenders envy and ill will.

    Perhaps Braun has detected a real connection between the kind of abstract thinking that supports morality in any but the simplest circumstances and IQ.

    Morality is a relative and subjective concept. There were slaveholders who considered themselves paragons and virtue and morality. Making pernicious judgments about an entire continent based on superficial interactions and deeply-held biases is in fact immoral. Therefore, ironically, Braun himself is immoral.

  128. @Okechukwu

    Relative is relative…

    Because some people considered themselves morally correct even when they weren’t it’s doesn’t mean they were correct. If morality is relative and subjective why white guilt?? Why blame the whitey by enslavement if morality is relative and subjective, I mean, no have objective criteria???

    “Is in FACT IMMORAL”

    It’s not relative or subjective??

    • Replies: @utu
  129. @Factorize

    Why look in the rear view mirror when the road ahead is so promising?

    I like this attitude, though to be fair, due to the cost of the procedures, I suspect it’ll just trigger ever more elite sorting.

  130. Okechukwu says:
    @K-Drama Kumiho

    This is unintentionally damning. You’re basically admitting to SSAs being incurious as a whole. Confucian Asians were pretty damn impressed by steam engines, organic chemistry, advanced firearms…because that’s the normal reaction of a person who values civilizational and technological progress.

    Africans too were curious about these things, dummy. That’s why they went to Europe and the United States to study. My parents came here to study. That’s why I’m here. Africans were also very curious about guns. So much so that the colonial powers formed a pact among themselves to keep modern guns out of African hands. They probably had good cause to do this. I mean the Zulus killed 1300 crack British troops with little more than spears.

    We now develop leading-edge consumer technology products; you might even be using one right now.

    None of which were developed organically in Korea by Koreans. You’re the one reaping the benefits of the work and toil of others. When I said that a mere handful of Black Americans have invented and innovated more modern technology that all of Asia combined, I meant it.

    A black man was very instrumental in inventing the PC you’re using to write your Asian supremacist junk (see Mark Dean).

    A black man invented the modern video game console which formed the basis of the Japanese gaming industry (see Jerry Lawson).

    A black man was highly instrumental in developing the cell phone technology we have today and which your Samsung has turned into a billion dollar business (see Henry T. Thompson).

    Going back further and amid withering racism and Jim Crow, black people invented many of the transformative technologies we use today. Going back further still, we even had black people inventing and innovating as slaves. You mentioned steamboats. Well it was a black slave that perfected propeller technology (see Ben Montgomery). So that which you claim Asians were curious about, while accusing blacks of incuriosity, was in part the intellectual output of a black man. Conversely, Asians were free in their own countries. They were not subjected to debilitating and dehumanizing oppression. Yet they produced nothing. They created nothing. They invented nothing.

    I apologize to any decent Asians. But this character needs a cold dose of reality.

    Koreans invented our own alphabet suited for Korean and the first metal moveable-type printing press. We had sophisticated carpentry, luxury-quality cloth-making, fine ceramics, etc. Not much, but we were hardly savages.

    Korea was a primitive stone age society before and during the Korean war. I’ve seen the films. But unlike you, I’m not alleging that they were stupid or inferior. North Korea today is basically a mirror image of South Korea, absent U.S. largess. You were created by the United States and you’ve been nurtured by the United States. You’ve been allowed to dump all your products here while at the same time closing your markets to U.S. products. Because of the American protective umbrella, you can divert funds to other purposes that would otherwise go to defense.

    Your entire country is an American fabrication. Virtually everything you have and everything you to is copied or stolen from America. Your K-pop is derivative of musical stylings invented by the black people you hate so much. Not only the music, but the presentation, the dance routines, the attitudes, the idioms — all reflect African-American aesthetics. So not only are you unable to invent your own tech, you can’t even invent your own pop culture.

    As for “all of Asia,” the list of Nobel Prize winners in physics, chemistry, and medicine speaks for itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Asian_Nobel_laureates. The only “African” winners in those fields are European. Ouch

    Given that there are billions of Asians on the planet, the relative infinitesimal number of Asian Nobel Prize winners belies your Asian supremacy polemics. The Nobel, by the way, exists within a Northern European cultural matrix. Duh…that’s why an overwhelming majority of the winners have been of Northern European extraction. Well now increasingly Africans are in the mix. And there’s absolutely nothing to preclude the possibility that Africans will be among future Nobel Prize winners. In fact in light of your moribund performance, it’s not inconceivable that Africans will surpass you in the not too distant future.

    Black Americans are an admixture with Europeans, but even then they can’t begin to match the accomplishments listed above.

    But if blacks are genetically inferior to whites and Asians, why would admixed blacks be far more intelligent, far more inventive and far more innovative than fully 100% whites and Asians? Umm…that doesn’t make any sense. Sorry.

    Like Chisala, you use sophistry and Kangz-style bravado to ignore the elephant in the room.

    Well go play with Chanda. Apparently he’s far more indulgent of your Asian supremacy gobbledygook. Chanda is an immigrant. Often times immigrants have a tendency to walk on eggshells. Me, I’m an American. We don’t play that shit.

  131. @Okechukwu

    Your mention of envy brings to mind the 1966 (in Germsn, 1970 in English) book “Envy” by Helmut Schoeck. He discusses inter alia the way the overcoming of envy was so important to economic and cultural advance and the different ways in which it was dealt with in Ancient Greece and amongst Christians. I remember that he noted the way superior West African farmers would hide their skills, hard work and results from others for fear of envy.

    Why do you describe Lynn, Rushton and Braun all as “frauds”? Even systematically wrong or fallacious doesn’t usually imply that someone is behaving fraudulently.

  132. @Okechukwu

    James Watson, co-discoverer of the DNA molecule, said “I am inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa” because “all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really.” That sounds like a wise opinion to me.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  133. @utu

    Utu, I take the position that IQ measures something useful, arguably the skill-set conducive to success in a modern, industrial socities, but it wrongheaded to claim to IQ represents general intelligence.

    I’ve found the marked difference in social skills between mean-representative individuals from groups with a lower relative mean score, and individuals of similar IQ, but from a higher-mean group, to be a compelling challenge to what IQ measures. IQ seems to miss verbal virtuosity and ‘common sense’ reasoning. It may also miss impressive visual-spatial abilities that outlier human groups such as the Kalahari bushmen or Australian Aboriginals exhibit.

    I agree that manifest intelligence, as wisdom or achievement, seems to be heavily moderated by emotion. College professors, obviously high in raw IQ-type intelligence, who fail at disinterested scholarship, which is sadly a large portion of academics outside of STEM, almost always are emotionally invested in a ’cause’ or tribal identity of some type. This problem of selective honesty and adhering to narratives is not a new phenomenon, but certain developments in 20th Century philosophy sanctified what were once failings as acceptable conduct in the academy.

    I agree too that while genetics may play a role in human group-level differences, it is important to recognize the powerful influence of socialization. One of my major frustrations is how ‘racist’ has gone from opposition to biological determinism and denial of fair opportunity to individuals, to a cover for culture and religion. It leaves us in the position where structural societal issues are the only ‘acceptable’ targets of criticism. That hampers progress on all fronts in a pluralistic world.

    • Replies: @utu
  134. @Okechukwu

    Damn bro, you definitely slay. I’ll jump back into the conversation tomorrow.

  135. @Okechukwu

    I see that memory may have failed me. I Googled “are there castes in Africa” and found plenty of examples but not, of course, Igbo. It would be interesting to compare Indian and Africsn castes on a number of aspects and dimensions. And to add comparison to class systems.

  136. @Peter Johnson

    That seems like an appeal to authority (although he has no authority there). Why do HBDers like fallacies so much? Post hoc, ergo propter hoc, appeal to authority, some use appeal to emotion, etc.

  137. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Two kinds of inferior people:

    Although both are ultimately incapable of true sentience(which requires a soul and divine spark), one type of ape is more competent than the other at imitation.

  138. Pat Boyle says:
    @Hu Mi Yu

    The Chinese did not develop gun powder. There is a well defined Gunpowder Revolution that describes when what we call black powder was first used effectively in militarily useful guns. It occurred in France and Germany in the fifteenth century. There were many separate stages to the development of effective gunpowder including corning.

    When gun powder and guns were used in the invasion of Italy by Charles VIII, all existing fortifications were instantly obsolete. Within a few years military architects created a whole new form of polygonal fortification. No high thin wall could withstand a gun. This revolution swept to the east only reaching China much later.

    People who like to think China invented gunpowder have sloppy thought processes. We celebrate an inventor when he has added the final piece that makes his invention useful. We do not attribute an invention to the first one who worked with it. If we did that we would attribute the electric light not to Edison but some early glass blower.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @utu
    , @res
    , @Jason Liu
  139. Pat Boyle says:
    @RaceRealist88

    You are patronizing the readership. Most of us took Latin in school and many of us took formal logic.

    You have not caught anyone in a terrible embarrassing error because there is “the arrow of time.” Causes do indeed precede effects. So all a putative causes will first of all need to precede its observed effect. Things that go backwards in time are only in Science Fiction and some parts of Theoretical Physics that I don’t understand.

    The fallacy part is when you assume that you have proven causality when you merely demonstrate precedence. No one is doing that here.

    The ‘cold winter makes intelligence’ hypothesis is just that – a hypothesis, and one that I think is likely wrong. It seems simplistic and wrong to me but it isn’t a fallacy.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  140. utu says:
    @Santoculto

    Very good catch!

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  141. @Pat Boyle

    The idea that only the “classic gun” design would define the gunpowder age doesn’t seem consistent with the observation that the Ottoman Empire was using cannons and bombards effectively as siege weapons on a consistent basis as far back as the 1420s; while it didn’t make all walls instantly obsolete, it would be hard to argue that the siege of Constantinople didn’t impress upon the world that a fundamental shift in warfare had occurred.

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
  142. utu says:
    @Okechukwu

    Africans too were curious about these things, dummy. That’s why they went to Europe and the United States to study. My parents came here to study. That’s why I’m here.

    Why did they abandon you here in America? Because I presume once your parents learned how to build the steam engine or whatever they got so curious about they went back to Nigeria to repay with their newly acquired knowledge the Nigerian government that funded their studies in America with money it got probably from UN. What Nigeria or any African country gets from your sorry ass staying in America? How are you helping to turn African into the next South Korea and contributing to your great vision of flooding the world with African Nobel prizes? In the meantime you should moderate your badmouthing of Asians because your future may depend on them.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  143. utu says:
    @Pat Boyle

    People who like to think China invented gunpowder have sloppy thought processes.

    To acquire facts no thought process is necessary. The fact is that gunpowder was invented in China. Retain this fact and use your though process for something more useful.

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
  144. utu says:
    @K-Drama Kumiho

    Ok, ok, ok. I got it. My point was that when personality traits and emotional make up that might be conditioned by environment and culture dominate intelligence factors the question of intelligence can be put aside. This is about what Priss has said: “Their emotions outrun their intelligence.” This proposition can be adopted as more aligned with the Occam razor. In this case the Occam razor is favoring Africans. Because if it will turn out that there are genetic factors determining lower intelligence of Africans then they are really royally fucked with no hope left. If it is however that environmental and cultural factors determine the emotional make up that outrun their intelligence they have hope. Once they fix their pathological culture and get grip of the runaway emotional makeup their innate intelligence will have a chance to develop and blossom.

    • Replies: @K-Drama Kumiho
  145. @Okechukwu

    Okechukwu, the Once and Future Kang, writes:

    Korea was a primitive stone age society before and during the Korean war.

    “Stone Age” is a concept with an actual anthropological meaning. Koreans had been working metal for over two thousand years, so we were not “stone age” by definition. The pettiness and desperation of your insult speaks for itself. This outburst puts the rest of your gratuitous anti-Korean remarks in perspective.

    Conversely, Asians were free in their own countries. They were not subjected to debilitating and dehumanizing oppression. Yet they produced nothing. They created nothing. They invented nothing.

    Apparently you need pointed out to you that history did not just begin when Europeans began to exert an influence in Subsahran Africa.

    Your statement about Asian history shows laughable ignorance of European colonialism and influence in Asia, as well as gross ignorance of devastating intra-Asian conflict.

    And by “created nothing” and “invented nothing” you mean aside from gunpowder, paper, the compass, the mechanical clock, smelting, silk production, various agricultural innovations, and on and on.

    When I said that a mere handful of Black Americans have invented and innovated more modern technology that all of Asia combined, I meant it.

    Well,I posted links with dozens of Asian inventions, discoveries, and Nobel laureates, plus a general measure of per capita scientific output via peer-reviewed publications. You named four African-Americans.

    None of which were developed organically in Korea by Koreans. You’re the one reaping the benefits of the work and toil of others.

    Wow, talk about a shameless double-standard. Your African-Americans are given full, undivided credit by you, despite working in an overwhelmingly white context, but Koreans get no credit for our contributions. Could you look any more bitter and desperate?

    …why would admixed blacks be far more intelligent, far more inventive and far more innovative than fully 100% whites and Asians?

    Your very question just shows you don’t understand how group averages work versus the status of any given individual, nor grasp how admixture could impact genetically-regulated behavior.

    It’s not worth engaging you further. You seem to exemplify the “We wuz Kangz” mentality.

    In fact in light of your moribund performance, it’s not inconceivable that Africans will surpass you in the not too distant future.

    Q.E.D.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @Okechukwu
  146. @Pat Boyle

    You are patronizing the readership. Most of us took Latin in school and many of us took formal logic.

    Who is “many of us” and how do you know that? The comment was for Santoculto, who I’m 99 percent sure didn’t know that fallacy.

    The fallacy part is when you assume that you have proven causality when you merely demonstrate precedence. No one is doing that here.

    Santoculto wrote:

    humans were exposed to cold regions and became smarter

    So yes, someone did do that. “X happened before Y” (cold winter happened before increase in intelligence)”.

    The ‘cold winter makes intelligence’ hypothesis is just that – a hypothesis, and one that I think is likely wrong. It seems simplistic and wrong to me but it isn’t a fallacy.

    Yea it kinda is.

    “P1: X happened before Y.
    P2: (unstated) Y was caused by something (that happened before Y).
    C1: Therefore, X caused Y”

    P1: Cold winter happened before increase in IQ/intelligence
    P2: IQ/intelligence increases were caused by something (that happened before the intelligence increase)
    C1: Therefore, cold winters caused higher IQ/intelligence

    I agree that CWT is wrong, and if you say that X caused Y, that’s a fallacy.

  147. @K-Drama Kumiho

    It’s not worth engaging you further. You seem to exemplify the “We wuz Kangz” mentality.

    I don’t think that there is anything necessarily wrong with a Kangz mentality, so as long as it is actually useful for future growth. Omens look poor at the moment, though. Given the option for future selection for more intelligent offspring, for example, would our guest even pursue such a method?

  148. @Daniel Chieh

    ”I don’t think that there is anything necessarily wrong with a Kangz mentality”

    Everything wrong, super self confidence destroy nations.

  149. utu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    I don’t think that there is anything necessarily wrong with a Kangz mentality, so as long as it is actually useful for future growth.

    Interesting point. The confidence bordering on chutzpah must come from some inner strength. And to maintain it it must be fertilized with occasional successes. A military success will do. Or well planned and well executed genocide preferably of white people will do. But they are unlikely. On the other had an emulation of a quiet success of Koreans or Taiwanese is very unlikely. This requires possession of committed elites that will resist corruption from outside who will have the welfare of their society at heart. It is very hard to find it in Africa. I haven’t seen a leader in Africa with these qualities yet. An there is a culture. What parts of African culture is suitable for building a modern society that depends on discipline, perseverance, honesty and cooperation?

    • Replies: @szopen
  150. @utu

    Regarding the thesis that emotionality hampers the exercise of reason, and thus fails to allow genetic intelligence potential to be realized, what if relative emotional control itself is strongly genetically regulated?

  151. @utu

    @Okechukwo. I have trouble fathoming utu also….

  152. @Daniel Chieh

    I don’t think that there is anything necessarily wrong with a Kangz mentality, so as long as it is actually useful for future growth.

    If it were just a typical founding myth, I would not bother mock it, despite demonstrably ahistorical elements. It’s the broader mentality that accompanies the Kangz rhetoric, which profoundly disturbs me.

    It’s that notion, exemplified by the worldview of Ta-Nehisi Coates, that blacks are held down solely by external forces, mostly “people who believe they are white.” This leads to rejection of personal agency, a problem which those black intellectuals with the courage to take on Coates have pretty much uniformly highlighted. It extends more broadly to a rejection of the culturally-cultivated virtues that have allowed other groups to better their condition. Just look at the excuses and evasions that Okechukwu resorts to.

    • Replies: @szopen
  153. szopen says:
    @utu

    AFAIK Black Americans have far more self-esteem than whites. The “we wuz kangs” mentality may have helped them initially, but it seems that not during last 4 decades.

    (Yeah, I know some are arguing that the black-white gap is narrowing still, but the problem is checking whether the “blacks” and “whites” refers to the same population as before).

  154. szopen says:
    @K-Drama Kumiho

    I’d argue that _if_ the hereditarian hypothesis is wrong, _then_ one could argue that it’s not racism or discrimination which holds blacks down, but rather the toxic culture of “we are victims”.

    Of course, the Jensen’s criticism of “x factor” would apply also here (i.e. that this culture would have to made, on average, the same debilitating effect on all American blacks, no matter of their SES etc).

  155. Jason Liu says:
    @Okechukwu

    Ah, the old list of “black inventors” that turn out to be cogs in the machine with tangential involvement in developing “their” inventions. I’m sure those names will be corroborated by mainstream history.

    Generally I am not sympathetic to strict HBD hierarchies, but you’ve revealed yourself as a joke.

    PS: The egalitarian mindset is a white invention, and a delusional one at that. Free yourself from it.

  156. Jason Liu says:
    @Pat Boyle

    All historical evidence shows gunpowder came to Europe from the East. As did gunpowder weapons.

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
  157. @utu

    He is embarrassingly self contradictory but it’s extremely common, indeed part of intelligence challenge is to fight against self contradictions all the time.

  158. @RaceRealist88

    I don’t said this.. What fallacy?? An?

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  159. @Santoculto

    Yes you did. The fallacy is post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  160. @RaceRealist88

    Yes, in your alternative reality, i did…

  161. @RaceRealist88

    P1: Cold winter happened before increase in IQ/intelligence

    an**

    it’s not the opposite* ;)

    this sentence don’t make sense.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  162. @Santoculto

    Yes, in your alternative reality, i did…

    Go back and reread your comment. You said cold winter preceded an increase in intelligence, meaning that cold winter caused IQ/intelligence.

    this sentence don’t make sense.

    It does. Get your reading comp up.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  163. szopen says:

    Yall guys, you know what? I realised I hate both hereditarian and environmental hypothesis.

    For a long time I ridiculed environmentalists, becasue they were always inventing new explanations, and pretty much could interpret any evidence as being in favour of environmental hypothesis (“blacks score worse in tests because of low self-esteem! Oh, they have HIGHER self-esteem than whites? You see, this proves how discriminated against they are, as even though they have high self-esteem they score worse!”).

    But some time ago I thought that actually the same can be said for hereditarian hypothesis.

    The black-white gap has not narrowed – see, that proves the gap is immutable and proves biological basis!
    The black-white gap has narrowed – I can immedietely find explanation why this is actually predicted by hereditarian hypothesis: (1) the gap is not fully genetical, so it can be narrowed by 1/3 or even half (2) tabout 10% of Black marraiges are black/white couples, whose children usually count as black, hence of course gap HAS to narrow!

    I keep trying to think about things which could not be explained by one or the other theory, and except regression to the mean (or genetic tests, which are sf right now) I can think about anything.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Santoculto
  164. @RaceRealist88

    NO. just no. Re-read you but i give up, i already explained thousand times and you still don’t understood.

    I believe that humans were becoming ”smarter”/future-oriented/abstract-oriented DURING their migrations from X place to Y place and when they arrived in very harsh places they stopped to evolve their intelligence because TOO constantly COLD [or hot or dry] instead to select for HIGHER CREATIVITY, it limitates.

    More unpredictable or variable is the ”behavior” of environment more likely to select for higher creativity [abstract future oriented thinking /behavioral plasticity].

    And that it’s likely they evolved OR better, increase the PROPORTION [of people] and EXPRESSION [of this features: abstract and future-oriented thinking] specially when they arrived in temperate environments exactly because this climate is the most variable of all.

    My main question is: how humans were capable to arrive in very distant places without already have increased their intelligence//abstract-future-thinking**

  165. @szopen

    ”The black-white gap has not narrowed – see, that proves the gap is immutable and proves biological basis!”

    Because black-white IQ gap has no narrowed it’s doesn’t mean that

    is immutable because its biological basis.

    It’s immutable at

    individual levels

    and

    by now.

    The only certified way that ”make” ”blacks” quantitatively smart’er’ as ”whites” would be via positive and negative [cognitive] eugenics [people always think eugenics is only about increase intelligence, lol, nazi eugenics proves that it's not always like that] = change in selective pressures of this population OR dumbing down whites [on avg].

  166. @szopen

    I think the phenomenon of ”regression to the mean” would not be exactly or restricly what we habituates to think but… why a couple with higher cognitive skills is more prone to have kids with reduced cognitive skills THAN with increased*

    Higher cognitive skill and other type of increased expression of any intellectual features seems comparable with higher height where the same regression ”to the” mean tend to happens. The final borders of phenotypical variation and expressivity of this phenotypes.

  167. @Santoculto

    I believe that humans were becoming ”smarter”/future-oriented/abstract-oriented DURING their migrations from X place to Y place and when they arrived in very harsh places they stopped to evolve their intelligence because TOO constantly COLD [or hot or dry] instead to select for HIGHER CREATIVITY, it limitates.

    If this is true, we would need at least a reasonable mechanism for this to be true – perhaps that challenges in warm or hot climates were more diverse or “novel”, in that the individual would be unprepared by rote learning or other instincts for dealing with.

    I’m not sure if this is true. There’s more biodiversity in warmer areas but does that increase the number of novel challenges? Would general cleanliness prevent them all? If there are more types of hostile animals, would standardized forms of defense protect the humans? Would it promote instead less social cooperation if tribes can splinter more easily, and then prevent social cooperation(which seems to have had the greatest promotion in intelligence, presumably, creativity?)

    Furthermore, “creativity” is something which I feel is poorly defined and needs to be researched more. Working off Dr. Barbara Oakley’s theories on learning, creativity appears to be the result of chunked knowledge, which is then recombined – often unconsciously – to solve problems. This would suggest that some combination of lack of self-inhibition, widespread general knowledge, and some other neurological factors we haven’t quite captured. Perhaps even consistent sleep.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @RaceRealist88
  168. @Daniel Chieh

    I’m not sure if this is true. There’s more biodiversity in warmer areas but does that increase the number of novel challenges? Would general cleanliness prevent them all? If there are more types of hostile animals, would standardized forms of defense protect the humans? Would it promote instead less social cooperation if tribes can splinter more easily, and then prevent social cooperation(which seems to have had the greatest promotion in intelligence, presumably, creativity?)

    I think it’s different when we have a place where there are dangers ”all the time” BUT the climate itself compensates. It’s select for short-term thinking to deal with this everyday challenges.

    Too cold climates also select for short-term thinking but in different ways OR levels. Inuits are ”short-term”/practical thinkers as any intertropical human groups BUT they are not in the same levels. Also, lower levels of social complexity, deal with different people’s for example, tends to select against higher abstract thinkers.

    I think short-term thinking itself may reduce cooperation because it’s tend to be more instinctive/impulsive, but i don’t think intra-group cooperation is lower in most of intertropical hunter gatherers groups than among extra-tropical ones.

    Furthermore, “creativity” is something which I feel is poorly defined and needs to be researched more. Working off Dr. Barbara Oakley’s theories on learning, creativity appears to be the result of chunked knowledge, which is then recombined – often unconsciously – to solve problems. This would suggest that some combination of lack of self-inhibition, widespread general knowledge, and some other neurological factors we haven’t quite captured. Perhaps even consistent sleep.

    I necessarily don’t think creativity is poorly defined, it’s basically to think in different ways to solve known OR novel problems. It’s indeed reasoning per se. Indeed all things we have it’s due to creativity. I have impression because increase of self-domestication creativity became rare and/or split from what we call ”intelligence”. What we understand unilaterally as ”intelligence” in the truth mean ”capacity to memorize/internalize and to use creative inventions”.

    Usually environment decide the destiny of living beings. Humans are the only ones, because its very developed self-awareness, which can challenge the [usually] big influence of environment in your evolutionary path. I also don’t think intertropical groups ”no have creativity”, very obvious they have, but that novel environments have selected or increased creativity BUT maybe, not among all people, but some people, if every human community is hierarchical. OR, when some tribes increased their [avg] intelligence, those who are more creative also follows this evolution.

    Also we can think if when humans master some environment they tend to explore new lands accumulating more culture/knowledge [and requiring higher memory to recall them]. Inuits and other subpolar groups inherited many cultural practices as ”animal” skin clothes and invent news as iglu.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  169. @Daniel Chieh

    If this is true, we would need at least a reasonable mechanism for this to be true – perhaps that challenges in warm or hot climates were more diverse or “novel”, in that the individual would be unprepared by rote learning or other instincts for dealing with.

    Dobzhansky (1950: 221) notes that “Tropical environments provide more evolutionary challenges than do the environments of temperate and cold lands.

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMjMwNy8yNzgyNjMwNg==/10.2307%4027826306.pdf

    So the fact that higher intelligence evolved in Eurasia due to the extreme cold/novel environments is on shaky ground.

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @notanon
    , @Wizard of Oz
  170. @Santoculto

    when they arrived in very harsh places they stopped to evolve their intelligence

    Evolution doesn’t stop.

    More unpredictable or variable is the ”behavior” of environment more likely to select for higher creativity [abstract future oriented thinking /behavioral plasticity].

    Rushton would like you to believe that it’s more predictable in colder climates and therefore planning ahead was possible which increased intelligence. That’s part of the cold winter theory.

    Modern brains/bodies were already formed in Africa before the migration. That’s something you seem to forget.

    specially when they arrived in temperate environments exactly because this climate is the most variable of all.

    Do you think that Africa has one set climate (hot and dry)?

    My main question is: how humans were capable to arrive in very distant places without already have increased their intelligence//abstract-future-thinking**

    It was already formed in Africa. Specific adaptations occured once Homo sapiens migrated into colder climes (physiological: https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/30/human-physiological-adaptations-to-climate/) (and physical: wide pelves for heat retention: https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/04/homo-neanderthalis-vs-homo-sapiens-sapiens-who-is-stronger-implications-for-racial-strength-differences/).

    It also helped that, as I wrote in the article on strength differences between Homo sapiens and Neanderthals, that Homo sapiens had narrower pelves and therefore were quicker than the wide-pelved Neanderthals (each pelvis is a specific adaption to climate).

    In conclusion, human cold adaptation in the form of increased metabolism and insulation seems to have occurred during recent evolution in populations, but cannot be developed during a lifetime in cold conditions as encountered in temperate and arctic regions. Therefore, we mainly depend on our behavioral skills to live in and survive the cold.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4861193/

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @res
    , @notanon
  171. @Santoculto

    Novel problems would select for improved ability to associate only if only novel answers helped solve those problems, but I’m not sure if that is true. If the solution to “red-colored animals” is to avoid them and the solution for “large, predatory” animals is to defend/kill them, then the fact that both grey wolves and dire wolves exist doesn’t necessarily select for innovative methods, but innervate around known solutions.

    From my understanding based on current neuroscience, we are aware that knowledge exists as “nodules” on nerves, which are then chunked such that they occur together in a consistent pattern; depending on the frequency of path by which a set of knowledge is used, the more innervated with white matter or myelinated that it has. Processing becomes faster and more fluid.

    So to find new solutions, some things appear to have to be there: the chunks of knowledge to be hybridized, a novel problem or objective, and some period of incubation. Some sort of idea generator motors this, possibly associated with working memory(which seems to be a set of temporary chemicals which can hold concepts); most ideas generated are totally worthless, such as dreams of walking on light or other mostly subconscious gibberish, but some reconceptualize chunks of knowledge into ways that are useful. This produces “ah hah” moments, learning and I’ll say, overall creativity as well.

    This all seems to be a fairly sensitive process, such that disease load would presumably affect it quite adversely.

    • Replies: @res
    , @Santoculto
  172. @RaceRealist88

    Evolution doesn’t stop.

    Yes, sometimes or often stop, regress OR conserve. I think most part of time species conserve themselves than evolve specially when they find their balance with the environment.

    Do you think that Africa has one set climate (hot and dry)?

    OBVIOUSLY not. But no have large continental portions with temperate climate.

    Rushton would like you to believe that it’s more predictable in colder climates and therefore planning ahead was possible which increased intelligence. That’s part of the cold winter theory.
    Modern brains/bodies were already formed in Africa before the migration. That’s something you seem to forget.

    Yess, and you forgot to pay whole attention to my comment where i said ”i don’t think ‘africans’ –no have creativity –”.

    I don’t think he believed ”colder climates is more predictable”, any source* any quote*

    I believe because lower termic amplitude this types of extreme climates become more predictable but respectively in different ways.

    in temperate and arctic regions

    But temperate regions tend to be quite different than arctic or polar.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  173. @Santoculto

    Yes, sometimes or often stop, regress OR conserve.

    Evolution has no direction, it’s not teleological so your words are meaningless. Evolution just happens, there is no “goal” or “direction”.

    OBVIOUSLY not. But no have large continental portions with temperate climate.

    Right but there is no one constant climate through out the continent. There are semi-wet places in Africa, but I’m not knowledgeable in that aspect. There are numerous climates and ecosystems in Africa.

    I don’t think he believed ”colder climates is more predictable”, any source* any quote*

    He did.

    I believe because lower termic amplitude this types of extreme climates become more predictable but respectively in different ways.

    Right. Subjective ways. Subjective ways that you can shoehorn things to fit what you’d like it to say.

    But temperate regions tend to be quite different than arctic or polar.

    But they’re more similar to arctic and polar than to tropical.

  174. @RaceRealist88

    any source* any quote*

    Check his book.

  175. @RaceRealist88

    Evolution has no direction, it’s not teleological so your words are meaningless. Evolution just happens, there is no “goal” or “direction”.

    What would you call happened in Rat Utopia?

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  176. res says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Therefore, we mainly depend on our behavioral skills to live in and survive the cold.

    It is interesting that you consider this important enough to emphasize (bolding). Which kind of behavioral skills do you think are most relevant? Is intelligence one of those?

    What do you think are possible explanations for the correlation of IQ with latitude seen in Japan?

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000949

    Thanks for your earlier references to Eppig’s work. Here is one example: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44888621_Parasite_Prevalence_and_the_Worldwide_Distribution_of_Cognitive_Ability

    From the abstract:

    Infectious disease remains the most powerful predictor of average national IQ when temperature, distance from Africa, gross domestic product per capita and several measures of education are controlled for.

    Looking at Table 1 we see that DALY disease (the logarithm of it) and winter high temperature correlate with average IQ at -0.82 and -0.72 respectively and also correlate 0.71 with each other (both also correlate about -0.4 with the logarithm of the distance from central Africa). So evidence for the importance of disease, but hardly evidence against the importance of cold winters. An interesting question is how each would correlate with phenotypic vs. genotypic IQ if such data was available.

    Table 3 shows the results for a multiple regression model. DALY disease and winter high temperature have similar p-values. One interesting issue (uncommented on in the paper AFAICT) is that the VIF (variance inflation factor) for DALY disease is 6. Per this page a VIF of over 4 indicates multicollinearity may be a problem and requires further investigation: https://onlinecourses.science.psu.edu/stat501/node/347

    I wish they had done an ANOVA. And perhaps presented other models including different subsets of their explanatory variables.

    This excerpt from the discussion seems fairly reasonable except for “large margin” which I think is an overstatement of the results:

    Multiple regression shows that, of infectious disease, temperature, evolutionary novelty and AVED, infectious disease is the best predictor of intelligence by a large margin. The effects of years of education are not significant, while temperature and evolutionary novelty seem to have distinct predictive power beyond infectious disease. Although this model cannot rule out the independent effect of distance from central Africa, this effect is difficult to interpret because of the doubt cast on the theory underlying this variable (Wicherts et al. 2010a). Although the effects of education and GDP per capita are not statistically significant when other factors are controlled for, this is not to say that these factors are not involved. A nation of more intelligent individuals is likely to produce a higher GDP, but a wealthier nation is also more able to pay for public education, as well as public medical and sanitation services. An indirect link between education and intelligence may also exist, as a better-educated population may be more interested in public health measures—leading to increased IQ by reducing parasite stress—provided that education includes information about germ theory and hygiene. These sources of endogeneity must be considered when interpreting our findings (and see below). It should also be mentioned that we are not arguing that global variation in intelligence is only caused by parasite stress. Rather, variation in intelligence is probably caused by a variety of factors, including those we have mentioned here as well as factors that are yet unknown.

    Notice the final two sentences.

    And here is a look at temperature and IQ: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000917
    The paper is available at libgen. One nice feature of that paper is that Table 2 contains a listing of their data for all countries and explicitly states which IQ scores are calculated and which are estimates (and Table 4 gives correlations for both subgroups as well as all countries). That data could be handy for reproducing their analysis. It looks like it could be converted to a spreadsheet with a little effort. Perhaps I should do my own ANOVA, etc.?

    The paper PDF conveniently includes the three comments mentioned at the link above. I think the latter two provide a good sample of the arguments in play here. In particular, section 4. A concluding comment of the Hunt and Sternberg response makes clear where the “hot buttons” are.

    It is interesting to see this paper also included an Editorial note on controversial papers at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605000954
    PDF of that is also at libgen.

    • Replies: @res
    , @RaceRealist88
  177. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    This all seems to be a fairly sensitive process, such that disease load would presumably affect it quite adversely.

    Could you break down how you see this in terms of:
    1. Evolutionary pressure on intelligence.
    2. Phenotypic intelligence in individuals.

    Disease load seems much more obviously relevant to 2. than to 1. for me. However, I am interested in arguments for why disease load might affect the evolution of intelligence.

    I’ll start the ball rolling by providing one. Evolutionary pressure for metabolically expensive higher intelligence might be lessened by disease effects on phenotype resulting in the metabolic expense remaining while lessening the resultant intelligence. Put another way, a big brain which is ineffective due to disease load is still metabolically expensive (as well as retaining the pelvis size issues of big brains).

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Daniel Chieh
  178. @Daniel Chieh

    Novel problems would select for improved ability to associate only if only novel answers helped solve those problems, but I’m not sure if that is true. If the solution to “red-colored animals” is to avoid them and the solution for “large, predatory” animals is to defend/kill them, then the fact that both grey wolves and dire wolves exist doesn’t necessarily select for innovative methods, but innervate around known solutions.

    Well, i think body-adaptations also can be described as ”creativity” if all novel adaptations are creative, thinking in creativity as large concept, but we are talking about human abstract thinking, predictive/cultural and not body-adaptations directly caused by long term environmental interactions/pressures.

    Nonhuman beings are selected/adapted or evolved by the environments they are. Even this process also happens among humans, ”we” have bigger awareness, if compared with other beings, of our sorrounds and may can anticipate, predict or think in ways to adapt.

    This all seems to be a fairly sensitive process, such that disease load would presumably affect it quite adversely.

    So you think it’s impossible to become smarter in high disease load*

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  179. res says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Evolution has no direction, it’s not teleological so your words are meaningless. Evolution just happens, there is no “goal” or “direction”.

    I disagree. I think it is quite meaningful (and yes I know there are philosophical quibbles) to say both of these:

    - Evolution has the goal (perhaps “result” is better?) of increasing fitness in a given environment.
    - Evolution of measurable traits within a particular group at a particular time may very well have a direction. This direction need not be constant across time or groups.

    We can argue about the details of what Santoculto said in his response to you:

    Evolution doesn’t stop.

    Yes, sometimes or often stop, regress OR conserve. I think most part of time species conserve themselves than evolve specially when they find their balance with the environment.

    But IMHO he is making a sound (and important!) point.

    The evolution of the peppered moth provides an excellent illustration of his point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution

    Do you disagree with both directional evolution of moth color and its reversal being observed?

  180. szopen says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Nevertheless it seems that different climates may produce differences in brain structure within a species:

    Timothy Roth et al “Variation in Hippocampal Glial Cell Numbers in Food-Caching Birds from Different Climates”
    Also, earlier (2010)
    Timoty Roth et al “Learning capabilities enhanced in harsh environments: a common garden approach”

    http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2010/05/29/rspb.2010.0630?sid=1580b0b0-1c12-4ba1-abd8-2e0bc92fd7fd

    Now, of course you would say that for food-caching birds it’s different and that pressure for having better memory is not the same as pressure for higher intelligence, and puzzles he gave to birds are not measuring, arguably, the general intelligence [1]. But given it is within-species difference and is being preserved in lab-reared birds (and hece, most likely heritable), and it’s unlikely that it’s caused by racism against chickadees from warmer climate it does seem to suggest that harsher climate may sometimes pose more challenges for at least some species, resulting in visible brain structure differences, no? The point about shorter days (hence less time for finding food) stands for humans too.

    OTOH, the “two different environmental extremes” does not seem to be very convincing.

    [1] from the 2010 paper:

    The problem-solving test involved removing galvanized steel washers (3.5 cm diameter, 1.5 cm diameter hole; roughly equal to the mass of the birds, approx. 15 g) covered with clear 3M acetate from a 3 × 5 grid of 1.5 cm wells drilled into a wooden board (40 × 18 cm) containing wax worms

  181. @RaceRealist88

    Evolution has no direction, it’s not teleological so your words are meaningless. Evolution just happens, there is no “goal” or “direction”.

    yessss, BUT it’s doesn’t mean evolution is TOTALLY random, just like, a bird evolved to human in one or two generations…

    So evolution don’t stop AND no have direction…. isn’t*

    ”evolution don’t stop” = teleological*

    Right but there is no one constant climate through out the continent. There are semi-wet places in Africa, but I’m not knowledgeable in that aspect. There are numerous climates and ecosystems in Africa.

    All climates are in some degree inconstant ”or’ variable at least in its typical weather behavior but i’m talking about the more variable climate: temperate.

    Right. Subjective ways. Subjective ways that you can shoehorn things to fit what you’d like it to say.

    hmmm. No.

    Different and not subjective.

    Colder climate is constant but, well, it’s cold, the air is already deadly if you’re not adapted or protected.

    Warmer climate, equatorial or even oceanic tropical is both constant, on avg. You will not die because you breathe tropical or equatorial air itself.

    Colder climate is challenge itself, Intertropical climates no. Temperate climates combine still more biodiversity [than colder regions] and period of intense cold and bigger thermic amplitude.

    But they’re more similar to arctic and polar than to tropical.

    Maybe you are confusing temperate [oceanic and continental variants] with cold climate, intermediary between polar and temperate climate, found in places as big portions of Canada/Cucknada.

  182. @res

    How explain increasing of human brains still in intertropical places*

    • Replies: @res
  183. res says:
    @Santoculto

    I am not sure I understand your point. My disease load (or cold) and evolution thoughts are more concerned with differing rates. So intelligence might increase in tropical (warm and disease laden) regions, but more slowly than in colder (and less disease laden) regions.

    P.S. Here is some WHO data for DALY by country for anyone who wants it: http://apps.who.int/gho/data/view.main.ENVDALYSBYCOUNTRYv

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  184. @Santoculto

    Well, i think body-adaptations also can be described as ”creativity” if all novel adaptations are creative, thinking in creativity as large concept, but we are talking about human abstract thinking, predictive/cultural and not body-adaptations directly caused by long term environmental interactions/pressures.

    I was referring to cultural adaption to environmental hazards, i.e. recognizing red-hued animals as dangerous and avoiding them. To follow on this example, if you lived in a place with dangerous animals, and you came up with the idea of “stab jaguar” so you won’t lose food you hunted, that’s one form of simple solution to a problem. If you came up with the idea of “bang loud noises to scare animals”, that’s another form of a solution to a problem. If you came up with the idea of “set a fire”, that’s yet another.

    All of the above are examples, at some point of individual ingenuity, before they become cultural knowledge. Non-human examples of this are rare, but we do see some versions of it in macaques that teach their children to “dip sweet potatoes in seawater” to improve the taste. This was recent – it was first observed in the 1950s, whereupon parents passed on this knowledge to their children, and now is commonly done by all macaques on the island. I would say that the first macaque that thought to “dip food in seawater” exhibited creative thinking, no?

    So you think it’s impossible to become smarter in high disease load*

    I think the brainstem, the “reptilian brain” is an example of how evolution can “stall” if something becomes to difficult to change; its the part of the brain that controls basic functions such as heartbeat, breathing and other essential living processes. It has remained mostly throughout its development; any alteration can cause lethal results, so its why humans and primates continue to operate with a brainstem that isn’t exactly optimized for a high vision-dependent lifestyle, for example.

    Likewise, I think if the learning process is as complex as illustrated above from B. Oakley’s work , then disease load that might impact one or more of its parts might derail it. It wouldn’t be as simple as “high disease makes dumb” but increased difficulty.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  185. Pat Boyle says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    I don’t see how your remarks are in opposition to mine. Perhaps I was unclear. Constantinople and Harfluer were sieges in the fifteenth century where guns and gunpowder played a crucial part. That was my point. The Chinese had used their resources of saltpeter when mixed with honey to create a series of fireworks. This was quite early but it did not lead directly to the guns and gunpowder that knocked down fortress walls or that led to hand cannons and small arms.

    Gunpowder was all over Europe in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries but it wasn’t of much use because it had poor properties for a battlefield weapon. Mix up a batch of homemade black powder and carry it around all day in your powder horn and when you go to use it will have separated again and be useless.

    True gunpowder is not just a simple mixture. It was a manufactured product made in royally authorized factories. The state kept tight control over the manufacturing of real (corned) gunpowder. Part of the process is to make cakes and then grind them up to the proper consistency for particular kinds of gunpowder. If you are careless in grinding – boom.

    Military historians generally credit the Italian campaign of Charles VIII as ending the high walls style of fortifications which had been the standard means of defending against the enemy since Jericho. This campaign signaled the start of the Gunpowder Era. You can trace when gunpowder came to a region by their style of walls. Note that The Great Wall of China while begun in Chin Zeaundi’s rein before Christ, it was still being built until the seventeenth century (the part Nixon and the tourists visit). No major new fortifications were built that way in Europe so late.

    So you might say that The Great Wall of China proves that China did not invent gunpowder. (Maybe that’s a bit to strong a statement).

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  186. Pat Boyle says:
    @utu

    You have a funny notion of what constitutes a ‘fact’. The idea that the Chinese invented gunpowder is popular in the popular press but not in the serious literature. Pleas read some military history. And please consider other ‘inventions’. You are not just wrong – you are impolite.

  187. @res

    Increase of brain size has been a marker of increase of human intelligence and humans have evolved firstly, what we know, in intertropical places, with higher infectious disease load. I’m talking about first increase of brain size/intelligence since first proto-humans.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  188. Pat Boyle says:
    @Jason Liu

    What you say is ahistorical. Saltpeter is not as common in Europe as it is in China and India. It is certainly true that saltpeter was exploited in the East long before it was in the West. But gunpowder is a specific manufactured product that was invented in fifteenth century Europe.

    True gunpowder – that powder-like substance that was useful in guns – was in most places a royal monopoly made in purpose made factories. It’s exact manufacturing process was kept a state secret. China had made saltpeter and honey fireworks many centuries earlier, but that was not gunpowder.

    Joseph Needham a virulently anti American communist may be the source of a lot of this pro-Chinese propaganda. China has probably been the most advanced civilization for most of history and may be again. The Chinese seem to do real well on IQ tests normalized on Europeans. And it is certainly true that China before the fifteenth century had many if not most of the important inventions made anywhere. But the Chinese did not invent everything. They did not invent gunpowder unless you torture the definition of the term “invent”.

    • Replies: @res
  189. @Daniel Chieh

    I was referring to cultural adaption to environmental hazards, i.e. recognizing red-hued animals as dangerous and avoiding them. To follow on this example, if you lived in a place with dangerous animals, and you came up with the idea of “stab jaguar” so you won’t lose food you hunted, that’s one form of simple solution to a problem. If you came up with the idea of “bang loud noises to scare animals”, that’s another form of a solution to a problem. If you came up with the idea of “set a fire”, that’s yet another.

    Ok, i understood now.

    All of the above are examples, at some point of individual ingenuity, before they become cultural knowledge. Non-human examples of this are rare, but we do see some versions of it in macaques that teach their children to “dip sweet potatoes in seawater” to improve the taste. This was recent – it was first observed in the 1950s, whereupon parents passed on this knowledge to their children, and now is commonly done by all macaques on the island. I would say that the first macaque that thought to “dip food in seawater” exhibited creative thinking, no?

    Yes, for sure.

    ”Likewise, I think if the learning process is as complex as illustrated above from B. Oakley’s work , then disease load that might impact one or more of its parts might derail it. It wouldn’t be as simple as “high disease makes dumb” but increased difficulty.”

    Even i don’t doubt that disease load have some impact i doubt if it will be significant at the point to be the most important factor, of course, i’m totally open to change my views if it is proved.

    There is ongoing the process of patologization of lower cognitive skills exactly as if is a disease or a mental condition.

    Maybe we can debate that when the organism is exposed to more micro-invaders it tend to extra-adapt against them [and with less time to evolve to higher intelligence] while in less micro-populated places, organisms, i mean, all or majority, will be more free to evolve, less dependent, with a less factor to worry. We have a very common trends or correlation between load disease and intelligence among other species** It’s a universal trend*

  190. @Santoculto

    … in places with higher infectious disease-load, i want to mean that seems, this factor don’t prevent early human intelligence evolution.

  191. Pat Boyle says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Santoculto was simply referring to a common theory why the peoples who left Africa and went north also became smart. The theory may be wrong of course but it isn’t a logical fallacy. He is probably in the majority. Many anthropologists believe the same.

    You’re right. Maybe Latin is less well understood by the readership than I presumed. But the intelligence of the readership of this blog is very high. I’m always learning something new here.

    I remember quoting – Post quo, ergo propter quo – to a sergeant who was teaching a class in Basic Training. I had trouble in the Army.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  192. res says:
    @Pat Boyle

    You seem to have responded to everyone on this topic but me (comment 149).

    It seems to me you are playing “No True Gunpowder” here.

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

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

    I of course have no argument with your assertions about the importance of European contributions to firearm and cannon technology and the resultant effects on fortifications. It’s just that those were not the invention of gunpowder.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  193. @Daniel Chieh

    What would you call happened in Rat Utopia?

    I don’t know what that is.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  194. Okechukwu says:
    @K-Drama Kumiho

    Okechukwu, the Once and Future Kang, writes:

    You’re the one exhibiting a kang mentality. You’re the one emotionally overwrought because I am loathe to endorse your hilariously misplaced superiority complex. You seem to be pleading for affirmation in hopes of ameliorating personal failings. People of your ilk are actually an interesting psychological study. It’s a psychosis wrapped up in low self-esteem, perhaps post-traumatic stress of some kind, or perhaps unrealized ambition which ultimately segues into scapegoating.

    “Stone Age” is a concept with an actual anthropological meaning. Koreans had been working metal for over two thousand years, so we were not “stone age” by definition.

    Yeah, I realize that Koreans weren’t literally a Neolithic people. Of course stone age in this context was a figure of speech.

    The pettiness and desperation of your insult speaks for itself. This outburst puts the rest of your gratuitous anti-Korean remarks in perspective.

    But my posts are defensive and reactive. You’re the initiating offender to whom I’m responding. I did apologize to all decent Asians prior to ripping you to shreds.

    Apparently you need pointed out to you that history did not just begin when Europeans began to exert an influence in Subsahran Africa.

    No I don’t. Remember, I wrote the following:

    Prior to that time Africans did engage and defeat European armies and settlers. Europeans were confined to small coastal enclaves and functioned as vassals to African kings. Europeans engaged in trade with Africans on equal terms because they couldn’t take anything by force, including slaves. They tried to raid African villages for slaves and were roundly defeated. Subsequent to that they made treaties and paid for the slaves.

    Your statement about Asian history shows laughable ignorance of European colonialism and influence in Asia, as well as gross ignorance of devastating intra-Asian conflict.

    I don’t suppose you have the perspicacity to appreciate how frightfully hypocritical you are. Doesn’t your ridiculous ideology ordinarily hold that colonialism was a force that registered somewhere between benign and beneficent, at least with reference to Africa? So now it would appear that colonialism frustrated national development in Asia but not in Africa. Is that correct? You intend to extenuate Asian failure as by-products of colonialism and conflict?

    Well,I posted links with dozens of Asian inventions, discoveries, and Nobel laureates, plus a general measure of per capita scientific output via peer-reviewed publications. You named four African-Americans.

    Those four African-Americans innovated and invented more modern technology than all of Asia combined. I could name a hell of a lot more than four. But four is all that is required.

    Wow, talk about a shameless double-standard. Your African-Americans are given full, undivided credit by you, despite working in an overwhelmingly white context, but Koreans get no credit for our contributions. Could you look any more bitter and desperate?

    African-American culture IS American culture. It’s impossible to disentangle one from the other. Which brings to mind, should we really ask people who invented Jazz, Rock & Roll, Soul, Blues, Hip-Hop, Rap, etc. to take a back seat to Koreans or Chinese, or whomever, in terms of intellectual prowess? I think not. I think the ones that have to copy their stuff are the inferior ones.

    Your very question just shows you don’t understand how group averages work versus the status of any given individual, nor grasp how admixture could impact genetically-regulated behavior.

    These are silly, rehashed, mumbo-jumbo talking points. First of all, you don’t have any inkling of any averages. No global, large sample size, culturally neutral or culturally inclusive survey of global intelligence has ever been done. To legitimately answer these questions you’d have to raise healthy children of different races on an island somewhere under proper scientific controls. Expose them to the same culture, education, diet, etc. Then you’ll have your answer and you won’t like that answer. But beyond the disqualifying ethical questions there’s the simple fact that it would be an unmitigated waste of time. Because to assess someone’s intelligence by virtue of outward phenotype requires a special kind of stupid. In other words, unless you’re profoundly stupid you should know, almost instinctively, that race and intelligence are utterly unconnected.

    Nature, by the way, doesn’t do averages. Either an organism has something or it doesn’t. That’s why there isn’t a single chimpanzee that can do algebra or operate an automobile.

    I’m not saying anything to you that is unusual or extraordinary. The Internet bubbles and echo-chambers you frequent tend to enforce a false sense of reality. I’m the reality. I’m what you’ll find if you ever take your sorry ass to a brick and mortar scientific conference. Do so in your own South Korea, where there are very few black people. Let’s see you explain, demonstrate and quantify how blacks are supposedly inferior to whites and Asians. In fact link me to any credible South Korean scientist, geneticist or academician who shares your views. Good luck. You’ll need it.

    • Replies: @gda
  195. @res

    I’ll respond to you and everyone else tonight. Wifi at the place I’m at at the moment is screwy and I don’t like typing long comments where I have to keep looking back and forth at different things in mobile.

  196. Okechukwu says:
    @Pat Boyle

    Santoculto was simply referring to a common theory why the peoples who left Africa and went north also became smart. The theory may be wrong of course but it isn’t a logical fallacy. He is probably in the majority. Many anthropologists believe the same.

    Then name a single credible anthropologist that believes that nonsense.

    Please stop making stuff up. It’s painful to see, particularly as what you’re claiming is so demonstrably wrong.

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
  197. notanon says:

    two stages to it imo

    1) before farming: physical selection e.g. long cold winters forcing selection for higher IQ and lower time preference

    2) after farming: cultural selection through population density leading to more complex societies with more competition for the more cognitive roles

    i think the biome idea applies in both cases but separately:

    1) hunter-gatherer baseline intelligence and time preference increasing more or less linearly by latitude to the north (or south) from the equator

    2) civilization layer based on the ease with which each biome could be made suitable for high population density agriculture and the consequent competition for the cushiest spots in a more complex society.

    so for example in the first stage say the IQ range was 70-85 with 70 at the equator and the eskimo equivalent in the far north (ANE?) being the smartest (but still not very smart) at 85 with another +15 IQ points available from civilization if and when people in a particular biome were able to develop high density agriculture (wit the mid-latitude biomes getting there first).

    if correct then overlaying the 1st stage and 2nd stage biome may produce a better fit.

  198. notanon says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Evolution has no direction, it’s not teleological so your words are meaningless. Evolution just happens, there is no “goal” or “direction”.

    sure it does: the maximum possible amount of life

  199. Factorize says:

    Daniel, thank you for responding.

    I think the posters on this thread should become more engaged with the genetic technologies that will greatly reshape our futures and are now rapidly approaching. I am not clear why so many are so heavily invested in speculating about what might have happened thousands of years ago.

    At no time in history has there been the possibility that over 1 thousand IQ points could be added to human intelligence. The social consequences of such a development will be profound.

    For thousands of years there has been a stable class equilibrium structure present in all human populations. Those with a relative IQ advantage of 1 SD have provided educational, medical legal and other services for those less fortunate. There was symbiosis. Adding 4 SD to IQ would move a child from the back of the line to the front of the line. Today based on IQ life is highly predictable, even over multi-generational time scales, this will soon no longer be true.

    What this might mean for our societies is very unclear. One probable outcome will be that even the addition of a few perhaps (3 or 4 SD IQ) will lead to the unwinding of the custodial state. There are entire communities that require nearly continuous nurturing in order to help their members make it through life. Adding a significant amount of IQ would result in governments around the world withdrawing from service provisions.

    Another entirely plausible outcome will be that a very substantial divergence in group IQ could soon become obvious. Some level of resources (though not necessarily excessive) will be required to enhance IQ. Broadly, Asian and white populations will have access to such procedures. Yet, I wonder to what extent Sub-Saharan populations will have such access. A large scale IQ divergence could have devastating consequences. People of extreme intelligence would likely be able to eliminate most if not all of the value added in African exports.

    {As an aside, I am impressed how all human communities have been psychometrically aware over the last many thousands of years. In order for a class structure to emerge, considerable insight into the nature of human intelligence was necessary. In Spearman’s breakthrough 1904 paper, he was able to establish g as a mathematically derivable quantity. However, this was based on asking teachers for their ranking of their students on the basis of intelligence. Thus, Spearman’s results in some sense only restated what teachers had likely been aware for a very long time before, probably dating back thousands of years. From this phenotype information, a society based on intelligence gradations emerged with a typical range of 2 or 3 SD.}

    Here’s a reference for selection for increased cognitive ability in Eurasians over the last 3000-4000 years.

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/02/28/109678

  200. notanon says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Do you think that Africa has one set climate (hot and dry)?

    there could be an infinite number of environments where food was available all year round but i think the critical element is having an environment where food isn’t available for a substantial part of the year *requiring* the evolution of lower time preference to survive.

    personally i wonder if the evolution of lower time preference was the critical precursor magnifying the benefit of evolved intelligence and thus speeding it up?

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  201. @res

    That seems fair – and it could simply be that pressures for higher intellect might not matter in an environment of extremely high disease load; if planning is only likely to manifest as a benefit over thirty years, for example, and the average lifespan isn’t that long, then it would select for disease resistance over intelligence.

    The difference might be the difference between horses that grow up being bred for, say, weight-bearing versus horses left to live in the wetlands. The latter might evolve more resistance to wet hoof disease but its extremely unlikely that they will be as strong as the former, even though strength might benefit them too. It just doesn’t help them as much in the environment.

  202. notanon says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Dobzhansky (1950: 221) notes that “Tropical environments provide more evolutionary challenges than do the environments of temperate and cold lands.”

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMjMwNy8yNzgyNjMwNg==/10.2307%4027826306.pdf

    So the fact that higher intelligence evolved in Eurasia due to the extreme cold/novel environments is on shaky ground.

    It doesn’t require more difficult challenges only new ones.

    Say group A evolves enough intelligence to deal with their initial environment A and then stop while a breakaway group moves to environment B which has new challenges which the smarter ones adapt to first, thus bumping the average IQ up a point or two each time – so the northernmost population is standing on the shoulders of all the previous layers.

    Logically i think it could have happened either of two ways: 1) a gradual increase as populations moved to each novel environment or 2) winter forcing the evolution of lower time preference and lower time preference magnifying the evolution of intelligence (or a bit of both).

  203. Okechukwu says:
    @notanon

    there could be an infinite number of environments where food was available all year round but i think the critical element is having an environment where food isn’t available for a substantial part of the year *requiring* the evolution of lower time preference to survive.

    Why don’t you explain why food would be unavailable all year round in the northern hemisphere. As a mater of fact, cold and ice are great preservatives. Food could be buried in permafrost. Caves could become primitive refrigerators. Animals would be preserved where they fell, affording abundant scavenging opportunities.

    I can’t overstate the tremendous advantage of cold and ice in the preservation of food. Consider some of the recent natural disasters we’ve had. With power loss and lack of refrigeration, people can starve. Literally. As an example, in anticipation of a hurricane and potential power loss, people are asked to collect as much ice as possible so as to be able to preserve food for as long as possible. People are also asked to collect as much water as possible. These warnings and pleadings should clue you in as to which environment is most conducive to the maintenance of adequate food supplies. Warmth destroys food, cold preserves it. Water of course is critical, and the northern hemisphere has abundant, easily accessible water.

    • Replies: @notanon
  204. utu says:
    @Factorize

    Spearman’s breakthrough 1904 paper, he was able to establish g as a mathematically derivable quantity.

    He just stumbled on the property of covariance matrices w/o realizing that the covariance matrix is always both symmetric and positive semi-definite which implies that eigenvalues are non-negative and the largest eigenvector maximizes the Rayleigh quotient, i.e., explains the largest fraction of variance. In other words there is always some factor that explains the most of variance. The profundity of Spearman’s realization was akin to the discovery made by Monsieur Jourdain:

    MONSIEUR JOURDAIN: Oh, really? So when I say: Nicole bring me my slippers and fetch my nightcap,” is that prose?

    PHILOSOPHY MASTER: Most clearly.

    MONSIEUR JOURDAIN: Well, what do you know about that! These forty years now I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing it!

    —Molière, The Bourgeois Gentleman, 1670

    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @res
    , @szopen
  205. @Factorize

    Well, I haven’t actually heard of anything that will allow gene editing to that extent of more than 1 SD, probably from embryo selection. BGI Shenzhen was still working on it and I believe that it might be a more complex problem than we apprehend.

    That said, we probably will see more elite sorting as children from more cognitive-valuing cultures continue to gain the best benefit from their parents and governments to aid them; e.g. I did research myself when I found out that my wife was pregnant with my son, and pretty much have tried to control variables for nutrition, etc. as much as possible so that our son will hopefully be as healthy and intelligent as possible(this included increased consumption of omega-3 based on http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745691612462585 ). I’m sure that I’m not the only one who is doing this, and education is a highly paid and respected field in Asia, so I’m certain that anything that can intervene to promote competence there will find an audience, and surely among the many snake-oil salesmen, some methods might actually find real validity.

    My personal suspicion is that it’ll lead to an ever more stratified world, and possibly promote even more conflict due to overproduction of elites. Its hard to make predictions, though, especially about the future.

  206. res says:
    @res

    I created a spreadsheet from the Templer and Arikawa Table 2 data and added in the WHO infectious disease DALY data from the link I gave above. With that I was basically able to recreate the main results from both papers. I did some additional scatterplots looking at outliers and the most striking thing I saw was the frequency of high IQ outliers (relative to Winter mean high temp, logged DALY, and skin color) being Asian countries.

    Stepping back, I am amazed by the -0.92 correlation between skin color and IQ. Templer and Arikawa got their skin color data from https://www.amazon.it/Razze-popoli-della-Renato-Biasutti/dp/B00GZKSDBW
    Biasutti, R. (1967). Le Razze e i Popoli Della Terra. Torino, Italy: Unione pipografiza-Editrice Torinese.

    I found their reasoning intriguing:

    Skin color was conceptualized as a variable closely related to temperature. It is viewed by the present authors as a multigenerational reflection of the climates one’s ancestors have lived in for thousands of years. Another reason to predict correlations of IQ with temperature and skin color is the product–moment correlation reported by Beals, Smith, and Dodd (1984) of 0.62 between cranial capacity and distance from the equator. Beals et al. based their finding on 20,000 individual crania from every continent and representing 122 ethnically distinguishable populations. Jensen (1998) reasoned that natural selection would favor a smaller head with a less spherical shape because of better heat dissipation in hot climates. Natural selection in colder climates would favor a more spherical head to accommodate a larger brain and to have better heat conservation.

    Regarding DALY and infectious diseases in general, I earlier questioned how important that might have been in evolution. I’d also note that I suspect DALY correlates highly with the presence of broadly available first world medicine. Given that, how much of the observed correlation is from the reverse causal path of:
    IQ -> presence of first world medicine -> low DALY ?
    I’m pretty sure IQ can’t cause (historical) cold weather so that seems like an argument in favor of the cold weather hypothesis.

  207. res says:
    @utu

    And the presence of a single principal component (aka g) which dominates the variance explained is purely a coincidence. Got it.

    • Replies: @utu
  208. notanon says:
    @Okechukwu

    Why don’t you explain why food would be unavailable all year round in the northern hemisphere. As a mater of fact, cold and ice are great preservatives. Food could be buried in permafrost. Caves could become primitive refrigerators.

    right – food would be available all year as long as people gathered and stored it in advance before winter set in aka lower time preference

  209. @res

    The so-called “exotic” diseases in the tropics have long been noted both by travelers, explorers, etc., as well as by physicians. One obvious reason is that the hot climate present during all the year and the larger volume of rains directly affect the formation of breeding grounds, the larger number and variety of natural reservoirs and animal diseases that can be transmitted to humans (zoonosis), the largest number of possible insect vectors of diseases. It is possible also that higher temperatures may favor the replication of pathogenic agents both inside and outside biological organisms. Socio-economic factors may be also in operation, since most of the poorest nations of the world are in the tropics. Tropical countries like Brazil, which have improved their socio-economic situation and invested in hygiene, public health and the combat of transmissible diseases have achieved dramatic results in relation to the elimination or decrease of many endemic tropical diseases in their territory.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_disease#Relation_of_climate_to_tropical_diseases

    Duh!

    • Replies: @res
  210. Factorize says:

    Daniel,

    My comment was related to the discussion around post 133 of:

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-hsu-boundary/

    The potential for massive increases in human g is quite new to me.
    100 SD increases in human IQ would profoundly change life as we know it.

    Careful mate selection based upon genetic assessment could boost intelligence, and as you mentioned, selection among 10 embryos would increase IQ by 1 SD. CRISPR and other gene editing are clearly approaching.

    The modification and or selection of gametes would be another powerful technology.
    I will be very interested to know what the optimized geno-g of a gamete that I could produce might be. Yet, considering that there are roughly 2^^23 possibilities, I would suspect that such a gamete when fertilized with a similarly selected gamete of the other gender would exhibit a very extreme phenotype.

    It likely required many thousands of years to increase average human intelligence by 1 SD in a broadly defined group. Now, a 1 SD increase in IQ per generation using a simple and relatively inexpensive technology is already entirely plausible. We are now at the dawn of a new age of ever increasing human ability.

    This change in the psychometric landscape will have substantial implications for the elite. It is now becoming clear that everyone, not only the elite, has the innate genetic potential to create children of very high cognitive ability. The same technique that could select for a 1 SD increase in IQ for any parents to be could also be used to select for a 2 SD, 3 SD , 4 SD , 5 SD … increase in IQ per generation.

    There has been a restriction of range problem that has obscured what will happen when IQ soon begins its steady march to the stratosphere. Until now, there was a ceiling to top end IQ. When average IQ starts increasing, the social value of intelligence will evaporate. In a world of unlimited supply of high end IQ, what might be the expected equilibrium price of it be?

    However, if humans are squeamish about IQ enhancement, then I suppose that a full scale effort could be made to optimize the intelligence of other animals that have exhibited psychometric g such as mice, rats, crows, dogs, cats, raccoons, chimps, gorillas and others. There is no particular law of the universe that dictates that humans should forever be the most intelligent biological life form known in the universe. If we are not interested in enhancing our intelligence, then genetic engineering of other animals could be used to displace us. To believe that our place in the biological order is somehow outside of such scrutiny would be speciesist.

    How intelligent might a mouse be if 100 SD were added to its IQ? Without the same moral constraints that apply to human research I suppose that a genius level mouse or chimp should crop up any day. Our world could be filled with super intelligent animals and not so intelligent people.

    Planet of the Apes!
    Just don’t get those big hairy (don’t want to say it, but UGLY) gorillas angry.

    Of course, human equivalent computational power has already been achieved in a computer.
    A $1,000 home version is expected over the next few years.

    It is sad that the indecision related to advancing human IQ enhancement simply means that
    humans will become increasingly marginalized.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  211. res says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Duh!

    Come on Afrosapiens, you are better than that (I think, anyway).

    What is your point exactly? My point is that although I am well aware of increased disease rates in the tropics, medicine is also relevant (as your quote also observes) and I believe it is reasonable to think there is a causal path from higher IQ to decreased DALY as I described. Do you think it is unreasonable to believe a higher average country IQ makes it more likely for effective medical treatment to be widespread?

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  212. @Factorize

    The Woodley paper on ancient genomes uses the Piffer equation, and in that setting it causes less controversy.

    • Replies: @res
  213. @res

    I too am amazed by Templer’s data, and find the correlation extremely high. I did some work on it months ago, when Templer died, as part of a post in his memory, but haven’t been able to progress it because of needing to check up on the skin colour data.

    • Replies: @res
  214. szopen says:
    @utu

    Now, my statistics class was a long time ago, but IIRC you are missing the point.

    Sure, it indeed does for all covariance matrices (even for those in which covariance between the variables is zero) – but in this case we have a fact of positive correlation (i.e. there are no zeroes in eigenvectors).

    If you would put random noise data, you would get eigenvectors one pointing straight into one direction, and second straight into another direction. That would be indeed, not interesting. But the fact that whatever tests were devised, even those which were created in order to prove that “g” does not exist, they seem to always correlate IS interesting.

  215. utu says:

    Now, my statistics class was a long time ago

    Does not matter. These are not issues covered in statistics. More like in linear algebra only slightly moderately advanced.

    The rest of your comment is nonsense just showing you have no clue. You are not even Monsieur Jourdain.

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @szopen
  216. Earlier humans were more exposed to tropical diseases by lack of cultural knowledge as still today happen with many reminiscent hunter gathers communities. So instead just a matter of climate itself the lack of understanding of basic hygiene (specific cause and effect) helps to creates this dominance of environment on earlier human adaptations. If a group of smarter humans or even a group of average (100) humans were placed in natura in intertropical climates I don’t believe If they would become subconsciously disease-adapted as intertropical hunter gatherers.

  217. utu says:
    @res

    Again you are exhibiting bad faith. We have discussed the issue before many times. But I am well disposed to obstinate children today so I will try once again. Let say a given battery of tests produces k factors. The first two largest eigenvalues are g and s. And g>s. Here we make a judgment call and say that g is dominant because s/g<0.2. Let identify tests from the battery of the tests that have largest loadings of s. Create more similar tests and add them to battery of tests while removing some of the tests that have largest loading of g. You end up with new covariance matrix that after decomposition will produce s/g larger than before. By process like that you can make s/g equal to 1. Obviously you will object that one can't mess with the tests to which I will answer: says who? Did Spearman or Binet get their tests on Mt. Sinai or form Angel Moroni?

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @res
  218. szopen says:
    @utu

    Sure, maybe I have no clue, so help me here please. Even if you consider me a clueless idiot worthless of attention, your explanation may help the others, more intelligent than me.

    From my understanding, you can find always find a factor explaining the largest part of variation for bunch of variables, but if those variables are uncorrelated, the “largest part of variation” will actually be essentially the same as variation of one of those variables. This is not the same as Spearman’s finding.

    Ie. imagine covariance matrix

    X 0.7 0
    Y 0 0.5

    The eigenvector explaining the largest variance here would be [0.7 0], right? Where the largest variance would be actually the variance of the X variable, with none of the Y variance explained.
    This is, however, not what we are facing with the tests of cognitive abilities, hence I find your earlier post missing the point – how this is a comparable with “g” factor at all?

    • Replies: @utu
  219. Factorize says:

    Dr. Thompson, how much of an increase in IQ is suggested by that paper? It would be a truly startling result if the IQ gain found in the article were of significant magnitude. It would suggest that higher end cogntive ability in European populations is a recent development and that such higher abilities can rapidly manifest in real world accomplishments.

    It would be extremely informative if such studies could also be conducted in African and Asian populations.

    The genetic results are broadly reflective of European history. Might similar results apply to Asia? Did similar cognitive evolution actually occur in Europe and Asia over the last few thousand years as a result of the same set of forces such as increased population density, cognitive complexification etc. ? If so, it would indicate a manipulation that could select for higher IQ.

  220. @RaceRealist88

    Does “more evolutionary challenges” mean “more challenges which require enhanced cognitive ability in order to survive a produce and rear children to adulthood”?

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
    , @Daniel Chieh
  221. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @jason kennedy

    Better this than the endless stream of anti-semitic articles. The sad part is the the owner of this site is jewish himself (if i remember correctly ) and he is unwittingly making some people here anti-semitic by publishing articles that make people ‘hate’ jewish people.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  222. szopen says:
    @utu

    Say we have a large pool of cognitive tests. Then we make six larger batteries, consisting each time of randomly chosen tests. Then we carry the factor analysis each time, discover first factor, and call it “g” (g1, g2, g3…). Surely, as composition of the tests is random, if the factors discovered should depend on the composition of the battery then the g-loadings of a given test (g1-loading, g2-loading..) should not be highly correlated (g1 != g2 != g3 etc). OTOH, if the factor actually reflects the same latent variable, then g1 = g2 = g3 (roughly) and hence g-loadings should be highly correlated (say 0.85). Agreed?

    • Replies: @utu
  223. @res

    What is your point exactly? My point is that although I am well aware of increased disease rates in the tropics,

    Yet you just said that:

    Looking at Table 1 we see that DALY disease (the logarithm of it) and winter high temperature correlate with average IQ at -0.82 and -0.72 respectively and also correlate 0.71 with each other (both also correlate about -0.4 with the logarithm of the distance from central Africa). So evidence for the importance of disease, but hardly evidence against the importance of cold winters.

    So, duh!

    medicine is also relevant (as your quote also observes) and I believe it is reasonable to think there is a causal path from higher IQ to decreased DALY as I described. Do you think it is unreasonable to believe a higher average country IQ makes it more likely for effective medical treatment to be widespread?

    Except my link, nor any medical professional would never make the claim that IQ is needed to decrease the disease burden. Investment in sanitation and urbanization would isolate people from breeding grounds for mosquitoes, parasites and pathogenes, access to medicines would lower mortality but would hardly do anything for morbidity because there is no vaccine that is efficient for most tropical diseases in the long run.

    I did some additional scatterplots looking at outliers and the most striking thing I saw was the frequency of high IQ outliers (relative to Winter mean high temp, logged DALY, and skin color) being Asian countries.

    It’s the fraud, stupid. Those Asian scores will never make sense, no matter what predictive variable you test. They’re bogus.

    Stepping back, I am amazed by the -0.92 correlation between skin color and IQ.

    It’s the fraud, stupid. The African (and to some extent, South Asian) scores were made up to yield such a correlation. Duh!

    • Replies: @res
  224. @Wizard of Oz

    Kind of challenges that made humans evolve from the chimpanzees of central Africa (I mean, a common ancestor) instead of the Japanese macaque.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  225. szopen says:
    @utu

    You are clearly more knowledgeable and intelligent than me. I really do appreciate that nevertheless you have time and patience to explain things which are obvious to you, and which are out of reach for me, the below-Polish average stupid guy.

    So I would be deeply grateful if you would have time to look into my reasoning below.

    I always thought about different factor analysis techniques with graphical analogies. I will start by stating the obvious: say you have two variables, X and Y. You can plot them on a graph, with points representing the given observation, having two values x and having the [x,y] coordinates in the graph.

    The graphic analogy is that factor analysis tries to find reduce a number of dimensions, so the new axes in new coordinate system would capture the most of the information previously contained in a graph.

    With that analogy in mind, your previous statement that you can always find eigenvector for covariance matrices explaining largest variance, can be simply restated that you can always find an axis which would capture the largest part of information in the graph.

    For perfectly linearly correlated variables, obviously there would be new one axis which would capture ALL the information in the graph.

    For white noise-kind of graph, for two (or more) perfectly uncorrelated variables, it would be the same: simply we remove the axis (or axes) for the variable(s) with smaller(est) variance. In this approach we preserve the information for one variable, while losing all the information for the second.

    However, the amazing thing about “g” is that with “g”, for NONE of the tests ALL information is lost (when accounting for sampling error), as long as “g” is calculated for many diverse tests, there is no range restriction – and this is a non-trivial finding in my opinion.

  226. @Anon

    Jewish detected…

    The sad part is that jews exist…

  227. Pat Boyle says:
    @Okechukwu

    People in the north (Europe and Northern China, Japan and Korea) are smart and they got there by walking. I didn’t make that up. It’s an observation. The reason that these peoples are smart rather than those who reside nearer to the equator is what is in question. Lynn for example thinks that it is because of the cold winters in the north put selection pressure mon them to develop better brains. Not every anthropologist agrees with this theory but many seem to accept it at least in part.

    All this is a commonplace issue. This theory is the subject of this whole thread. So your remarks seem to be strange. I wasn’t writing anything controversial. Why so hostile?

  228. res says:
    @utu

    obstinate children

    LOL!

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

    P.S. It is funny (and perhaps not coincidental) that you both impute bad faith to me and assume it of Spearman, Binet, etc. Perhaps the most compelling thing about g is it seems to appear even when people attempt to avoid it. For example, see how often attempts to measure other “intelligences” end up finding a substantial correlation with g. Who exactly is engaging in bad faith in this discussion?

  229. utu says:
    @szopen

    You start with diagonal matrix. In principal component analysis you end up with the diagonal matrix which is equivalent to the covariance matrix (not necessarily diagonal) that you started with. “Equivalent” in the above sentence means that that both matrices span the same linear vector space.

    After decomposition of any covariance matrix you get eigenvectors which are linear combinations of the original variables. These eigenvectors are mutually orthogonal which means that covariance matrix of these vectors (variables) is diagonal. Eigenvector v1 does not correlate with eigenvector v2 and so on and thus it does not explain any variance that v2 explains and vice versa.

    This is, however, not what we are facing with the tests of cognitive abilities, hence I find your earlier post missing the point – how this is a comparable with “g” factor at all?

    Putting words “this”, “however” and “hence” in a sentence does not automatically make the sentence an argument. I am not sure what you are saying here and I suspect neither do you.

    • Replies: @szopen
  230. @Pat Boyle

    Name those many anthropologists then. FYI, Lynn is not an anthropologist or a specialist in human ecology/biology.

  231. res says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Most of that is not worth responding to, but let’s look at this:

    Except my link, nor any medical professional would never make the claim that IQ is needed to decrease the disease burden. Investment in sanitation and urbanization would isolate people from breeding grounds for mosquitoes, parasites and pathogenes, access to medicines would lower mortality but would hardly do anything for morbidity because there is no vaccine that is efficient for most tropical diseases in the long run.

    So IQ is not helpful to doctors? LOL! I don’t think many medical professionals would agree with that.

    Despite there being no effective vaccine for most tropical diseases, there are a number of measures that can be taken for both prevention and treatment. These typically require some combination of resources (e.g. per capita GDP) and ability (both of which correlate with IQ, as does the ability to make good fact based cost-benefit decisions). One example is mosquito netting. Here is a paper looking at the cost-benefit effects of that on DALY: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3348006/

    This WHO report looks at DALYs worldwide: http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/GBD_report_2004update_part4.pdf
    Table 12 has a list of the leading causes. The top 2 (accounting for 10% of the total) are Lower respiratory infections and Diarrhoeal diseases. My understanding is both of those are quite amenable to medical treatment. Malaria is #12 at 2.2%.

    P.S. Unsubstantiated accusations of fraud are not a compelling argument.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  232. @Wizard of Oz

    I think that’s a fair argument; basically an environment that specifically is breeding for intelligence rather than, say, resistance from illness or predation. I’ll add another wrinkle to this – and it seems like that the single strongest early drive for intelligence was basically through greater social contact(we see this in primates, the more social ones who have to both deceive and be deceived evolve higher intelligence).

    Therefore, groups of humans who had to deal with increasingly complex social environments involving deception and detection of deception probably had the strongest motivating forces to increase their intellect. We might argue this is a factor in Jewish intelligence and generally speaking, for “market dominant minorities.”

    • Replies: @res
  233. @Factorize

    However, if humans are squeamish about IQ enhancement, then I suppose that a full scale effort could be made to optimize the intelligence of other animals that have exhibited psychometric g such as mice, rats, crows, dogs, cats, raccoons, chimps, gorillas and others.

    There are pretty extensive facilities for animal breeding and experimentation in China, related in part to practical CRISPR development, including the recent successes with dogs. Would be interesting to see if much more intelligent, but otherwise mild and friendly dogs could be brought into the population.

  234. szopen says:
    @utu

    I must say I appreciate a good insult when I see it :D

    But continue with your explanation, please:
    Eigenvector v1 does not correlate with eigenvector v2 and so on and thus it does not explain any variance that v2 explains and vice versa.
    But it does not mean v1 explains the variance of one variable, and v2 of the second variable, right? If I understood correctly, there is part of variation of variable X values explained by v1 and unexplained by v2, part of variation of variable X values explained by v2 and unexplained by v1, and the same for variable Y, di I get you right?

    However, in case of uncorrelated variable, you could still create eigenvectors v1 and v2, but all variance in variable X will be explained by v1 and none by v2. All variance in variable Y will be explained by v2 and none by v1. Am i right?

    In case of “g”, however, “g” explains a bit of variance for every test. That’s why I wrote “this is different” from the case where we have uncorrelated variables.

  235. One important thing to point is the levels of mechanicism—mentalism among macro-micro-nano-human-populations. I think mechanicism levels [interest on science, engineering, maths] tends to be positively if not very positively correlated with higher IQ/cognitive skills and for sure, namely with math-higher-than-verb tilt. Modern societies are considerably sustained by this types of minds/people and seems subsaharian blacks tend to be less ”mechanicistic” and more ”mentalistic” / empathetic [don't confuse with ''compassion'', it's one of the possible effects of highly emphatetic people, but not about all of them ... and yes, many blacks, namely women, are very compassionated].

    So in empathizing-systemizing spectrum, in my view, north east asians will score higher, on avg, ‘whites’ in the middle [ northern whites along with north east asians and southern whites more along with other group] and subsaharian africans in the bottom. I have impression that jews tend to be higher on both systemizing and empathizing, but with many ”aberrant” subtypes of cognitive tilts with the ashke-nazi cognitive profile is already umbalanced.

    Remember that human intelligence has been evolved/strongly biased on systemizing skills. This may explain why humans has been capable to build many fantastic things but still deal very poorly in social issues.

    Empathizing–systemizing spectrum also correlates with autistic-like psychological traits [more systemizing], artistic inclinations [both] and even with verbal skills [empathizing].

    Levels of autistic-like traits correlates with: orderness, lower levels of violence and corruption.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  236. res says:
    @James Thompson

    Given the combination of the map and the raters it is probably hard to check on the data unless they kept extensive records. Does Arikawa have the raw map and individual rater data?

    Volume 4 of the 1959 edition of that book is available at libgen, but I searched for “colore della pelle” (Italian for skin color) and despite ~10 hits saw nothing like a map or table. It is 800+ pages long and in Italian so I gave up at that point.

    P.S. Have you seen this blog post? http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/04/validity-of-national-skin-color-iq.php
    They repeated the analysis with another source for skin color and got a 0.87 correlation with IQ and a -0.91 correlation with Templer’s skin color measure.

    P.P.S. Note mostly for myself. Templer and Arikawa looked at race, skin color, and IQ in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17037466
    There was a nonsignificant (and opposite signed) correlation between IQ and skin color within the Negroid race. But significant correlations within the two other races shown and for groups including multiple races.

  237. @Santoculto

    Northern whites =europeans, sorry.

  238. @jason kennedy

    Social ”justiss” MANIA…

  239. @res

    So IQ is not helpful to doctors? LOL! I don’t think many medical professionals would agree with that.

    Of course, how often have you been asked your IQ score for any diagnosis?

    How do you relate decrease in Malaria incidence to IQ here?

    My understanding is both of those are quite amenable to medical treatment. Malaria is #12 at 2.2%

    The study on disease burden above doesn’t state that it’s all DALYs that mater, only infectious, nutritional, neonatal and parasitic DALYs. So the caradiovascular, psychiatric or accident related DALYs don’t count.

    Anyway, prevention and treatment matter, I’m not claiming that these diseases aren’t preventable. However, they hard much harder to control in tropical environments and controlling them does not require a specific IQ.

    P.S. Unsubstantiated accusations of fraud are not a compelling argument.

    It’s not gratuitous, stupid.

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/wicherts2010c.pdf

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Han_Maas/publication/220018518_Another_failure_to_replicate_Lynn’s_estimate_of_the_average_IQ_of_sub-Saharan_Africans/links/0046352814aafa3c2b000000.pdf

    • Replies: @res
  240. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    That was interesting. Thanks.

    I’m not sure I find that argument sufficient though. How often did the Chinese war with technologically comparable opponents? I think part of Europe’s drive to develop firearm technology was the frequent warring between technologically comparable opponents–resulting in arms races in a variety of dimensions. Is there a good example of a Chinese arms race?

    What do you think of the Chase hypothesis immediately following the Chinese wall theory? I find the former (Chase) less compelling than the latter, but I think it might provide a partial cause.

    The Morillo idea about de/centralization being relevant is also interesting.

    P.S. The Chase section mentioned this: “and in the case of Sichuan, both sides employed equally potent firearms” but did not give a reference or go into more detail. Is this a counterargument to my first point or more the exception which proves the rule?

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  241. utu says:
    @szopen

    If the battery B1 consists of tests favoring “verbal intelligence’ and battery B2 consists of tests favoring “geometric intelligence” then g1 and g2 will be less correlated than if both batteries had mixture of tests favoring both types of intelligence in the same proportions. If we denote by s1 and s2 second largest factors for the two batteries it is possible that g1 will correlate well with s2 and g2 with s1. Then the principal two factors of two batteries would be reversed: g1s2 and g2s1. Neither g1 nor g2 is “the g” of Spearman or Binet because these are different batteries of tests. The main point is that g is really arbitrary. It depends on how you compose the battery of tests.

    For some people and I suspect you are one of them the argument used by Spearman that g is something (special, unique) because it is the main factor from his factor analysis is very appealing. But this is a very disingenuous argument. There is the smoke and mirrors involved here. Mambo jumbo big words mathematics. I am just trying to demystify it. It is perfectly OK to calculate some g and use it in some studies instead of raw data of tests for various reasons. But it should be emphasized, which it never is, that any particular g being used in some study is just a g that is specific to the battery of tests used in this study. It is not a universal g because a universal g does not exist. But it is definitively not OK to use the fact that g exists as a crowning killer argument about the theory of intelligence. It is a fraudulent argument. Often in speech or written texts g is used as a purely rhetorical device such as “because there is g….” or “because it is g loaded….” . These are fallacious arguments.

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @PandaAtWar
    , @CanSpeccy
  242. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Therefore, groups of humans who had to deal with increasingly complex social environments involving deception and detection of deception probably had the strongest motivating forces to increase their intellect.

    This. I think this speaks to the importance of things which might enhance the formation of large societies (e.g. agriculture) or prevent the same (e.g. contagious disease). I can see a possible strong feedback loop between technology -> large human societies -> IQ -> technology …
    Then there is the impetus of large societies in conflict (see gunpowder discussion).

    I also think the importance of intelligence for social functioning provides a good reason observations like “well, if cold matters then Eskimos should be the most intelligent” are not as meaningful as some people think. It’s like I said earlier. Some challenge is helpful for IQ evolution, but challenges that make life or large scale society impossible do not help.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  243. @Pat Boyle

    All this is a commonplace issue. This theory is the subject of this whole thread. So your remarks seem to be strange. I wasn’t writing anything controversial. Why so hostile?

    Same reason why South Africa’s power grid is on the very edge of collapse. Lower IQ is just one of many problems. There are a number of cultural issues, including a near total inability to admit any fault.

    What’s vaguely interesting is that I worked with one of elite from Zimbabwe, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the elite there mostly use classical European methods for their children, including boarding schools. So within a subset of their population, they are aware of what they need to work on and improve – but due to the rampant corruption, overall societal prospects look dim. A brain drain effect serves to further deprive them of native talent, and there doesn’t seem anything like the “sea turtle” effect like Asia has where western-educated Asians return to their countries or are welcomed with insights.

    • Replies: @res
    , @Okechukwu
  244. @res

    There doesn’t seem to be anything like a Chinese arms race after the use of gunpowder – the Ming veneered from total control to total collapse, the late Qing made some efforts to keep up with Europe but failed dramatically, and more or less, we have the present.

    Lack of respect and underestimating the rest of the world proved very fatal, something which I hope is a cultural lesson that we will learn.

    • Replies: @res
  245. res says:
    @Afrosapiens

    So IQ is not helpful to doctors? LOL! I don’t think many medical professionals would agree with that.

    Of course, how often have you been asked your IQ score for any diagnosis?

    Total failure to understand my point. It is useful for doctors to have a reasonably high IQ (say above 115, though that is a soft limit of course).

    How do you relate decrease in Malaria incidence to IQ here?

    It is important to consider relative change as well as absolute rate. I think (infectious disease) DALYs provide a more accurate measure of overall success in dealing with disease. Base rate for malaria also greatly affects the incentive to reduce it.

    The study on disease burden above doesn’t state that it’s all DALYs that mater, only infectious, nutritional, neonatal and parasitic DALYs. So the caradiovascular, psychiatric or accident related DALYs don’t count.

    Right. Which would be the reason I used infectious disease DALY information from WHO for my own analysis. So what you are saying is my 10% estimate for the contribution of the top two should have been higher. Are you disputing the amenability of Lower respiratory infections and Diarrhoeal diseases to treatment?

    Anyway, prevention and treatment matter, I’m not claiming that these diseases aren’t preventable. However, they hard much harder to control in tropical environments and controlling them does not require a specific IQ.

    Thanks for clarifying your position and being at least somewhat reasonable.

    I love the use of “require a specific IQ” as a strawman. Do they teach that in a bad IQ argumentation class somewhere? Its use is so common I can’t believe it is coincidental.

    Of course a specific IQ is not required (and nowhere did I say it was, hence “strawman”). But IQ is helpful for many facets of prevention and treatment. For example, identifying the problem, developing and choosing a variety of solutions, providing resources to pay for solutions.

    I agree diseases are harder to control in tropical environments. There is a similar, but lesser, effect in subtropical climates. I think the experiences with disease over time in the American south provide a good example of ability to make a difference.

    Thanks for including the Wicherts links. It is only fair to include some responses from Lynn though:

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001275

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/the-average-iq-of-sub-saharan-africans-assessed-by-the-progressive-matrices-a-reply1.pdf

    The argument appears to center around the representativeness of African IQ study samples. I suppose if you consider university students representative of the general population then Wicherts has a compelling point. That is certainly not the case in the US, though some seem to believe it to be true in Africa (see recent Chanda Chisala thread).

    In any case, I think it is a reach to accuse Lynn of fraud.

    stupid.

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

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  246. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    You make multiple good points here. One question though. Did your experience indicate whether the elite efforts to improve were helping with the “near total inability to admit any fault”? I find that attitude deadly to any kind of effort at continuous improvement (e.g. Japanese manufacturing quality improvement techniques).

    I have seen a notable example in the affirmative in my own personal life, but the overall trend I see in these comment threads and elsewhere is not encouraging.

    As is probably obvious to most reading this comment thread, “inability to admit fault” (aka taking responsibility) is a powerful lens to use for viewing our current (and many Africa related) conversation(s). Both at the literal argumentation techniques level and the meta what we are arguing about level.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  247. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    There doesn’t seem to be anything like a Chinese arms race after the use of gunpowder – the Ming veneered from total control to total collapse, the late Qing made some efforts to keep up with Europe but failed dramatically, and more or less, we have the present.

    Thanks!

    Lack of respect and underestimating the rest of the world proved very fatal, something which I hope is a cultural lesson that we will learn.

    Agreed. And applicable to many different “we”s.

    I just read Stephen Ambrose’s history of the first transcontinental railroad and one thing that was notable is that despite the racism of the time there is a consistent note of respect for certain Chinese attributes (and accomplishments) which are still appreciated today. Not sure how much of that is PC retconning and/or specific to elites of the time, but notable nonetheless IMHO.

    America underestimates Chinese ability, will, and persistence at its own peril. (and, I would like to think, vice versa ; )

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  248. szopen says:
    @utu

    I understand your point, however:

    ” The main point is that g is really arbitrary. It depends on how you compose the battery of tests. “

    (1) So you think the Thorndike’s [1985] analysis (with 0.85 correlation between g-loadings of 17 “probe” tests inserted into six different batteries, each with nine non-overlapping tests) and JOhnson [2004] (three batteries of multiple non-overlapping tests – the redundant tests were removed, applied to the same set of people, “g” extracted from batteries was nearly identical) are invalid because they all measure diverse tasks?

    (2) But isn’t the whole point here to find out whether there is underlying “general intelligence”? So how the answer to that question (“is there underlying general intelligence which would explain performance in multiple different, diverse areas”) could be answered by looking only into one ability and not in others, preferably as many, as possible?

    I would have to also to point out that I am more familiar with Jensen, and I know Spearman mostly from Jensen’s and others’ papers outlining his ideas (as Spearman language is a bit archaic to a non-native, and reading through his 1904 seminal paper on g was a torture). However, I do not think as “g is main factor” as best argument, but rather “whenever we have diverse set of tests, the main factors which emerge are always highly correlated”, which is not the same.

    • Replies: @utu
  249. @res

    Total failure to understand my point. It is useful for doctors to have a reasonably high IQ (say above 115, though that is a soft limit of course).

    Oh my… I wished you weren’t making this point. Ok, so tell me precisely, empirically, what IQ provides that is useful to a doctor. As far as I know, no IQ score has been shown to be a necessary condition to anything and every IQ score is sufficient to any outcome. So, educate me if you’re aware of any such thing.

    It is important to consider relative change as well as absolute rate. I think (infectious disease) DALYs provide a more accurate measure of overall success in dealing with disease. Base rate for malaria also greatly affects the incentive to reduce it.

    Base rate of malaria is highly dependent on climate, and climate makes controlling the disease much more difficult in places where it’s endemic.

    Malaria reduction is probably the best proxy for ability to deal with disease burden. Because contrary to other diseases, malaria vectors evolve resistance to insecticides and drugs very fast, so it requires very reactive health authorities, contrary to other diseases whose treatment is more straightforward and prevention is more dependent on socio-economic factors such as medication cost, safe food and water, proper sanitation…

    Moreover, decrease in malaria incidence is even more spectacular in countries where population is booming.

    So what you are saying is my 10% estimate for the contribution of the top two should have been higher. Are you disputing the amenability of Lower respiratory infections and Diarrhoeal diseases to treatment?

    Yes this is what I’m saying, but so should be malaria and other parasitic diseases.

    As for the amenability of the two main causes, lower respiratory infectious disease is mostly pneumonia, diarrhoeal diseases is due to unsafe food and water. Fighting those conditions has nothing to do with the IQ of doctors, vaccines against pneumonia are expensive, access to safe food and water requires extremely costly public investments in sanitation and salubrious housing as well as food controls and access to refrigerators.

    It’s more complex than muh IQ, stupid.

    I love the use of “require a specific IQ” as a strawman. Do they teach that in a bad IQ argumentation class somewhere? Its use is so common I can’t believe it is coincidental.

    Of course a specific IQ is not required (and nowhere did I say it was, hence “strawman”). But IQ is helpful for many facets of prevention and treatment. For example, identifying the problem, developing and choosing a variety of solutions, providing resources to pay for solutions.

    Cringe…

    Do you really think health professionals in developing countries don’t understand those diseases? Or that populations have the opportunity to live in safe environments but don’t do it because they’re just too dumb?

    Could you “use your IQ” to avoid such extraterrestrial allegations? If you don’t wise up, decent commenters will stop wasting time on you and you’ll be left with santoculto. Is that what you want?

    I agree diseases are harder to control in tropical environments. There is a similar, but lesser, effect in subtropical climates. I think the experiences with disease over time in the American south provide a good example of ability to make a difference.

    It is possible, especially in subtropical latitude where disease outbreaks are seasonal and access to sanitation and medication decrease population vulnerabiliy. But such changes are hardly dependent on muh IQ, it’s the other way around, stupid.

    Thanks for including the Wicherts links. It is only fair to include some responses from Lynn though:

    No, it’s not fair, because it’s how Afrosapiens is going to expose the fraud. Ignorance is bliss.

    The average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans assessed by the Progressive Matrices: A reply
    to Wicherts, Dolan, Carlson & van der Maas

    5. Unacceptable studies
    WDCM include a number studies that cannot be accepted for a variety
    of reasons. Their samples of university students are clearly unrepresentative.
    The Crawford-Nutt (1976) sample consisted of high school
    students (IQ 84) in math classes admission to which “is dependent on the
    degree of excellence of the pupil’s performance in the lower classes”
    (p.202) and described as “a select segment of the population” (p.204).
    The students were also coached on how to do the test and “Teaching the
    strategies required to solve Matrix problems yields dramatic short-term
    gains in score” (Raven, Court, & Raven, 1996, p. 33). This is clearly an
    unrepresentative sample.
    Another unacceptable study is Okunrotifa’s (1976) samples reporting
    two results: (1) a sample of 50 Nigerian rural primary school children
    aged 5.5 years for which WDCM give an IQ of 88. The score is 25.9= the
    84th percentile on the British 1979 standardization sample=115 IQ; (2)
    a sample of 100 Nigerian urban primary school children aged 7 years for
    whichWDCM give an IQ of 85. The score is 34.75= the 96th percentile on
    the British 1979 standardization sample=126 IQ. The two IQs are so far
    beyond the range of credibility that the studies have to be rejected.
    WDCM assumed that the means reported were the percentiles rather
    than the raw scores, but this is just speculation. It might be thought that
    WDCM would have asked Okunrotifa whether this speculation was
    correct but it seems they did not do so. WDCM’s assumption that these
    Nigerian children had IQs of 85 and 88 seems improbable. These are the
    IQs of blacks in the United States. It can hardly be possible that blacks in
    the United States who have all the advantages of living in an
    economically developed country, with high income, good health care,
    good nutrition and education, would have the same IQ as blacks in
    impoverished Nigeria. If this were so, we would have to infer that these
    environmental advantages have no effect whatever on IQs and even the
    most hard line hereditarians would not go that far. For all these reasons,
    WDCM’s IQs for this study cannot be accepted. A number of other
    unacceptable studies given by WDCM are discussed in Lynn (2010b).

    Yes, they wrote that…

    1- University students/well-off individuals

    A professional demographer would not exclude such samples, he would include them and adjust the sample’s weight for representativeness in the general population.

    2- Credibility of high scoring samples

    WTF! I’ve never seen such an unscientific argument, who cares what are the scores of African Americans, using the same logic one should reject all Chinese samples scoring above 90, since it’s hardly possible given their living conditions which are much worse than African Americans.

    Wicherts, Dolan, and van der Maas (2009) contend that the average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans is about 80. A critical evaluation of the studies presented by WDM shows that many of these are based on unrepresentative elite samples. We show that studies of 29 acceptably representative samples on tests other than the Progressive Matrices give a sub-Saharan Africa IQ of 69; studies of the most satisfactory representative samples on the Standard Progressive Matrices give an IQ of 66; studies of 23 acceptably representative samples on the Colored Progressive Matrices give an IQ of 71. The international studies of mathematics, science, and reading give a sub-Saharan African IQ of 66. The four data sets can be averaged to give an IQ of 68 as the best reading of the IQ in sub-Saharan Africa.

    What is “acceptably representative”? Representative of who, where, and when? What are Lynn and cie.’s credentials in demographic studies?

    In any case, I think it is a reach to accuse Lynn of fraud.

    Maybe you prefer incompetence?

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

    Try harder, stupid.

    • Replies: @szopen
  250. Okechukwu says:
    @Pat Boyle

    People in the north (Europe and Northern China, Japan and Korea) are smart and they got there by walking.

    Congratulations. You’ve just identified walking as genius-level activity. Allow someone of equatorial lineage to infuse your cold weather derived brain with some much needed education.

    Early humans had no plans or maps or countries or border crossings or passport control. People just wandered around over thousands of years, averaging a few steps a day. They may have followed their prey animals. They may simply have gotten lost. Wandering around out of Africa was no more taxing or demanding than wandering around within Africa. Africa is a huge place. Maps are not to scale. You can fit into Africa all of Europe, the UK, the United States, India, China and Japan. As a matter of fact, the sailing distance from Europe to North America is significantly shorter than the distance between West and East Africa. The distance between North and South Africa is nearly twice as long as the distance between America and Europe. So the early humans that wandered out of Africa didn’t do anything more noteworthy than those that wandered within Africa.

    The reason that these peoples are smart rather than those who reside nearer to the equator is what is in question.

    You mean you hope, wish and pray that they’re smarter. They’re not smarter in actual fact.

    Lynn for example thinks that it is because of the cold winters in the north put selection pressure mon them to develop better brains.

    That theory is bunk on multiple levels and Lynn is a joker. Let me remind you that glorified gorillas like Homo erectus and Neanderthal were very successful in “cold winters,” which, by the way, is just one of four seasons. Wintry conditions didn’t prevail year-round.

    Not every anthropologist agrees with this theory but many seem to accept it at least in part.

    So put that cold weather brain of yours to work and identify these mysterious anthropologists.

    All this is a commonplace issue. This theory is the subject of this whole thread. So your remarks seem to be strange. I wasn’t writing anything controversial. Why so hostile?

    Umm…maybe because you told a bald-faced lie in suggesting that most anthropologists agree with the absurd notion that people who left Africa became smarter. FYI, they don’t believe that. You just made it up.

  251. @res

    Did your experience indicate whether the elite efforts to improve were helping with the “near total inability to admit any fault”?

    Very sparse and uncoordinated. The elite emigrate a lot and there’s a lot of contention between different tribes and families. Although blacks vote as a bloc in the US, African solidarity doesn’t really seem to be a thing. Its kleptocratic in a way that is beyond comprehension; Pakistani, for example, call the leader Asif Ali Zardari “Mr. 10%” because he steals 10% of every transaction, supposedly. Zimbabwean government, from what I could infer, would steal over 50% per transaction. The guy I knew specifically referenced Russian mobsters as being more reasonable people. Imagine that.

    As such, even the present-day culture encourages the development of different skills than what we would imagine as successful. For example, my friend had a brother back in Africa who was semi-successfully operating an auto-parts sure using computerized technologies – but he had to intentionally cripple his technological assets and hide his operations not to account for things cleanly, or else the government would notice and essentially tax/rob him. A substantial amount of effort must be placed into evasion of the law, and its hard to call it as criminal when the government acts in ways that are, essentially, criminal.

    There are so many problems, and the problems are so pervasive and endemic in culture that its hard to imagine how they will ever get out of it, except possibly for a few places like Ethiopia.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  252. Okechukwu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    You might try bringing your own house in order.

    Rampant corruption? China is currently the fraud and scam capital of the world. Just ask anyone who’s ever tried to do business there. Or read their testimonies online.

    Low IQ? The Chinese destroy beautiful endangered animals in a hopeless quest to make their little peckers hard. If that isn’t indicative of low intelligence, I don’t know what is.

    People like you are the reason China earned the appellation: “sick men of Asia.”

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
    , @Daniel Chieh
  253. @Okechukwu

    Exactly, they always talk like China or Korea like these are orderly, honest and functional societies! LOL! I’m a business lawyer, those stories I have on doing business in China, or simply importing stuff from China… Or things as simple as driving in China, the superstition that you point out to, the corruption, the mafias…

    Those Asian’s newfound superiority complex with Africans is laughable, so is the belief in Lynn’s sky high East Asian IQs, if IQ is supposed to mean anything.

    • Agree: Okechukwu
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  254. @Okechukwu

    A typical methodology: disregard reality, go on the attack and focus on the emotional rather than the factual. However, only a complete doofus would think that Chinese corruption approaches SSA levels.

    You’re not worth the time to refute, but please note the sources below.

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/cpi-2016/?highlight=corruption

    https://www.transparency.org/cpi2015

    And of course, the literal fact that Africa seeks Chinese aid, not the other way around. Please. If you truly believe in what you’re propagandizing, I can only wish you the best. Good luck with the power grid.

    • Agree: res
  255. For those interested in actual theories on the evolution of human intelligence, this paper confronts the social brain hypothesis that some commenters mentioned above (social network complexity driving the evolution of intelligence) to some leading competing theories. The cold winter theory is, of course, not one of them, but it’d be interesting to see someone confronting the CWT to actual specialist scenarios.

    https://44984771-a-62cb3a1a-s-sites.googlegroups.com/site/dmobbs/relatedness_class/Dunbar_1998.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7cryF-9NybE4HRk8YGTdFeqKiX6-qzpLjbTZStFTfJlmpeO98oFnoOirgRVAclRBEdAUohPDgX_1ZVjxJBv53hrwnR81Glzl2U7Wz3Rjwqj1r5U82aw2JtwqH7W-fc-JuWkVD5T1B-m6SfUJqoOJR-Fuv3WSbFYbSWvyAdc5LlllHueUwIp3bgOmR28GctwCooI7YsXtJ6gBBECbtbCpW8ADqpMJZFOhzsItBQFXDz1ByWjutQ8%3D&attredirects=0

    • Replies: @res
  256. @res

    America underestimates Chinese ability, will, and persistence at its own peril. (and, I would like to think, vice versa ; )

    As “soft authoritarianism” enabled by big data is becoming more common as we see in increasing regulation of speech in Germany, UK, etc, its unfortunate to note that China seems like she is successfully exporting her government to the West, rather than becoming liberalized by the West.

    This is not a trend I really support, but its worth noticing.

  257. Okechukwu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Africa who was semi-successfully operating an auto-parts sure using computerized technologies – but he had to intentionally cripple his technological assets and hide his operations not to account for things cleanly, or else the government would notice and essentially tax/rob him. A substantial amount of effort must be placed into evasion of the law, and its hard to call it as criminal when the government acts in ways that are, essentially, criminal.

    You must be one of those Asian supremacists who extol the virtues of a mythical China they’ve concocted in their mind while ensconced in the West.

    Corruption is rampant and pervasive in China, from the highest to the lowest levels. Moreover, Chinese business practices are sneaky, deceitful, treacherous and highly injurious to individuals, businesses and countries. The Chinese never seemed to have developed an honorable approach to business whereby counterparties to a transaction each gain. It’s always a zero sum game. They circumvent, they cheat, they steal. They use virtual slave labor to create products which they then dump as exports, destroying entire industries in their wake.

  258. @Afrosapiens

    Why yes, the facts for crime and violence would totally support your fantasies.

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

    Or perhaps only your ancedotes do, along with a fairly predictable attitude to refuse to any admit fault. At any rate, good luck with your dreams as well.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
    , @Okechukwu
  259. szopen says:
    @Afrosapiens

    what IQ provides that is useful to a doctor. As far as I know, no IQ score has been shown to be a necessary condition to anything and every IQ score is sufficient to any outcome

    While in general it might be true that in theory an individual with any score could be excellent in any kind of job (one study tested a sample of people of different occupations andthe median IQ for medical occupations with a medical degree was something about 120, and 90% of such people had IQ above 105, and 3/4 above 110 or so. The average for medical occupations (no MD) is lower, and the 90% threshold is waaay lower), it’s really beyond disbelief that someone would deny the relationship between IQ and job performance.

    A general finding is that IQ (or, more strictly, “g”) does predicts job performance in a wide variety of jobs (richardson paper notwithstanding). WHile I am not sure about doctors in particular, I very much doubt that this would be an exception.

    It’s not to say that there are no other factors, but, since IQ scores indicate the ability for abstract thinking, logical reasoning, reading comprehension; since high scores correlate well with ability to learn and good memory; i’d argue that high IQ scores indicate also abilities useful for succesful doctors.

    Whatever IQ measures, it seems it helps with being a doctor.

  260. res says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Thanks. For those who would prefer a less convoluted link this might be better: http://psych.colorado.edu/~tito/sp03/7536/dunbar_1998.pdf

    I find it interesting that someone who invokes the single cause fallacy (comment 40) finds arguments like this appealing:

    To test between the competing hypotheses, we need to force the hypotheses into conflict in such a way that their predictions are mutually contradictory. This allows the data to discriminate unequivocally between them. In the present case, we can do this by asking which hypothesis best predicts the differences in brain size across the primate order. To do so, we need to identify the specific quantitative predictions made by each hypothesis and to determine an appropriate measure of brain size.

    I find reasoning like this more appealing: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3973910/

    Explanations for the evolution of the human brain are mainly focusing on selection pressures of the physical environment (climate, diet, food availabilty) and those of the social environment (group size, coalition formation, parental care). Although attempts have been made to discriminate between ecological and social theories (see e.g., Leigh, 2004; Dunbar and Shultz, 2007a,b; Lefebvre, 2012; Roth and Dicke, 2012; Willemet, 2013) there has been little effort to develop an explanatory framework that integrates the many social, ecological, and life history correlates of brain size that have been identified. Obviously, they all play a role in explaining the marked differences in brain size between humans and apes, but in which way and to what extent is far from clear at this moment. We will need better studies of cognition and behavior, along with comparative brain studies, to answer these questions.

    Note the word climate.

    I found their discussion of Limits to human brain evolution quite informative.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  261. @Daniel Chieh

    What!? China, the police state with 50 capital offenses has an European-level homicide rate? No shit!

    Or perhaps only your ancedotes do, along with a fairly predictable attitude to refuse to any admit fault.

    What fault do I have to admit? Can you elaborate while explaining me why your ubermenschen tribe is still far from topping every efficiency ranking? Try not to make excuses and admit your faults.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  262. @res

    I find it interesting that someone who invokes the single cause fallacy (comment 40) finds arguments like this appealing:

    I don’t recall sharing my views on this paper. I had the same objection, one hypothesis is not supposed to exclude all other competing theories, but I appreciate the intellectual effort to test the strengths and weaknesses of a theory.

    Note the word climate.

    Thank you, I know some English, especially those words that are of French/Italian/Latin origin.

    So, yes, climate and what? You know climate is more than temperature, right? Water, for instance, is more crucial to human survival and it’s reasonable to assume that dealing with scarcity of water imposes a more immediate and inescapable evolutionary challenge. Survival in cold regions was already mastered by homo erectus, yet homo sapiens is from East Africa.

    I found their discussion of Limits to human brain evolution quite informative.

    I don’t care.

  263. Okechukwu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Why yes, the facts for crime and violence would totally support your fantasies.

    Every data point that comes out of China is untrustworthy, dummy. From their IQ scores to their crime and homicide rates to their GDP figures.

    China is not a stable country:

    China saw 180,000 protests, riots, and mass demonstrations in 2010 alone — on average about 500 every day — a number that has likely since increased. The villagers’ complaints were common ones: local officials exploiting land sales for personal gain and violently repressing dissent.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/01/how-china-stays-stable-despite-500-protests-every-day/250940/

  264. @szopen

    it’s really beyond disbelief that someone would deny the relationship between IQ and job performance.

    Relationship and causation are two different things despite many people’s discomfort with correlation does not equal causation.

    A general finding is that IQ (or, more strictly, “g”) does predicts job performance in a wide variety of jobs (richardson paper notwithstanding). WHile I am not sure about doctors in particular, I very much doubt that this would be an exception.

    Still correlations, and speaking of correlations, I think you want to know how IQ correlates to 45 personality traits, you’d be surprised by some correlations, especially the negative ones:

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/how-does-iq-relate-to-personality/

    Personality does matter to job performance, we can agree on this I think.

    It’s not to say that there are no other factors, but, since IQ scores indicate the ability for abstract thinking, logical reasoning, reading comprehension; since high scores correlate well with ability to learn and good memory; i’d argue that high IQ scores indicate also abilities useful for succesful doctors.

    It’s not as well established as you think, many learning disabilities occur at any level of IQ.

    Whatever IQ measures, it seems it helps with being a doctor.

    Or maybe the life of a doctor helps scoring higher on IQ tests.

    I hate to repeat myself, but attributing any causal role to IQ (a construct) is reification.

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    , @szopen
    , @szopen
  265. szopen says:
    @Santoculto

    Santo,

    The problem is that while we should always talk about “general intelligence” (the postulated, hypotethical latent variable) and “g”, and remember IQ is just an imperfect test from which we can try to extract “g” – most if not all authors I’ve read tend to conflate those two. I mean, even the people who first write how important is to differentiate between the two, in another paper happily use IQ scores where they should use “g” scores. I admit with shame I am guilty of the same, and often I talk about “IQ predicts something” when actually I should be saying “g predicts something”.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  266. res says:
    @James Thompson

    Interesting observation. The published version of that paper is also freely available (I find the formatting easier to read): https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/twin-research-and-human-genetics/article/holocene-selection-for-variants-associated-with-general-cognitive-ability-comparing-ancient-and-modern-genomes/BF2A35F0D4F565757875287E59A1F534

    Figure 1 is interesting. I wonder if anything is known about the individuals in general (e.g. location, social class, historically notable) and in particular the four high scoring outliers around -1000 BC.

    I wonder if they are planning to extend this analysis further back in time. This paper has some older examples: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4014435/
    Also this: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4170574/

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  267. @Afrosapiens

    job performance

    IQ is a shit predictor of job performance.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4557354/

    Even then, the original studies on IQ and job performance, work-skills tests correlate better with job performance than actual IQ scores.

  268. @szopen

    A general finding is that IQ (or, more strictly, “g”) does predicts job performance in a wide variety of jobs (richardson paper notwithstanding).

    So you claim that IQ (‘g’; whatever that is) predicts job performance and then say “Richardson paper notwithstanding”? That’s bullshit and you know it.

    By the way, in the original studies, work-skills tests correlated better with job performance than IQ tests.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4557354/

    Why do you choose to not include this paper from Richardson and Norgate? Does it not matter to the discussion on IQ and job performance? Or is it because it gives a result you don’t like… I think I know the answer.

    • Replies: @szopen
  269. @Afrosapiens

    Well, it might have much to do with the fact that the Chinese are hardly ubermenschen(or for that matter, really just one ethnicity). As a people, the Chinese have demonstrated stagnation, weakness, cowardice, insularity and a lack of awareness about the world beyond. But there is one thing. In the ruins of the Old Summer Palace(圓明園), destroyed by an Anglo-French force in 1860, is a plaque that effectively says:

    “We deserved this for our weakness.”

    You notice that it does not blame anyone but themselves. So, you see, the Chinese are aware of their faults. And this is why as a people, they have been willing to sacrifice “blood and capital” toward a nebulous but ultimately real concept of a future nation. And for the most part, it has panned out. I don’t talk out of ignorance; I lived in Shanghai before and I visit there often enough. That there are problems is very real – but that there are achievements is as well, and the overall level of political discourse and judgment is pretty sound.

    So no, not ubermenschen at all. Short, weak, and not very creative people. But people who sometimes are capable of rowing in the same direction and willing to learn from the mistakes of the past, while seeking to control the only thing in the world that they can: themselves. And which given all of that and the above, are willing to put a lot of respect, effort and money into education.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  270. @res

    To answer your previous question, Woodley says there is no point in estimating the actual number of IQ points, beyond saying that there has been a slight rise. This is because of the relatively small sample and the incompleteness of the DNA recovery.
    I don’t think the outliers in Fig 1 have been looked at in more detail, but I can ask if that is intended, because I think there will be further papers once more data are available.

  271. @szopen

    I will pray for your soul. Maybe HE forgive you.

    What i [think i] know G would be the common points of/found in all IQ subtests and not IQ itself. IQ performance is not G, necessarily, whatever.

  272. szopen says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Relationship and causation are two different things

    That’s true.

    It’s not as well established as you think, many learning disabilities occur at any level of IQ.

    With the same frequency?

    Or maybe the life of a doctor helps scoring higher on IQ tests.

    No idea (as I know no papers specifically about doctors), but knowing other kind of papers I very much doubt it. For example, in one paper a guy tested physics students before and after the course of physics. The initial test results predicted the students scores on the final exam. The final IQ test results were not siginificantly different from the initial tests. Usually it’s that IQ results at young age predict better outcomes in life (and, as I mentioned in the previous thread on iq, remains good predictor even after controlling for SES). I doubt it would be different for doctors.

    I hate to repeat myself, but attributing any causal role to IQ (a construct) is reification.

    It might be true that IQ is a construct and as such, cannot “cause” anything. However IQ purports to measure cognitive ability and hypothesized “general cognitive ability”, and having high or low level of ability surely affects real life outcomes. “IQ causes something” is then really just a shorthand for something such as: “the hypothesized physical brain differences in structure/metabolism/effectiveness/whatever, for which we postulate an IQ is a very imperfect measure, cause something“.

    Consider also the other social construct, such as “social class”. Social class is an imperfect measure, as what is “low class”, “middle class” etc does not really capture all the characteristics of an environment and is, in a way, somehow arbitrary distinction (for example in my country for a long time we had “intelligentsia” class, which is not really fitting to any English class, as anyone could be part of intelligentsia no matter of his/her income). But they do (imperfectly) reflect a reality.

    If someone would then write the long argument “being born in low class increases the probability of incarceration”, would you dismiss the argument by saying “attributing any causal role to a social class (a construct) is a reification”? Maybe you would; but for me it would sound intellectually not satisfying, as I would feel this is more close to nitpicking instead of attacking the gist of the argument.

  273. If humans evolved exactly to fight against this tropical diseases why, based on this hypothesis, most of them has been affected, supposedly, reducing their avg IQ/cognitive skills*

    So we will expect increase of their avg IQ [afro americans] from the moment they are living in urban environment*

  274. @Afrosapiens

    A clear enough point but maybe not relevant to the last few hundred years of hominid evolution.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  275. szopen says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Ah,. one more thing. Thanks for the link on personality. I don’t know what correlations should surprise me. SOme fo them I already knew (the openness to experience and happiness), I have not about some other, but there is nothing surprising there – with an exception of “morality”, which may or might not be surprising, since I don’t know how they define and measure “morality” trait (as google gives me a lot of behind-the-paywall papers, and a lot of papers discussing whether morality is measured, how it should be measured and what does it actually mean).

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  276. @Daniel Chieh

    You could really credit some virtues of the Chinese people if this alleged propensity to admit faults and move on emanated from democratic choice in a free speech society.

    But we both know that China is what it is because of the sole will of the communist party, you’re lucky, you could have had a North Korean dictatorship, or a Mugabe-type of dictatorship that gave much less thoughts to collective well-being.

    It’s absurd to blame the state of a society on powerless citizens. The elites have their own interests, at times these interests meet those of the mass, most often they don’t and the mass has to live with it under the threat of repression if it ever becomes discontent with the situation.

    That there are problems is very real – but that there are achievements is as well, and the overall level of political discourse and judgment is pretty sound.

    That’s true everywhere, to different extents, relating to different circumstances. I can’t tell any country in the world that objectively stagnated or regressed, and if there must be only one, it would probably be North Korea.

    And which given all of that and the above, are willing to put a lot of respect, effort and money into education.

    That’s true of every African that gets the chance to invest as much money. So what are you trying to say?

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  277. @res

    You prompt the thought that we might expect to find alleles that favoured submission to strong leadership in one form or another and/or ones which, in a probably more complicated way, treated any leader as if strong and admirable.

    There was a TV piece last night on an Australian WW1 officer, Cecil Healy, whose claim to fame was the now unbelievable act of sportsmanship at the 1912 Olympics of insisting that Duke Kananamoku be allowed to swim in the final, despite knowing that it would prevent Healy winning gold and despite the US swimmers failing to turn up for the semifinals. He started in WW1 as quartermaster but got himself moved to the front line so he could fairly share the dangers others faced. (He was killed 74 days before the end of the war leading his troops in an attack). The impact of upbringinging, peers and culture was obviously the key but it will be interesting to know one day whether heroes like that tend to be genetically distinct in some parts of their DNA.

  278. szopen says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Because Richardson paper claims, in short:
    (1) They have doubts over meta analyses of job performance, and seems to me be saying “yeah, usually meta-analyses are better than individual studies, but here we don’t like the results”. Sure, they raised interesting points, pointed to real shortcomings, but still the “there are valid doubts about previous meta-analyses” is not the same as “we prove the previous meta-analyses were wrong”
    (2) There could be other factors
    (3) Few recent studies (no meta-analysis done AFAIK) seem to not support earlier conclusions.

    Yeah, it’s not all they have written, but reading them I had the impression that they have an axe to grind. It’s not that I think they are wrong. It’s that I think that one paper is not enough to contradict what seems to me be a widely accepted in the literature. I am not a contrarian and when I read literature outside my domain of expertise, I (usually) tend to rely on current most dominant view, not necessarily the newest one.

    I think I know the answer.

    RR, we have discussed many times in the past and I really do not know why you think you know the answer. I have accepted findings which I do not like in the past. In fact just a year ago you seemed to be in perfect agreement with me. In fact I am of impression that even just few months ago you seemed to agree. Why then suddenly attack me for positions you were occupying not long ago and implying that my motives are different than yours some time ago?

    • Replies: @res
    , @RaceRealist88
  279. @Afrosapiens

    Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. Fortunately, China will never be a Western-style democracy.

  280. Daniel Chieh,
    Athenian democracy was very different than today and the modern western democracies are not direct. For example about immigration most people in western side is against massive numbers. If “collective wisdom” is really accessed I think we had better political choices. Current democracy is oligarchic system which use “people’s representatives” as Trojan horse.

  281. @szopen

    With the same frequency?

    I can’t find any study that quantifies it, but here are some clues:

    The purpose of this article was to examine the logic and the empirical data supporting the proposition that intelligence tests are not necessary for the definition of a learning disability. Four assumptions of the use of IQ test scores in the definition of learning disabilities were examined. These assumptions were (a) IQ tests measure intelligence; (b) intelligence and achievement are independent, and the presence of a learning disability will not affect IQ scores; (c) IQ scores predict reading, and children with low IQ scores should be poor readers; and (d) reading disabled children with different IQ scores have different cognitive processes and information skills. It was argued that IQ scores measure factual knowledge, expressive language abilities, and short-term memory, among other skills, and that because children with learning disabilities have deficits in these areas, their scores may be spuriously low. It was also shown that some children with low IQ scores can be good readers, indicating that low IQ scores do not necessarily result in poor reading. Empirical evidence was presented that poor readers at a variety of IQ levels show similar reading, spelling, language, and memory deficits. On logical and empirical grounds, IQ test scores are not necessary for the definition of learning disabilities.

    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/002221948902200803

    No idea (as I know no papers specifically about doctors), but knowing other kind of papers I very much doubt it. For example, in one paper a guy tested physics students before and after the course of physics. The initial test results predicted the students scores on the final exam. The final IQ test results were not siginificantly different from the initial tests.

    Brain plasticity takes a longer time than the study’s design would allow in my opinion.

    Usually it’s that IQ results at young age predict better outcomes in life (and, as I mentioned in the previous thread on iq, remains good predictor even after controlling for SES). I doubt it would be different for doctors.

    How much does it predict it and relative to what SES measure? What I’m used to is IQ researchers jumping to conclusions out of correlations in the 0.2 – 0.5 range which is actually not predictive enough to satisfyingly predict any outcome.

    It might be true that IQ is a construct and as such, cannot “cause” anything. However IQ purports to measure cognitive ability and hypothesized “general cognitive ability”, and having high or low level of ability surely affects real life outcomes. “IQ causes something” is then really just a shorthand for something such as: “the hypothesized physical brain differences in structure/metabolism/effectiveness/whatever, for which we postulate an IQ is a very imperfect measure, cause something“.

    In short, that’s a construct ;-)

    Consider also the other social construct, such as “social class”. Social class is an imperfect measure, as what is “low class”, “middle class” etc does not really capture all the characteristics of an environment and is, in a way, somehow arbitrary distinction (for example in my country for a long time we had “intelligentsia” class, which is not really fitting to any English class, as anyone could be part of intelligentsia no matter of his/her income). But they do (imperfectly) reflect a reality.

    You’re partly right, but it’s not exactly the same. You can relate social class, in a given cultural and economic context, to actual real life situations and challenges that people from a given milieu encounter, that’s why field work is so important to social sciences. Ethnologues/sociologues observe and interview people, compile their anecdotal stories and find general tendencies in the agregate. That’s called a qualitative study. No such observational work has ever been done to compare what life and behavior is like for persons with any given IQ.

    For this reason, although we can’t say “social class made him do that”, you can say” his values/beliefs/upbringing/social networks/opportunities/hardship made him do that” in a way you couldn’t say “his IQ made him do that”.

    If someone would then write the long argument “being born in low class increases the probability of incarceration”, would you dismiss the argument by saying “attributing any causal role to a social class (a construct) is a reification”?

    No, because factual circumstances faced by lower class people actually play a role in the relationship between class and incarceration. Poorer people can’t afford to be bailed out like richer people do for instance or can’t pay good lawyers, and these play a direct factual role in the difference.

  282. @Wizard of Oz

    So cold winters would be even less relevant, seeing how previous hominids have prospered in cold regions and seeing how no northern varieties in the animal kingdom are smarter than their tropical counterparts.

  283. @Daniel Chieh

    Your point was on blame, and there can’t be collective blame without collective choice. Of course not everyone has to be blamed for democratic choices because of majority rule and indirect representation, but it’s even more absurd to call the mass responsible for the deeds of authoritarian elites that they’re not in a position to beat.

  284. Factorize says:

    res, think of the insights that we will soon have into ancient history when we know the causal variants for IQ and other traits!

    We could attach a genotypic IQ and genetic behavioral assessment to the Ice Man found on the mountain. We might even be able to trace the rise and fall of empires to the changing allele
    frequencies of ancient DNA samples.

    If even more ancient DNA samples could emerge, perhaps we could discover what effect the Yamnaya had on ancient intelligence. What if there were an isolated population that managed to avoid this invasion, we could then have a window into the genetics of the European population before it was displaced?

  285. @szopen

    On the personality correlates of IQ, they say:

    Positive correlates:

    intellectual engagement, intellectual creativity, mental quickness, intellectual competence, introspection, ingenuity, intellectual depth, imagination, organization, toughness, provocativeness, leadership, self-disclosure, emotional stability, moderation, and happiness.

    Not related:

    sensitivity to beauty, gregariousness, friendliness, assertiveness, poise, talkativeness, social understanding, warmth, pleasantness, empathy, cooperation, sympathy, conscientiousness, efficiency, dutifulness, purposefulness, cautiousness, rationality, perfectionism, calmness, impulse control, imperturbability, cool-headedness, and tranquility.

    Negative correlates:

    orderliness, morality, nurturance, tenderness, and sociability.

    I don’t know how replicated and cross-culturally valid these correlations are. And as with all correlations, causal direction is a mystery. I favor a personality causes differences in IQ to the opposite direction because it’s easier to figure out how personality is conductive to IQ test performance than the other way around, especially when you notice that IQ doesn’t make people rational, moral, orderly, sociable, cooperative, conscientious or cool-headed. All those things that we would expect to be products of intelligence as I guess we both imagine it.

    For this reason, it’s hard for me to believe that IQ is anything more than a score on a pencil and paper test, and let alone that it could have been subject to natural selection.

    That said, the IQ/personality correlations are all low: from 0.423 for intellectual engagement to -0.193 for nurturance.

    • Replies: @szopen
  286. Factorize says:

    Daniel, very exciting comment about Chinese research into dogs. I am glad that you picked up on the idea about genetically augmenting animals.

    I have had a hunch for some time that dogs have played a significant role in human’s success especially in outcompeting Neanderthals. Humans could have used these genetically enhanced animals as tools and weapons against other hominids and other animals. I can see no effective countermeasure that Neanderthals or others could mount against dog attacks controlled at a distance by early humans.

    Developing an even more powerful version of animals as tools could be extremely beneficial. Creating superintelligent chimps, dogs and other animals would have a range of applications.
    Optimizing animal IQ by adding 100 SD would create radically enhanced cognition.
    There would then likely be no choice but to recognize such as animals as equivalent to humans
    with respect to “human rights”.

    Such animals would have a range of uses, that subject to their approval could be considered.
    Superintelligent animals could be highly functioning companion animals for those with cognitive impairment issues. It is entirely possible that if the intelligence of these animals were increased enough that we could have some form of direct language interface with them.

    Also other animals such as raccoons, crows, ravens and squirrels might be genetically modified in order to act as an interface between humans and urban wildlife. Cities are highly disruptive to the natural environment, having buffer animals on our side would allow for more harmonious relationships between humans and nature. For example, genetically modified birds could help guide migrating bird species through the urban environment or help. They could be like wildlife park rangers.

    Adding 100 SD IQ to chimps would move their intelligence well beyond that of humans.
    I’ll take back my big ugly and hairy remark about the gorillas because you never know.
    One day we might all worship an alpha-primate who is a gorilla.

    There is so much opposition to enhancing humans; it seems to naturally follow that
    we will be ruled by those animals that we have no qualms with genetically engineering
    such as mice or chimps.

  287. @Factorize

    “Chinese research on dogs”

    I will pray for them too.

  288. @Factorize

    We must “genetically-engineering” your mom….

  289. res says:
    @szopen

    but reading them I had the impression that they have an axe to grind.

    You might enjoy the review of Ken Richardson’s book (and associated comment) at https://www.amazon.com/Genes-Brains-Human-Potential-Intelligence/dp/0231178425

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
  290. @Factorize

    This might interest you, then:

    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/542616/first-gene-edited-dogs-reported-in-china/

    http://www.nature.com/news/first-monkeys-with-customized-mutations-born-1.14611

    I particularly think that dogs will be promising, since its one of the better understood animals and I imagine with a combination of deep implant chips and higher intelligence/strength, we can get something akin to a cyborg helper. Definitely hopeful.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  291. @Daniel Chieh

    You’re stupid monsters who endorse everything goes wrong in so called”humanity”. I hope “humanity” be destroyed soon and specially so called”smarter” ones, infinite human imbecility syndrome.

  292. Okechukwu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. Fortunately, China will never be a Western-style democracy.

    Democracy is messy, but it’s superior to whatever governing model China is practicing now. Ultimately, China’s long-term prospects are dim. The main reason for their eventual demise is the kind of people their system produces. My girlfriend is a PhD candidate in molecular biology. Her working group has a wide variety of nationalities, but she only complains about the Chinese. The Chinese will not or cannot deviate from their rote learning. Their brains seemingly have been re-wired to reflexively reject anything that minimally diverges from their rote learning. They won’t investigate, challenge, question or explore. They’re not curious. They can’t think critically. They simply want to complete tasks mechanically. Outside of a few core competencies that have been drilled into their brains, they’re useless. My girlfriend has to constantly re-do their work and she doesn’t want them anywhere near her work. This is because the Chinese don’t actually know anything, they’ve just memorized certain things.

    These are the best people China has and they’re not at all impressive. Their English remains horrid after a period of many years, making communication with them virtually impossible. Everybody else becomes proficient in English, but not the Chinese. How are these automatons ever going to be able to compete with people like my girlfriend, whose brain is constantly percolating, searching, probing, investigating and creating? I suppose they can compete to a certain degree by continuing to cheat, steal and copy. But that doesn’t make for a very bright future.

    • Replies: @random rand
  293. @Daniel Chieh

    Also, I enjoyed your Summer Palace story, but here is what I found out:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30810596

    Seems quite different from a “we deserved it mentality”.

    I also found a map of the distribution of guilt/fear/shame cultures.

    Once again, I fail to see this Chinese virtue of admitting faults that’d rank China among guilt-oriented cultures.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  294. Factorize says:

    Daniel, thank you for the links.

    What I am especially anticipating is an announcement in which many gene edits are done at once.
    Traits are very very polygenic.

    To cross over into an extreme breakthrough would require making thousands of edits to a dog embryo or as I suggested some way to choose chromosome by chromosome for an optimal gamete/embryo.

    Once this milestone were achieved, a new era would have begun.
    We do not have to wait for whatever stalling might occur with human ethical approvals.
    Optimally increasing the intelligence of any of a range of animals with measured g will be sufficient.

    A chimp or gorilla that had been IQ enhanced by 100 SD would certainly become the alpha-biological intelligence of the universe. Human claims of intellectual supremacy would clearly no longer be valid.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @Okechukwu
  295. @Afrosapiens

    Its typical of Western reporting only to focus on what they want to; however, holding yourself accountable is not to the exclusion of holding others accountable as well. Takes two to tangle and all that.

    And yes, that mentality is still there, as is the “West worshipping” mentality which Derbyshire has mentioned. Its one of those things within the culture, would be as obvious as the sky is blue. “Personal responsibility” is a huge part of life, which is why honor suicide remains a constant thing. This can be writ large, and this isn’t just part of the Communist or Chinese ideology. It was throughout Taiwan as well, anywhere Confucian, and it part and parcel of the entire culture. Within the proscribed roles, you hold yourself responsible for any violations first and foremost.

    That’s the reality. You can believe as you wish.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
    , @Okechukwu
  296. @res

    Which kind of behavioral skills do you think are most relevant? Is intelligence one of those?

    How is intelligence defined in this conversation? Ability to adapt to novel environments? Behavioral plasticity? This was formed in Africa for us. Clothing, houses and behavioral adaptations also helped. Do those things preclude an increase in ‘IQ’?

    What do you think are possible explanations for the correlation of IQ with latitude seen in Japan?

    I honestly don’t know anything about Japanese history so I can’t give a good answer (yes I read the paper), but I do know about Italy more (which is referenced in the paper), which Lynn has done ‘IQ studies’ on them using PISA data.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/11/03/northsouth-differences-in-italian-iq-is-richard-lynn-right-part-ii/

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/01/31/northsouth-differences-in-italian-iq-is-richard-lynn-right/

    Here are refs to the debate from Lynn:

    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.613.5932&rep=rep1&type=pdf

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/iqs-in-italy-are-higher-in-the-north-a-reply-to-felice-and-giugliano.pdf

    et al:

    https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2011-felice.pdf

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236631160_Problems_in_deriving_Italian_regional_differences_in_intelligence_from_2009_PISA_data

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223712957_The_mean_Southern_Italian_children_IQ_is_not_particularly_low_A_reply_to_R_Lynn_2010

    http://www.scienzeformazione.unipa.it/doc/225/D_Amico__Cardaci__Di_Nuovo___Naglieri_2012.pdf

    The difference doesn’t come down to ‘genes’, there are no ‘racial differences’ between the North and South; lower test scores can be explained by environmental factors, re schooling.

    This is also a good response to Lynn:

    http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17465721111175056

    If you can get the full paper (libgen isn’t working for me right now), the author gives a table comparing different ‘measures’ of ‘IQ’ (PSIA and other exams), and shows that there is no difference in IQ between the north and south of Italy.

    Notice the final two sentences.

    I did. Did I claim that parasite load would explain the whole variation in cog ability? If I did, then I apologize.

    Here are Jensen’s thoughts on Templer and Arikawa’s paper:

    http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTAxNi9qLmludGVsbC4yMDA1LjA0LjAwMw==/10.1016%40j.intell.2005.04.003.pdf

    The main limitation of such a study design is that correlations obtained from this type of analysis are completely non-informative regarding any causal or functional connection between individual differences in skin pigmentation and individual differences in IQ, nor are they informative regarding the causal basis of the correlation, e.g., simple genetic association due to cross-assortative mating for skin color and IQ versus a pleiotropic correlation in which both of the phenotypically distinct but correlated traits are manifested by one and the same gene.

    Further, there is no relationship between any skin color genes (which there are very few of) to ‘IQ genes’ (to which there are ‘possibly’ thousands+). That should tell you it’s just a correlation and doesn’t really mean anything.

    And on the evidence against cold winters, there’s a good Psychology Today article on that note.

  297. @res

    You call this a review?

    “This may have been one of the most useless boring reads I’ve had in awhile. Basically, this entire book is about bashing science and experiments. That’s great, there are lots of bad data out there but this book just repeats and repeats the same ideas over and over. There is nothing new you will learn from this book if you have normal intelligence. The book just sites previous studies and the assumptions in this book are also not concrete. A basic summary of this book is “lots of info out there on genes are misleading”.”

    I own a copy. I bought it when it came out. I just read it for a second time. Richardson had great ideas, especially, as we’ve discussed before, intelligence systems/physiology and development along with the intelligent cell. (Chapters 4 and 5 on intelligent cells and intelligent systems/physiology are some of the most thought provoking things I’ve read in a while. Anyone who reads the book can verify this.)

    That’s not a review man. That reads like someone literally read half of the first chapter and decided to write the review. I’m not joking either. Read the book and verify this yourself.

    Now if you’d like me to get quotes from him along with references then we can discuss that, but to link to a ‘review’ of his book that literally didn’t talk about anything that Richardson said (and I doubt this guy read the book) is dishonest and you know it.

  298. @Daniel Chieh

    Its typical of Western reporting only to focus on what they want to

    LMAO, Chinese “reporting” never does that. Never.

    That’s the reality. You can believe as you wish.

    Indeed, and your Chinese moral superiority thing is something I won’t believe from objectively looking at the reality.

    Btw, speaking of suicide, China has the world’s 115th standardized rate, most African countries rank higher.

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

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  299. @Afrosapiens

    You should know that suicide is frequently seen as appropriate and honorable in Asian culture. That should have been obvious even from the pop culture that has come across. Its particularly high after the gaokao, which should not be a riddle, and is exactly part of the overall belief system of face-loss.

    This conversation serves no further purpose. Good luck with your beliefs. Perhaps you’ll even be correct.

    • Replies: @Afrosapiens
  300. @Okechukwu

    Democracy is messy, but it’s superior to whatever governing model China is practicing now.

    There is literally no reason to believe this.

    Ultimately, China’s long-term prospects are dim.

    No reason to believe this either.

    These are the best people China has and they’re not at all impressive. Their English remains horrid after a period of many years, making communication with them virtually impossible.

    This is one of those Western myths that won’t die because people like to tell themselves this to make themselves feel better. The Chinese brain drain is not what people think it is. Many (most) Chinese taking bachelor degrees in the NA are those who did not get optimal Chinese university entrance exam scores. The other large group of Chinese immigrants and Chinese university students are rich people who are possibly corrupt and have to get out in case the government fucks them. Needless to say, these people are not the best and brightest and many of them are complete idiots. The fact that a lot of these people can even get into top NA universities actually reflect very badly on the qualities of top NA universities. They’re also hardly any dumber than most of NA’s “best and brightest”.

    How are these automatons ever going to be able to compete with people like my girlfriend, whose brain is constantly percolating, searching, probing, investigating and creating? I suppose they can compete to a certain degree by continuing to cheat, steal and copy. But that doesn’t make for a very bright future.

    Yeah considering how China is currently researching 600km/h maglev trains I suppose they must be cheating, stealing, and copying some alien technology from the Vulcans or something since the tech does not yet exist on Earth. By the way, the only people wh\o truly believe Chinese people can’t innovate are idiots like Gordon Chang and James Fallows. One can argue that when controlling IQ maybe Chinese people have less capacity for innovation than Westerners but the idea Chinese people can only cheat, steal and copy is hilarious. I suspect you to be a follower of Gordon Chang. Also considering how American companies are copying Chinese companies’ ecommerce platforms and not the other way around, I guess you would probably theorize that China copied facebook and Amazon’s super secret ecommerce plan that no one but the Chinese have seen. After all, how can they possibly come up with ecommerce platforms by themselves if they can only cheat, steal, and copy?

  301. @szopen

    No idea (as I know no papers specifically about doctors)

    Intelligence did not independently predict dropping off the register, career outcome, or other measures.

    All 511 students registered with the General Medical Council, but only 464 were on the 2001 Medical Register. The 47 doctors who left the register (a mean of 11.1 years after qualifying; SD 5.9; range 2-23) had lower A level grades but not lower AH5 scores (table A, bmj.com); see http://www.bmj.com for ROC analysis. Two doctors subsequently returned to the register. Of the remainder, three had died, contact details were available for 35, and no information was available for seven.

    Intelligence does not predict careers, thus rejecting the ability argument. A levels predict because they assess achievement, and the structural model shows how past achievements predict future achievement.

    http://www.bmj.com/content/327/7407/139

    This shows no predictive effect of IQ on clinical performance (promotion to senior doctor):

    https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1741-7015-11-242

  302. utu says:
    @szopen

    (1) What do you think Thorndike is demonstrating? I looked at his 1987 paper Stability of factor loadings where he has 6 disjoint batteries of 8 tests each which he appends with extra test from the list of 17 tests and then he looks how vectors (17 long) of loadings correlate with each other. He does not address how g’s from different batterie compare. To compare g’s one should correlate 6×17 different g’s. I am sure some correlations would be large and some small. He does not do it. Anyway, different batteries produce different g’s.

    (2) But isn’t the whole point here to find out whether there is underlying “general intelligence”? Nice idea for somebody inclined for extreme reductionism. But it did not pan out. We can have a battery of tests that produce two factors of similar strengths or a battery of tests that produce one dominant factor that will not correlate well with a factor produced by yet another battery of tests. This fact is enough to shoot down the single general intelligence concept. Who decides which battery of tests is god given? Binet? Air Force? Bureau international des poids et measures in Sèvres, France?

    “whenever we have diverse set of tests, the main factors which emerge are always highly correlated”
    No true. Not always. How high is highly correlated?

    The bottom line.

    Every battery of tests yields some g. This is a trivial mathematic fact. Thus the fact that somebody got somewhere some g can’t be used as an argument for anything.

    g’s from different batteries of tests are not identical. They may have high or low correlations among each others.

    Some batteries of tests may yield two eigenvectors that are of similar strengths. Thus two independent g’s are needed to explain large part of variance.

    • Replies: @szopen
  303. @szopen

    They have doubts over meta analyses of job performance, and seems to me be saying “yeah, usually meta-analyses are better than individual studies, but here we don’t like the results”.

    They say that it’s because the adjustments inflate the correlations. The main point of the paper is that supposed high correlations between IQ and job performance are not a test of validity for IQ tests. Other biological functions have theories and models to describe them, yet there is not one for IQ. Breathalyzers are calibrated against a model of how alcohol flows through the system. There is no such test of validity for IQ. And so-called high correlations between IQ and job performance do not prove that IQ tests are construct valid.

    Sure, they raised interesting points, pointed to real shortcomings, but still the “there are valid doubts about previous meta-analyses” is not the same as “we prove the previous meta-analyses were wrong”

    Raising doubts are important; pointing out that there are other explanations is important. My biggest problem is that supervisor ratings are, as they point out, subjective and influenced by other factors other than job performance. Intelligence, as I’ve shown, doesn’t predict doctor ability.

    Few recent studies (no meta-analysis done AFAIK) seem to not support earlier conclusions.

    They say that more recent studies show that job performance is more complex.

    Yeah, it’s not all they have written, but reading them I had the impression that they have an axe to grind. It’s not that I think they are wrong. It’s that I think that one paper is not enough to contradict what seems to me be a widely accepted in the literature. I am not a contrarian and when I read literature outside my domain of expertise, I (usually) tend to rely on current most dominant view, not necessarily the newest one.

    You’re appealing to motivation while revealing your bias against the paper.

    RR, we have discussed many times in the past and I really do not know why you think you know the answer. I have accepted findings which I do not like in the past. In fact just a year ago you seemed to be in perfect agreement with me. In fact I am of impression that even just few months ago you seemed to agree. Why then suddenly attack me for positions you were occupying not long ago and implying that my motives are different than yours some time ago?

    One, I’m a contrarian. Two, I read new things and challenge my beliefs all the time. My views have been strongly revised over the past year.

    The fact of the matter is this: there is no solid evidence that IQ predicts job performance (as I’ve explicitly shown with doctors).

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @res
  304. szopen says:
    @Afrosapiens

    Thanks a lot for both comments. Do you have a link to the paper? Google isn’t much helpful (“kaufman personality traits intelligence” gives no answer) and I would love to know how they measure “morality” for example (or “rationality”, given that I’ve read before that “rationality” is slightly correlated with IQ).

    I’d only like to note that “0.423″ is not a low correlation. I think traditionally this would be called “medium” correlation level.

    As for the IQ doesn’t make people rational, moral, orderly, sociable, cooperative, conscientious or cool-headed, i don’t know why it should. In my understanding “g” measures (some) quality of nervous system, even though I don’t know what this quality is. If, for example, high “g” scores would indicate better brain connectivity or more gray matter (or whatever, i am just throwing assumptions here), then there is no reason to believe that would also indicate that a men with such brain must be more moral or cooperative. Well, to tell the truth, the low correlation (0.2 to 0.3 in other popular article I’ve read) did surprised me some two or three years ago when I first heard about it, but then I realised than my expectation was without basis.

    Here is a popular article discussing the (lack of) link between IQ and rationality:

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rational-and-irrational-thought-the-thinking-that-iq-tests-miss/

    Those two fragments are quite interesting IMO:

    No matter what their IQ, most people need to be told that fully disjunctive reasoning will be necessary to solve the puzzle, or else they won’t bother to use it. Maggie Toplak of York University in Toronto, West and I have shown that high-IQ people are only slightly more likely to spontaneously adopt disjunctive reasoning in situations that do not explicitly demand it.

    For the second source of dysrationalia, mindware deficits, we would expect to see some correlation with intelligence because gaps in mindware often arise from lack of education, and education tends to be reflected in IQ scores. But the knowledge and thinking styles relevant to dysrationalia are often not picked up until rather late in life. It is quite possible for intelligent people to go through school and never be taught probabilistic thinking, scientific reasoning, and other strategies measured by the XYZ virus puzzle and the four-card selection task described earlier.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  305. @ Daniel Chieh

    LOL! Don’t you think it’s such a waste of your time, despite perhaps some wicked faint pleasure of entertainment, to engage into an argument with some primitive axe-grinding sapiens here when things called logic and fact don’t usually register in their small brains, which, evolutionarily speaking, seem only to have just reached the level of being capable of filling discussion threads with endless pages of nonsense?

  306. Okechukwu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Its typical of Western reporting only to focus on what they want to; however, holding yourself accountable is not to the exclusion of holding others accountable as well. Takes two to tangle and all that.

    Yeah, it’s really smart to compare Chinese government-run propaganda rags to private Western media that are often in conflict with their governments. Western media bring down Western governments. In China, the media is the government. That high IQ of yours you keep bragging about seems entirely to be a figment of your imagination.

    Personal responsibility” is a huge part of life … Confucian blah blah blah

    Yeah, right. Google Chinese business scams or Chinese fraud or Chinese financial crimes or Chinese pyramid schemes or Chinese export scams or Chinese counterfeit goods or Chinese fake food or Chinese education scams (this is when they submit fraudulent documents to U.S. universities). A country that is teetering on the edge of total dysfunction simply on the basis of the weight of the frauds, scams and general malfeasance therein is not one that values personal responsibility.

    The Chinese can be ruthless and completely without scruples when it comes to making a buck, which is why you’d have to be a complete imbecile to put anything in your mouth that comes from there. It could be the last thing you ever eat.

  307. @utu

    OF course to use g as a sort of be-all-end-all thing is incomplete, Panda would not say it’s “fraudulent argument” though.

    Furthermore, kinda of universial “g” does somehow exist just by common intuition, doesn’t it? If it’s not called g for the moment, it would be called “x” or “y” or “z” in the future as sciences progress.

    Most importantly, the current g in most common arguments is not the g itself, rather, it’s g’s 2 layers of underlying meanings that embody:

    1/ thus far the best common correlation power with all other measures, and

    2/ thus far the best common predictive power.

    in short, g is prediction.

    • Replies: @utu
  308. @ James Thompson

    “Cold winter-harder long term planning” aside, is there any study done on absolute tempreture effect to effectiveness of a functional brain as an biological organ in the field of Medicine, professor?

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  309. @Factorize

    A chimp or gorilla that had been IQ enhanced by 100 SD would certainly become the alpha-biological intelligence of the universe

    Your mommy need more this than a gorilla. What’s your age*

    7 years old*

    A typical case of ”mathematical tilt”: lacking in benign/receptive empathy.

  310. szopen says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Thanks for the data on doctors.

    You’re appealing to motivation while revealing your bias against the paper.

    Well, when I examine my own motives I do not think I am biased against “paper arguing against IQ validity” as such. However, after self-examination, I have to admit that I might be subconsciously biased against any paper which goes against my views. Sure, I shouldn’t be, sure, you can rightfully point it out, but I think everyone or almost everyone has similar biases, even if he/she tries to do otherwise (surely I try to onvercome my biases!). My bias is imply “I invested a lot of thinking into this idea, this idea makes sense to me, a lot of papers I read supported this idea, hence when something contradicts it, I will not immedietely abandon it, but first thought it through carefully, examine the evidence, wait for the other side to comment, evaluate validity of their answer, and then make a decision”. Such a confirmation bias is a common phenomenon and if you are free of it, I’d have to say you could become a role model for me :D

    As for Richardson points, for starters, it’s true that supervisor rating is subjective, but it’s not clear to me whether it biases the rating toward people with higher IQ scores (“rating higher people which are socially similar to me”), or not (“rating higher people who are more social, agreeable, not questioning orders, extravert, amiable etc”). It’s also not clear to me whether, for example, correction for range restriction really produces overcorrection, as argued by Richardson. It might, sure, but surely not correcting for range restriction would produce also invalid results (as not everyone decides to try and become a doctor, not everyone is admitted to the university and passes the exams).

  311. szopen says:
    @utu

    utu,
    you are repeating the same argument since the last year, and I repeat the same counter argument since the last year.

    ad 1) As I wrote above in the previous comment: the g-loadings of the tests do correlate despite they were calculated using different batteries of thests. If the “g”s which arose in analysis of those different batteries were really different, then the g-loadings should not be correlated. Yet they are correlated, hence the “g”s cannot be totally different (contrary to your claim “g’s from different batteries of tests are not identical.” – unless you consider 0.99 correlation to be merely “high correlation” and not “identical”. I doubt you would get that high correlation between two measures of blood pressure of the same person!).

    I have not written Thorndike compared “g”s. I have written he compared g-loadings of same test in different batteries and have found them correlated.
    I have written that Johnson study compared “g”s of different batteries (no tests overlapping) and found them nearly identical.

    I have also found her newest tudy from 2008 (“Stil just 1 g”). Five different batteries, no overlapping tests. The “g” extracted Catell’s Culture Fair test, which included opeartions on matrices and pretty much nothing else, had the lowest correlations: only 0.76 with general aptitude something something (GATB) and ).79 with TIB, while 0.96 with GIT (Groninger Intelligence Test) which cinluded4 out of 8 tests with vocabulary. ALl other correlation were in range 0.95 and more (the highest between TIB and GIT, 1.0, and GATB and TIB, 1.0). None of the tests were used in the previous study from 2004.

    Once again, almost identical “g”s for different batteries.

    “whenever we have diverse set of tests, the main factors which emerge are always highly correlated” No true. Not always. How high is highly correlated?

    IIRC “highly correlated” is traditionally used when correlation >0.5. In studies I read the correlations were higher than 0.7. If you know other studies, I would appreciate the links.

    ad 2) The common sense. If we want the check whether there is a “general factor”, then we should create variety of tests tapping different mental abilities and check whether the factor arising is the same, period. Creating a battery which is non-diverse has no sense in establishing the question.

    And, AFAIK the “g”s created by different tests constructed in such manner (different bateries with many diverse tests) are highly correlated (nearly identical in the study I have quoted).

    ad the bottom line) Already I wrote this a year ago when you have used this argument for the first time, and already I have repeated this in this thread. The fact that some “g” arose is, indeed, trivial. The fact that all mental tests are positively correlated (though correlations are low for some, true) is not. Especially when some tests were specifically created to disprove the “g” theory. The fact that the “g”s arising from batteries of diverse tests are highly correlated (sometimes indistinguishable) is not trivial.

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @Daniel Chieh
    , @szopen
    , @utu
  312. szopen says:
    @szopen

    Foudn another study: “Are the General Factors From Different Child And Adolescent Intelligence Tests the Same? Results From a Five-Sample, Six-Test Analysis” 2013, Randy et al. The lowest correlation between “g”s of different tests applied to the same children was 0.89, two correlations were “not statistically different from 1.0″,

    They also quote two other studies, which I have not read yet, supposedly finding correlations between different “g”s as 0.98, 0.99 and 1.0, but they seem to test the same tests (with different samples).

    Also, in another study (Salthouse 2013) I have found only an abstract, claiming also high correlations “for tehoretically similar constructs”

  313. @random rand

    Hey, you sir! How dare you use facts and logic ?

    Let alone BLM, do you genuinely comprehend the degree of psychological trauma you’ve just caused by playing piano to a wood log?

  314. @ James Thompson

    Is the Mean Annual Temp (MAT) graph in the OP from today’s world?

    Do you have eastimated MAT info for at least 5,000 years ago?

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  315. Factorize says:

    g research on animals would add great clarity to basic psychometric concepts and might finally allow debates related to these concepts to end.

    If there were lab animals with a very wide range of g that exhibited strikingly different ability levels, then it would no longer be plausible to argue that such differences did not exist nor that they were unrelated to genetics.

    Lab animals have not been found to be good models for cancer and many others diseases/traits. Yet, they might make very good models for g as g is adaptive in a broad range of environmental contexts.

    Due to the highly polygenic nature of g, it is now understood that it will be possible to create humans with very extreme intelligence. For various reasons it might take time for this to be realized in humans.

    The highly polygenic nature of g should also be present in animals and it should be possible to create animals with very extreme intelligence. There are no obvious reasons why such animals will not be created over a short to medium term time horizon.

    This is a very exciting possibility as such animals might very well have IQs that exceed those of humans.

    • Troll: utu
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @Santoculto
  316. @szopen

    I wanted to add that I very much enjoy the conversation between you and @utu. From my understanding of the brain, I lean slightly toward what I think is your opinion that g is not simply defined – but I do think that it measures something meaningful. I would say it is equivalent to defining g as a measure of general health, using a certain heart rate and then use it to explain all human physical performance. A scientist would find correlation, but it would certainly not be the most accurate metric of all of a person’s physical performance on an individual basis. A test for running speed would find a total lack of correlation between the “general health” of a human and his inability to run due to having only one leg, for example.

    It still, however, would not mean that its useless as some metric for human health.

    • Agree: szopen
  317. res says:
    @RaceRealist88

    Intelligence, as I’ve shown, doesn’t predict doctor ability.

    That has hardly been shown. You take a heavily selected group (both by IQ through the MCAT and by the persistence to make it through medical school) and then look at their IQ as a predictor. There are two major problems with this.

    - Restriction of range.
    - Low IQ physicians are likely to be highly selected for other traits relevant to becoming a doctor (e.g. persistence).

    Being contrarian and skeptical is well and good, but at some point it is good to remove the beam from your own eye before criticizing the motes in others.

    I look forward to everyone saying IQ does not help skill at being a doctor putting their money where their mouth is and exclusively patronizing 85 IQ doctors from now on.

    P.S. Regarding that last, here is a study looking at the performance of physicians referred for alleged medical error: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887617704000769

    A sample:

    The results of this retrospective review of neuropsychological performance on 148 physicians referred for assessment due to allegations of medical error suggest that, as a group, they are generally of average intelligence. Average intellectual functioning among this physician group is consistent with prior reports of physicians assessed for performance difficulties but is lower than the expected level of functioning of physicians as a whole (Turnbull et al., 2000; Madden, 1988). Previous reports of the intellectual functioning of “non-impaired” physicians have suggested that the mean I.Q. of individuals with medical degrees is 125 (Matarazzo & Goldstein, 1972; Wecshler, 1972), which is considerably higher than the average performance of this cohort. Matarazzo and Goldstein (1972) also examined the I.Q. of the average medical student to determine whether, then, present claims that there was a “decline in the intellectual caliber of the entering medical student” (p. 102) was correct. Those authors found, contrary to the alleged contention, that their sample of medical students performed similar to that of 10 other samples of medical student I.Q.’s from 1946 to 1967. The average Full Scale I.Q. of the medical students across the number of studies was 125, similar to the I.Q.’s of physicians at that time.

  318. @Factorize

    Yet, they might make very good models for g as g is adaptive in a broad range of environmental contexts.

    I’m not sure why this would have to be the case. If this was always the case, then we would have highly intelligent snails, for example. Intelligence is only useful in certain cases, for example – tool creation as a skill is only useful if appendages exist to manipulate and use tools.

    If there were lab animals with a very wide range of g that exhibited strikingly different ability levels, then it would no longer be plausible to argue that such differences did not exist nor that they were unrelated to genetics.

    This is already known.

    https://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-12-adding-human-glial-cells-mice.html

    I’m dubious that we will be able to expand intelligence in as extreme ways as you suggest. Most biological processes are reasonably though not perfectly optimized.

    • Replies: @res
  319. @Factorize

    g research on animals would add great clarity to basic psychometric concepts and might finally allow debates related to these concepts to end.

    NO. G factor is understandable without pseudo-super-analyzers who need ”test” what seems salient to perceive. It’s just like ”test” studies to show if poverty is [ALWAYS, MOSTLY] causal to violent behavior. In SANE world, this type of study is FRIVOLOUS when it’s easy to observe this patterns. Most of this studies are done to try to convince STUPID people in important hierarchical positions on academia that their apophenic and emotional biases are wrong.

    If there were lab animals with a very wide range of g that exhibited strikingly different ability levels, then it would no longer be plausible to argue that such differences did not exist nor that they were unrelated to genetics.

    No there such thing ”wide range of g”. There is only one g.

    Lab animals have not been found to be good models for cancer and many others diseases/traits. Yet, they might make very good models for g as g is adaptive in a broad range of environmental contexts.

    Your mommy is a good model of Fatness awareness, sociopath!!!

    Only MEDIOCRE scientists need ”ANIMEL MODELS” to test your hipo-thesis.

    Due to the highly polygenic nature of g, it is now understood that it will be possible to create humans with very extreme intelligence. For various reasons it might take time for this to be realized in humans.

    Create such creatures for what*
    They will exterminate you in the first opportunity.

    Polygienic nature of statistical artfact, jesús eterno!!!
    Genes of toilet paper.

    Most intelligence researchers even don’t know what intelligence or creativity or rationality really is…

    ”There are no obvious reasons why such animals will not be created over a short to medium term time horizon.”

    I’m favour or HUMAAAANE NATURAL eugenic models on non-human animals. And not that mad scientist tests.

    Yes, there are very ethically obvious reasons to stop [to start] mad scientists with its IRRESPONSIBLE creativity.

  320. utu says:
    @PandaAtWar

    1/ thus far the best common correlation power with all other measures, and

    2/ thus far the best common predictive power.

    This is you response to my point that different batteries of tests produce different g’s that not necessarily correlate well with each other? Which of the two different g’s is “the best” in whatever you saying some magical g is the best at?

    • Replies: @PandaAtWar
  321. szopen says:
    @szopen

    Argh! I have found that somehow I deleted the whole sentence!

    Here:

    (contrary to your claim “g’s from different batteries of tests are not identical.” – unless you consider 0.99 correlation to be merely “high correlation” and not “identical”. I doubt you would get that high correlation between two measures of blood pressure of the same person!).

    There should be first a sentence “also, i ahve mentioned that Johnson [2004] compared three batteries of tests applied to the same people and found out the “g”s to be indistinguishable ( (contrary to your claim “g’s from different batteries of tests are not identical.” – unless you consider 0.99 correlation to be merely “high correlation” and not “identical”. I doubt you would get that high correlation between two measures of blood pressure of the same person!).”

    • Replies: @utu
  322. utu says:
    @szopen

    The fact that some “g” arose is, indeed, trivial. The fact that all mental tests are positively correlated (though correlations are low for some, true) is not.

    Correct on first. The second is also trivial because of the low correlations that you admit yourself do occur. And also because the batteries of tests are created by people who share common beliefs and biases including the one that there is common g.

    you are repeating the same argument since the last year, and I repeat the same counter argument since the last year.

    Probably true. I take the blame for it that for the lack of persuasive powers on my part you were left in error and probably will remain so.

    • Replies: @szopen
  323. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @jason kennedy

    Go back to tumblr and then attend your White Guilt class.

  324. @random rand

    Don’t be mean to Gordan Chang, he’s a great hero of the Celestial Kingdom. Ask any Chinese netizen, he is a pivotal member of the SFB*. In all honesty, though, he’s pretty unintentionally hilarious and I’ve come to really enjoy his articles. Best hanjian 2010.

    *Strategic Fool-You Bureau.

    • Replies: @random rand
  325. utu says:
    @szopen

    This is a road to nowhere. My claim that g’s are not identical or poorly correlated is proved by two batteries of tests that yield two poorly correlated g’s. I think that there are plenty of results that prove my claim. You claim is much harder and it can’t be really proven empirically. So you will keep listing papers that got similar g’s and so on but this still is not proving your claim. Your claim is disproven by any two batteries of tests that yield significantly different g’s.

    • Replies: @szopen
  326. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Afrosapiens

    >Most of the world, especially in Africa would laugh at the idea of measuring intelligence. Most of the world, especially in Africa have other conceptions of human worth.

    Even the Chinese authorities acknowledge intelligence gaps.

    >LMAO! I don’t give a damn about “harmonious existence blah blah blah”. All I care about is my girlfriend, my family and friends who need me here as much as I need them.

    Here we see the Negro admitting to having no respect for his host country and planning to get all the gibsmedats around.

    >Europeans really don’t need us to destroy each other. Without us, they’d be declining like Japan.

    Ah yes, Japan with how it has some of the lowest crime levels on Earth, some of the highest GDP per capita, a leadership and enterainment community nowhere near as hostile to their populace as the Euros or as disasterous as the Black ones (How’s Zimbabwe doing?). What, not they’re not having more kids on their well-populated island? It’s called automation and keeping out migrants or aren’t of your stock.

    And tell us about the many contributions of Togongo and Jamal. Is it in welfare using, terrorism, AIDs, and prowling for White women to rape, I mean, enrich?

  327. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    That Kang’s post demonstrates Negro ingratitude, parasitism, and delusions of grandeur.

  328. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    Japan needs more migrants to use their gibsmedats and enrich Japanese women.

  329. @szopen

    Regarding the notion that intelligence tests “miss” rationality, here are a few comments.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-tricky-question-of-rationality

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  330. @PandaAtWar

    Yes, there is work on performance under different temperature conditions. Don’t have references to hand, but I recall that the Applied Psychology Unit studied these sorts of matters. Usually, there is a fall in performance, but it depends on the degree of training and subject motivation, and if both those are high then reasonable performance can be sustained even in difficult conditions. Also, work on bio-protection suits was done for the military during Gulf wars, and I think there was a 30% drop in performance in desert conditions.

  331. @PandaAtWar

    Hertler is working on the matter, which is complicated, of looking at changes in climate over longer time periods, and changes as people migrate from one biome to another. This will also require estimates of selection pressures over the generations to provide a metric for the presumed impact of these changes in biome. As I explained, this is an attempt to improve the arguments about the effects of temperature on its own, and to take in a broader range of factors.

  332. @res

    As you say, medics are heavily selected for attainment, and that causes a restriction in range. Chris McManus studied medical students for decades. Here is a recent paper of his.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/representativeness-beats-size

    • Replies: @RaceRealist88
    , @res
  333. @Daniel Chieh

    You should know that suicide is frequently seen as appropriate and honorable in Asian culture. That should have been obvious even from the pop culture that has come across. Its particularly high after the gaokao, which should not be a riddle, and is exactly part of the overall belief system of face-loss.

    Irrelevant, the stats just show that suicide whether it’s related to honor or anything else is not a big thing in China, so don’t use it for your argument that the Chinese have such a sense of personal responsibility that they commit suicide en masse.

  334. @res

    I wrote something on this last night and just came across a few more papers on this. There is a good amount of literature on the matter you linked to. PTSD, depression, etc are looked at as some causes for this.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/10/04/doctors-iq-and-job-performance/

    One interesting study I came across states that:

    Most of the medical students had near average intelligence (88.3%) , they undergone one to two years preparation for medical entrance exams and devoted much time (>6 hrs) in studies. 10% of the students had higher IQ, spare less time in their self study but were sincere in the classes

    Students with near average IQ work hard in their studies and their academic performance was similar to students with higher IQ. So IQ can`t be made the basis for medical entrance; instead giving weight-age to secondary school results and limiting the number of attempts may shorten the time duration for entry and completion of MBBS degree.

    http://imsear.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/175546

    I’ll go in depth later when I have access to my laptop.

    Szopen, I’ll reply to you later this afternoon as well.

    • Replies: @res
  335. @James Thompson

    Dr Thompson, Ken Richardson cites that 2013 study from McManus in his new book and states that IQ doesn’t predict promotion to senior doctor.

    McManus et al also have a 2003 paper where they write:

    Intelligence did not independently predict dropping off the register, career outcome, or other measures.

    Intelligence does not predict careers, thus rejecting the ability argument. A levels predict because they assess achievement, and the structural model shows how past achievements predict future achievement.

    http://www.bmj.com/content/327/7407/139

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  336. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    I’m dubious that we will be able to expand intelligence in as extreme ways as you suggest. Most biological processes are reasonably though not perfectly optimized.

    I have some skepticism about this as well, but you might want to read Steve Hsu’s blog a bit about this (if you don’t already). His analogies with animal breeding experiences are fairly compelling IMHO. The hard part is judging which traits are more/less optimized and/or subject to physical limits.

  337. @RaceRealist88

    I think it is a restriction of range issue. McManus says that all predictors are pretty weak, and one explanation is that the selection has been done before application to medical school, as each discipline advertises their requirements, and in the case of medicine their high rejection rates.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  338. Factorize says:

    Daniel, the pages numbered 19 and 20 of the below url describe the logic why the maximal intelligence phenotype in humans has remained hidden.

    https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.3421

    The research implies that humans with 1500 IQ should be possible.
    It also implies that very extreme intelligence phenotypes for other animals that have
    been found to have measurable g including chimps, ravens, dogs and others should also be possible.

    It would help to move the technology forward if this idea were to enter mainstream conversation.

  339. @James Thompson

    Dr. Thompson, I’m curious about your thoughts on the Torrance Test as a measure of testing creativity.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  340. szopen says:
    @utu

    the batteries of tests are created by people who share common beliefs and biases including the one that there is common g.

    But this is the whole point! The were also batteries created by people trying to disprove “g”, trying to prove that “multiple intelligences” exist, and still they were correlated – despite they did NOT believe there is a common “g”!

    • Replies: @utu
  341. @James Thompson

    Yes old wolf, they miss… you miss it too… you’re living example of lack on rationality, at least in HIGGGHEST labels…

    People think in rationality as they think on cognitive empathy. Rationality is not just cognitive skills, what IQ tests measure or compare, but the good or excellent use of cognitive skill in interaction with psychological skills.

    Rationality barely can be reduced to non-contextual/non–real-world–cultural TESTS.

    Simple fact majority of high IQ people tend to lean-into-the-left or into-the-right in extreme ways: socially or economically liberal, already show how irrational they can be.

    But i agree that there is a correlation between highest rational levels and above-cognitive skills but not that … as ”IQ don’t miss rationality =IQ measure rationality too = MOST high/highest IQ people are [more] rational”.

  342. szopen says:
    @utu

    Sooo your claim is basically:

    Yeah, so long every time someone tried to actually check whether “g”s of different batteries of many diverse tests are the same, always they were correlated (the lower value I _think_ 0.76), but it does not matter, because there might be a battery of diverse tests of cognitive abilities, and they would produce “g” not correlated with other “g”s. I know no such battery exist, but not all were checked and that’s why I think plenty of them exist and that’s why the “g”s produced by all the batteries checked so far is different. Also, Gardner actually believed in ‘G” despite claiming “g” does not exist and that’s why his tests designed to prove many intelligences exist, correlate nevertheless, and when “g” is extracted it is correlated at 0.76 with “G” extracted from Wonderlic Personel test.

    I am sorry if I have missed something. Here in Poland we’re not actually known for intelligence and that’s the most probable reason I wasn’t impressed by this reasoning.

    • Troll: utu
    • Replies: @utu
  343. utu says:
    @szopen

    and still they were correlated

    Not true.

  344. Okechukwu says:
    @random rand

    Many (most) Chinese taking bachelor degrees in the NA are those who did not get optimal Chinese university entrance exam scores. The other large group of Chinese immigrants and Chinese university students are rich people who are possibly corrupt and have to get out in case the government fucks them.

    Not relevant in this case. These are Chinese postgraduates who come already armed with Chinese undergraduate degrees. I’m not going to make the leap to suggest that Chinese are stupid or inferior. I’ll leave the pretensions of supremacy to the Asian nitwits on here. What is certain, however, is that the Chinese system is what creates these people and not some innate predisposition. Their educational system inculcates them with a great deal of information, but they never learn how to apply that information. It’s sort of like cramming for a test and filling your head with the data you need specifically for that test. Your brain can recall this information come test time but you don’t really understand the depth and scope of the information.

    Yeah considering how China is currently researching 600km/h maglev trains I suppose they must be cheating, stealing, and copying some alien technology from the Vulcans or something since the tech does not yet exist on Earth.

    None of that germinated organically in China. Maglev tech certainly didn’t, nor did trains or railroads.

    I suspect you to be a follower of Gordon Chang.

    Gordon Chang comes off to me as sort of an Asian Uncle Tom. I despise such people. In
    temperament, he is not that far removed from our Asian supremacist commenters here. They’re taking different roads to get to the same place, which is the approval of certain reactionary and racist elements among whites.

    Also considering how American companies are copying Chinese companies’ ecommerce platforms and not the other way around

    Left to their own devices the Chinese wouldn’t have any e-commerce or Internet or computers for that matter. People are also copying African mobile money platforms like M-Pesa. But we know the technology didn’t originate there.

    • Replies: @random rand
  345. utu says:
    @szopen

    I am not interested who you are or what you are. I do not care if you are a monkey in Warsaw Zoo as long a you can present cogent and coherent arguments and show good will to recognize valid arguments particularly when they are not to your liking.

    • Replies: @szopen
    , @szopen
  346. res says:
    @James Thompson

    Thanks for the connection.

    The 2003 paper from McManus (thanks RR) seems relevant because it includes an explicit attempt to measure intelligence using the AH5 “high grade” intelligence test.

    Do you know about AH5 norming (e.g. conversion to IQ)? I could not find that information after a fair amount of searching. They give a mean score of 40.4, but don’t translate that:

    The mean total AH5 score (fig A, bmj.com) of 40.4 was similar to norms,8 as were verbal and spatial scores (table A, bmj.com). The mean A level score (fig A, bmj.com) was 4.00, equivalent to grade BBB. AH5 score and A level grade were correlated (Pearson r=0.285, P < 0.001; fig B, bmj.com).

    Table A in the supplemental material gives some more information about AH5 scores:
    Norms for university students from AH5 manual:
    Overall 39.1 (8.3)
    Medicine 37.5 (7.5)
    Science 39.0 (8.0)
    Arts 34.6 (7.5)

    For the study doctors they quote: 40.4 (7.7; 19-62)
    Where I think 7.7 is the SD and 19-62 is the range. The whole distribution is shown in Figure A. The distribution is normal in contrast to A Levels which are heavily ceiling limited. I wonder if the analysis results would change if the AH5 top scores were lumped together above about 45-50.

    It would be interesting to know more about the lower left outliers in Figure B. Some people are getting a serious break on admissions.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  347. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Okechukwu

    Here we see a Negro going full We Wuz.

    >Mark Dean

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Mark_Dean_(computer_scientist)

    Did swell work but didn’t invent it.

    >Jerry Lawson

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Home_video_game_console

    Ralph H. Pier was the first to map out a home video game. With the Magnavox Odyssey being the first console.

    >A black man was highly instrumental in developing the cell phone technology we have today and which your Samsung has turned into a billion dollar business (see Henry T. Thompson).

    http://conservative-headlines.com/2014/02/black-history-month-myth-of-the-day-the-cell-phone/

    Even a site as cucked as Wikipedia doesn’t lend any credence to your We Wuzzing:

    https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone

    >More We Wuz

    https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propeller#Early_developments

    https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stevens_(inventor)

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

    Bonus:

    http://www.niggermania.com/tom/blackinventionmyths/index.html

    >Nobel Prize

    Claiming that there’s some Northern European conspiracy to keep out non-Northern Europeans is something a member of a low-trust group (Blacks, Muslims) would say, as if everybody else was just like them.

    Also:

    http://www.jinfo.org/Nobel_Prizes.html

    https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_Nobel_laureates

    Askenazi and Sephardi Jews are too highly represented in Nobel Prize winners to harp on population or North European Privilege (Or are Jews suddenly accepted as fellow Aryans now)?

    • Troll: Okechukwu
  348. szopen says:

    @ James Thompson
    Can we count on some future post on “g” stability and “g”-loading stability across the test batteries? I found another work, a thesis by Major under direction of Wendy Thompson, once again finding high correlation between “g”s extracted from different batteries, but I guess a professional knows more and can elaborate more on the topic than we, the mere mortals.

    • Replies: @James Thompson
  349. res says:
    @RaceRealist88

    That India (!) study is interesting. My first point would be that the IQ test they used was a derivative of the iqtest.com test. I don’t think that would be considered a particularly good IQ test.

    If I interpret things correctly they binned the scores into one SD wide (except 85-114 for average) categories by both time and score. That seems like a terrible idea given how much information is lost. I am unable to interpret the exact thresholds used for each bin with certainty, but it looks like there are some serious mismatches possible. For example, scoring 55 marks in 15 minutes is average, but scoring 21 marks in 13 minutes is above average?!

    Using the difference between 15-20 minutes, 11-13 minutes, and <11 minutes to differentiate between average (85-114), above average (115-129) , and gifted/genius (130-144 and 145-159) seems absurd to me. The marks limits look more reasonable, but the below/average gap is only 15 to 20 relative to a 20 to 45 max jump for average/above. I sincerely hope I am misunderstanding what they did.

    Frankly, after trying to interpret Table 2 I am wondering about the IQs of the authors (and peer reviewers). If anyone thinks it is reasonable please explain the meaning to me.

    I was not particularly impressed by the full paper, but it's best if others assess that for themselves.

    P.S. Have you read the full paper? Do you think their IQ scoring methodology is sound?

  350. szopen says:
    @utu

    Utu, but what do you expect from me, when you post such an argument? Yes, not all batteries were tested. But all the studies which I was able to find which actually tried to check “g”s of different tests, found high correlation. You are claiming “many batteries exist (with many diverse tests)” which would produce different “g”, but you are not posting a single study to prove your claim, you merely state “it’s enough that one such study exist”. By your criterion it would be impossible to prove “g” exists (becasue someone could aways in theory design a new battery of tests, fulfilling criterion of “many diverse tests of mental abilities” and maybe, just maybe, taht would not correlate with other “g”s).

    But this is not a problem – I was teached in my methodology classes the Popperian approach, where you do not prove that hypothesis is true, you merely continously try to disprove it, and you should accept it as true until you disprove it. It was also mentioned in a footnote that if you have gathered many confirmations, then it’s ok to disbelieve a single disproval. That’s why I do not recognize your claim as valid argument against “g”.

    But here is a point to you: I was wrong to say the tests were designed by Gardner. Sloppy reading on my point, I apologise.

    Gardner had not designed the tests, he merely stated that there are the multiple intelligences and described them. Visser et al then designed the tests as well as they could to fit Gardner decriptions. And yes, not all correlated. Tests for kinetic intelligence (ie. keeping a balance while standing at one leg) were negatively or zero correlated, accuracy (accruately reflect on your own strenght and weaknesses) and music (tone and rhythm recognition) had mixed correlations, oscillating around.

    Once again – a point for you and I withdraw the argument from Gardner and his MIs. However, his MI are not also arguments against.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
    , @utu
  351. szopen says:
    @utu

    And, after some thought, sorry for my tone. I am very quick-tempered and I worked hard over the years to be polite in both internet and real daily social interactions. Nevertheless, sometimes I still act like an arsehole. I shouldn’t make fun of your argument and I should formulate my objections to its validity differently. I apologise.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  352. Okechukwu says:
    @Factorize

    A chimp or gorilla that had been IQ enhanced by 100 SD would certainly become the alpha-biological intelligence of the universe. Human claims of intellectual supremacy would clearly no longer be valid.

    Very funny. That’s never going to happen. One pathway to further investigation is through Alzheimers and Parkinson’s research, which can obviate many of the ethical objections. Most chimpanzees function at the level of a human 2 or 3 year old child on physical learning if not social learning. The ones that function at a higher age range (say 7 or 8 years old) are exceptional and don’t exist in great numbers in captivity. These are the most suitably research subjects. It may be possible to chemically enhance neural connections, thereby enhancing concentration.

    This study examined the link between concentration and intelligence:

    A strong interactive link between sensory discriminations and intelligence

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3702042/

  353. @szopen

    Off topic, I should mention that I quite admire your country for its courage. Poland seems to play a good hand in an increasingly mad Europe.

    • Replies: @szopen
  354. szopen says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Thanks. We have our fair share of idiots, SJWs and madmen too, unfortunately. Hard to say how long it would be before the situation will become as rotten as in the west :( And even our gvt has its moments of pure lunacy. For example, the government is eager to create new law against “fake news”, seemingly unaware that it will be then used against independent journalists, most likely against right-wingers.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  355. @szopen

    I already said this but nobody remember and nobody cares, what ever. I believe there is a type of optimal use of intelligence whatever the IQ scores. And remember That IQ tests IS about culture-genetic co-evolution, type of mirror, so IQ is cultural but in different way many people believe. This optimal use seems “heritable” (aka genetic/inheritable) or predictable.

  356. @szopen

    I think as the fortunes of the EU continue to spiral downward from a myriad of self-inflicted wounds, rightist movements in Poland will be increasingly vindicated and the parasites will be less engorged to continue their subversion, so there is much hope still. In a race to the bottom, you just need to avoid hitting the floor first. And keep those fences strong.

    • Replies: @utu
  357. Factorize says:

    Okechukwu, I was not merely being provocative.

    Your assessment of the range of chimp cognitive ability is quite accurate. However, what if we were to move towards a more optimal cognitive genotype?

    The top figure below suggests that there are many thousands of IQ SNPs in the human genome. There should also certainly then be many thousands of IQ SNPs in the chimp genome. There probably would be a fair amount of overlap between the two. If we could have 1500 IQ humans with intelligence 100 SD over normal, then why couldn’t we genetically engineer chimps with intelligence 100 SD over normal chimp IQ? A chimp with intelligence similar to an 8 eight year old would only be 3 SD below the IQ average of a human adult. Adding up to 100 SD of IQ would move the chimp well outside of the range of observed human cognitive ability.

    There is no reason to suspect that 100 SD in chimps could not be achieved. What I found of particular note is that there would be much less obstruction to increasing the IQ of a chimp than a human. As was noted above, mouse IQ was increased through genetic technology a few years ago. I think it is reasonable that a more compelling example of increased g in animals might now be in the works.

  358. @Daniel Chieh

    No experience of using it. For a general look at the topic, Rex Jung is my go-to person.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/heave-half-brick-at-creativity

  359. @res

    Yes, there are some dull doctors, but some extremely clever ones, who are a delight to be with. Mostly the difference shows up in their research output. Also, the best surgeons tend towards revision, that is, correcting the mistakes of less able surgeons. I was recommending one just this evening.
    The AH5. I have consulted an esteemed colleague, and she tells me we don’t have manual in our bookcase, just some test forms somewhere. All this despite her having moved to Psychology entirely through the encouragement of Alice Heim.
    I had a quick google, so you might try deriving it from this

    https://www.psyjob.it/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/GRT2Man.pdf

    correlation table on page 6

    • Replies: @res
  360. @szopen

    Ian Deary (passim) a good person to read on this topic.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-99-steps-of-intelligence-hunters

    Since its discovery in 1904, hundreds of studies have replicated the finding that around 40% of the variance in people’s test scores on a diverse battery of cognitive tests can be accounted for by a single general factor. General cognitive function is peerless among human psychological traits in terms of its empirical support and importance for life outcomes. Individual differences in general cognitive function are stable across most of the life course. Twin studies find that general cognitive function has a heritability of more than 50% from adolescence through adulthood to older age. SNP-based estimates of heritability for general cognitive function are about 20-30%. To date, little of this substantial heritability has been explained; only a few relevant genetic loci have been discovered

  361. Factorize says:

    Could anyone suggest some online sites that I could use to assess my IQ. I have already taken a large number of cognitive tests, though about all I am sure of is that my IQ is somewhere between 70 and 170. Psychometric theory suggests that a very accurate intelligence assessment should be possible when larger and larger samples of responses are recorded.

    Anyone help out?

  362. res says:
    @James Thompson

    I wasn’t able to figure out a way to derive it from that PDF. I think I need something which establishes a common reference point. I could try assuming AH5 of 40.4 is IQ 125, but that is pretty much assuming the conclusion I wanted to check.

    Nonetheless your link was a good read. Thanks for that and for checking in general.

  363. utu says:
    @szopen

    Do not worry and no need for apology.

    In Popperian spirit below I construct a battery of tests that yields two factors of similar strengths that are orthogonal and thus they must have interpretation of two different types of cognitive “intelligence”. I gave already presented this argument for res before but here I will try to be a bit more mathematically formal.

    Let’s B1={X1, X2,….} is a battery of tests consisting of single question tests Xi for i=1,…,N. Questions Xi are taken from all IQ and cognitive tests we can think of so N might be actually very large. Let’s apply this battery of tests to M subjects where M is sufficiently large. Let’s generate N dimensional covariance matrix C0. Let’s find two largest eigenvectors g-factor and s-factor of C where g-factor is stronger, i.e., g_eigenvalue>s_eigenvalue. Let’s z0=s_eigenvalue/g_eigenvalue. Keep in mind that g-factor and s-factor are orthogonal.

    Find Xj that has the highest g loading (highest correlation with g). Modify the battery of tests B by removing the test (question) Xj from it. Get N-1 dimensional covariance matrix C1 and find its two strongest eigenvectors and calculate z1=s_eigenvalue/g_eigenvalue.

    Find Xj that has the largest loading with g-factor and remove it form the battery B of tests. Get N-2 dimensional covariance matrix C2 and get new ratio z2. And so on continue this process and we will notice that z2, z3, z4,… will be increasing and at some point we will end up with two factors g and s that are of similar strengths. These two factors will be responsible for two different types of intelligence that are incommensurable because they are orthogonal.

    • Replies: @szopen
  364. utu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    I am very interested in what is going in Europe and with Europe and my take on what is really going behind the scene is that most of it is directed against Germany. The main issue is to isolate Germany and prevent it from ever linking with Russia. All developments such as: sanctions against Russia, refugee invasion, Volkswagen, Deutsche Bank, Brexit, Catalonia, strengthening of Poland and talks about the so called Intermarum can be read in the context of weakening Germany and preventing it from connecting with Russia. Poland, Hungary are having some room and appear to be able to stand up to EU demands only because USA and Israel are backing them up. Also this explains Poland bellicosity towards Russia.

    The real enemy of the Zio-American empire is still Germany. They always will be shown to know their place. There is no forgiveness for the WWII regardless how many billions are paid to Jewish organizations and how many submarines are gifted to Israel. Germany knows that there is no absolution coming from there but there is another victor and victim of the IIWW that can grant to Germany its sought absolution. It is Russia. Only through Russia Germany can return to its greatness and destiny.

    The secret of politics? Make good treaty with Russia. Otto von Bismarck

    Only through Germany Russia might be an equal partner in the power struggle with the US and China. Russia knows that weak Europe means it will either have to join with China or with the US as a junior partner.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @Okechukwu
  365. @Okechukwu

    These are Chinese postgraduates who come already armed with Chinese undergraduate degrees.

    Then that would depend on how good the universities they attended in China is. You can find many examples of Chinese with bachelor degrees from first rate Chinese universities becoming professors in first rate NA universities at a very young age.

    What is certain, however, is that the Chinese system is what creates these people and not some innate predisposition. Their educational system inculcates them with a great deal of information, but they never learn how to apply that information.

    Maybe for the non best and brightest but this certainly isn’t true for the best and brightest. You were saying that all Chinese people in NA are the “best” of China which simply isn’t true.

    None of that germinated organically in China. Maglev tech certainly didn’t, nor did trains or railroads.

    Left to their own devices the Chinese wouldn’t have any e-commerce or Internet or computers for that matter.

    This is like saying Europeans can’t innovate because they didn’t event gunpowder. China invented gunpowder, guns, and cannons way before Europeans got the tech. The inventions didn’t germinate organically in Europe. But no sane person would say Europeans did not innovate when it comes gunpowder weapons. Being able to drastically improve an technology takes skills and intelligence. It is not an easy thing to do. There is literally no reason for China to reinvent the wheel when it comes to already existing technology but being able to drastically improve them takes innovative ability. Also regarding ecommerce platforms, the whole current business model that the West is trying to emulate is basically invented in China. Sure, it is not a scientific invention but “social tech” is a thing although it is hard to define. E.g. I consider Zuckerberg innovative and facebook to be an invention in social networking even though he didn’t create any new tech.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @Okechukwu
  366. @utu

    Merkel certainly doesn’t make Germany look like its a victim of the overall erosion of European sanity, or for that matter, friend to Russia. At any rate, although szopen would certainly know better, I feel like Poland would prefer not to be too dependent on either of her former attackers.

    • Replies: @utu
  367. Okechukwu says:
    @utu

    I am very interested in what is going in Europe and with Europe and my take on what is really going behind the scene is that most of it is directed against Germany. The main issue is to isolate Germany and prevent it from ever linking with Russia.

    I’m unsympathetic to many aspects of U.S. foreign policy, but this is delusional drivel. Countries run from Russia, not to it. Germany has a tongue in cheek “hatred” of the United States. But at end of the day, they vastly prefer American hegemony which they perceive as benign, with convergent democratic and cultural values.

    Germany knows that there is no absolution coming from there but there is another victor and victim of the IIWW that can grant to Germany its sought absolution. It is Russia. Only through Russia Germany can return to its greatness and destiny.

    This is hilarious. Germany has the benefit of an invaluable natural experiment called the GDR. You know, the country that shot people for trying to escape. While Russia today isn’t exactly the USSR, it was the nucleus and orchestrator of the USSR. Even the former East Germans who are most ardently nostalgic for a return to days gone by don’t want a return to Russia’s orbit.

    • Replies: @utu
  368. utu says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Poland would prefer not to be too dependent on either of her former attackers.

    That’s pretty obvious but does Poland has other options? Hitching its wagon to the Zio-American empire is pretty risky. In 1939 Poland was used by England and France which resulted in horrible losses for Poland. Poland could have played more nuanced politics then particularly that III Reich was very interested in having Poland as an ally not an enemy. All countries who did not oppose Germany like Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria came out of the II WW much better off than Poland including (with exception of Czechoslovakia) their Jewish populations.

    • Replies: @szopen
  369. res says:
    @Anon

    The Comin paper is interesting: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/mac.2.3.65
    This link includes the data (as a Stata file) and an appendix with the data in text form.

    Africa seems to do fairly well (especially at 0 AD) by their measure.

    Following your links showed some discussion at http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2017/01/09/civilization-powered-by-the-west-threatened-by-the-rest/
    but I’d be interested in further thoughts on the technology trends.

  370. utu says:
    @Okechukwu

    Your seeing of the world is nanometers deep. It gets much more interesting when you let yourself go beyond the cliches and platitudes promulgated by the media and the mass culture.

    What I describe has nothing to do with nostalgia for DDR or being in Russia’s orbit. It is about future. Russia and Germany would be like a binary star. Two partners of similar strengths that together can resits both China’s and America’s dominations. Germany is not happy about allegedly benign American hegemony. EU was not created to be a chopped liver.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  371. Okechukwu says:
    @utu

    You’re completely delusional. Ask szopen about the hoops Poland was willing to jump through to join NATO. All of Russia’s neighbors would do the same. But either they don’t qualify or they fear Russia’s wrath. Ukraine for instance and possibly Belarus.

    The EU is a mere adjunct to the U.S. global order, a junior partner if you will. I don’t think you truly understand how powerful the United States is. I don’t mean just military power either. The U.S. financial markets are vast and deep and enable it to control the entire international financial system. No other country or federation of countries even remotely comes close to matching that capability. And there are none in sight beyond the farthest horizon.

    If the U.S. truly hit Russia with meaningful, hard-hitting sanctions it would be on its knees. Russia’s power is confined strictly to the military sphere. It lacks economic power (half the GDP of California, for instance). It lacks financial power and it lacks soft cultural power, all of which the U.S. has in great abundance. The whole world speaks English not because of the UK, but because of the U.S.

  372. szopen says:
    @utu

    we will notice that z2, z3, z4,… will be increasing and at some point we will end up with two factors g and s that are of similar strengths

    This is not necessarily true (in a sense: not inevitable for real data).

    Since your example is theoretical one, to show that your strategy is not necessarily producing equal-strength factors for any battery, imagine that I construct battery of tests such that I chose tests only with high g-loadings (>0.75), very close to each other (while still measuring different types of intelligence) and low-loadings on any secondary factors. Then I pursue your strategy. It’s easy to see that I would run out of tests before the second factor “s” would become equal strength to the “g”.

    Similarly with your example; it’s possible but not guaranteed that second factor would really become equal strength to “g” before the battery will stop to fulfill our initial conditions (having many, diverse tests). We don’t know until someone would actually try your experiment. That is, you would end up with tests which were all initially high on s-loadings (e.g. only verbal tests) in the original analysis. We

    Now, this sounds tautological, but whether it is or not tautological would depend really on someone making this experiment (and seeing whether we would really see “s-loadings” correspond to something which intuitively taps on only one ability, or a intuitively similar). We do not define “diverse” depending on their loadings on many different factors post-analysis. We can intuitively define “diverse” by saying they should tap on different mental abilities.

    Indeed, I have a strong conviction that what would happen is that before new “g” would stop be be correlated with old “g”s; I base my conviction on the fact, that second factors which emerge in analyses tend to group tests within broad range of intuitively reasonable sets (spatial-visual, verbal etc).

  373. szopen says:
    @utu

    does Poland has other options?

    You already mentioned Pilsudski’s intermarium dream. Every not pro-German politician in Poland will start to say about it (sometimes using other names, such as “Jagiellonian policy”) as soon as the question “if not Russia or Germany, then what?”.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  374. @utu

    ROFL! Good response! … didn’t read your other related posts on this thus lazily took you as a rookie, Panda’s bad.

    So if we assume you’re right that “different batteries of tests produce different g’s that not necessarily correlate well with each other” for some reason, what’s the point you try to make from there?

  375. @szopen

    From what I can tell, the Visegrád Group is already operational and it doesn’t seem like it’ll have the same fatal issues that the EU has. And much fewer “New Germans.”

    • Replies: @szopen
  376. szopen says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    That’s an illusion. There are frictions in V4, and a lot of differences in interests. Moreover, V4 economy and population is not comparable to Germany. I would love for V4exit and then some kind of confederation (not federation), but as it is, V4 is not enough.

    Not to mention that currently Polish economy is very dependant on Germany, though the recent Chinese initiatives might help us here too :D

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  377. @szopen

    Not to mention that currently Polish economy is very dependant on Germany, though the recent Chinese initiatives might help us here too :D

    Heh, my brother is actually living in Krakow at the moment and is financing one of those initiatives.

  378. Okechukwu says:
    @random rand

    Then that would depend on how good the universities they attended in China is. You can find many examples of Chinese with bachelor degrees from first rate Chinese universities becoming professors in first rate NA universities at a very young age.

    I wasn’t making a value judgment. I was merely correcting your statement by pointing out that these students arrived with Chinese undergrad and postgrad degrees.

    Maybe for the non best and brightest but this certainly isn’t true for the best and brightest. You were saying that all Chinese people in NA are the “best” of China which simply isn’t true.

    Nope, I wasn’t saying that at all. There could be peasant farmers that are better and brighter but didn’t have a chance. The institution in question is one of the most prestigious research centers in the world. Maybe China sent their A-Team of scholars, maybe they didn’t. It’s a corrupt system so who knows.

    This is like saying Europeans can’t innovate because they didn’t event gunpowder.

    I fully credit China with the invention of gunpowder, along with many other seminal technologies. I’ve always couched my statements in terms of modern (not ancient) technologies.

    Also regarding ecommerce platforms, the whole current business model that the West is trying to emulate is basically invented in China.

    If you mean platforms like Alibaba, you’re gravely mistaken. They certainly weren’t invented in China. The only thing that may have been invented in China was the idea of creating e-commerce safe spaces for thieves and crooks. For years Alibaba has been one of the biggest enablers of business scams in the world.

    • Replies: @random rand
  379. @Okechukwu

    If you mean platforms like Alibaba, you’re gravely mistaken.

    Wechat, wechat wallet, alipay, the integration of wechat wallet and alipay into the broader economy. Integration of uber like softwares into mobile platforms like wechat. Integration of every kind of software into wechat. Extremely quick and efficient delivery services. China is currently basically a cashless society. You can pay everything using either alipay or wechat.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  380. @Daniel Chieh

    I think the guy has daddy issues. And he obviously got bullied a lot when he was a kid. Kind of feel bad for him.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  381. Factorize says:

    The thread has not emphasized, to the extent that it should, the wide IQ disparities that are likely emerging in Africa now that it has attained substantial population densities.

    A rural-urban IQ gap is widely recognized by psychometric researchers, though the gap that exists in Kenya is on the high side of expectations. The 2005 UN HDI report showed that Nairobi’s HDI was on par with that of Turkey (IQ 85-90), while Kenya’s Turkana district’s HDI was lower than that of any other nation (IQ 60-65?). HDI is correlated with IQ. This suggests that a significant IQ sorting process is underway in Africa as one would expect from increasing population densities (see the population density figures near the top of this thread). A similar process should also be underway in the other densely populated African regions of Nigeria and Ethiopia.

  382. Okechukwu says:
    @random rand

    Wechat, wechat wallet, alipay, the integration of wechat wallet and alipay into the broader economy. Integration of uber like softwares into mobile platforms like wechat. Integration of every kind of software into wechat. Extremely quick and efficient delivery services. China is currently basically a cashless society. You can pay everything using either alipay or wechat.

    But they’re just adopting pre-existing technologies. They’re not inventing them. The U.S. doesn’t have a central government authority like China that can decree from on high: “You shall be a cashless society.” Private companies implement these systems and they do so in ways that reflect the needs and desires of their customers. Today the U.S. is a semi-cashless society because that’s what the people want. Americans are perfectly happy with a combination of debit cards, credit cards and cash. I even see people writing checks on occasion.

    You have to consider the vast differences between authoritarian systems and democracies. For example, China builds a lot of high speed rail. Often that is cited as evidence of Chinese ascendancy visa-a-vis the United States, which doesn’t build any. Well, obviously the U.S. has the means and wherewithal to build bullet trains. But for a host of reasons, they’re not practical for the United States. The Chinese communist party doesn’t necessarily care about practicality and that is one of the great failings of vertical, dictatorial power structures. It’s the reason China builds cities that no one ever lives in and shopping malls that no one ever shops at.

    • Replies: @random rand
  383. @Okechukwu

    But they’re just adopting pre-existing technologies. They’re not inventing them.

    The social tech was not adopted because it didn’t exist before it was invented in China. I honestly have no idea what you’re trying to say here. As I stated before, social tech requires innovation, and improvement of existing tech requires innovation. 1) People would agree that Europeans innovated advanced gunpowder weapons. 2) People would agree facebook is an innovation in social tech even though the tech they used is the same as myspace. 3) The platforms are innovations because no one else in the world applied the tech in the way Chinese companies did. Unless you want to state that Europeans did not innovate when it comes to gunpowder weapons and you don’t consider facebook to be an innovation then sure, you can make the argument you are making. But most people do not think that way.

    The U.S. doesn’t have a central government authority like China that can decree from on high: “You shall be a cashless society.”

    It wasn’t a decree for everyone to use wechat to pay. People can still use cash and credit cards if they want since no stores reject them. But people like using wechat and alipay because it is easier to use and wechat had become incredibly integrated with daily life.

    For example, China builds a lot of high speed rail. Often that is cited as evidence of Chinese ascendancy visa-a-vis the United States, which doesn’t build any.

    We don’t have to compare with the US. Chinese high speed rails are in no ways inferior to Japanese rails and in many ways superior. China has the fastest bullet train in the world, which means they improved on the already existing tech, which means they had the ability to innovate with, improve on, and apply the tech they acquire. Otherwise, every country would be able to make trains as fast as China’s. If China can only adopt tech without any ability to innovate with it or apply it, then it would never be able to create superior trains to Japan.

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  384. @random rand

    Well, I guess something could be said for someone who has successfully managed to leverage his psychosis into a profitable career.

  385. Factorize says:

    Exciting!

    Filling in the genetic gaps for the people who left Africa will give us a psychometric timeline.
    This will give us a much better understanding of what specific forces shaped changes in human IQ.
    Did IQ increase early after leaving Africa (~50,000 years ago) or did it happen closer to the modern age (~10,000 ya)? My guess would be that it happened more recently.

    They have completed full genome sequencing for the 4 early humans below. What might their gneotypic IQ have been?

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/10/171005141759.htm

    • Replies: @Okechukwu
  386. Okechukwu says:
    @Factorize

    There’s no part of the brain called IQ. I assume you mean intelligence.

    Implicit in your remarks is the absurd suggestion that people who left Africa at some point became more intelligent than those that stayed behind. It’s a cute theory, but ultimately, it’s laughable. You’d have to account for people like me and Afrosapiens, who are not exactly the least intelligent people in this discussion. In fact quite the contrary.

    You seem to be postulating discreet genetic differentiation. But in reality, there’s too much overlap in raw intelligence between groups for that postulate to make any scientific sense.

  387. Okechukwu says:
    @random rand

    The social tech was not adopted because it didn’t exist before it was invented in China.

    Nope. It’s been around since the fledgling days of the Internet. Sorry, there’s no invention or innovation here. In fact China is a late adopter of many of these technologies.

    But people like using wechat and alipay because it is easier to use and wechat had become incredibly integrated with daily life.

    Fine, but these platforms have been around for nearly 20 years. What you’re describing is adoption rather than innovation. You as an individual could create your own iteration of these systems simply by hiring developers in Mumbai or Nairobi.

    We don’t have to compare with the US. Chinese high speed rails are in no ways inferior to Japanese rails and in many ways superior.

    Remember, Japanese bullet trains have been around much longer and China has the benefit of that experience. It’s the same reason many U.S. airports look absolutely ancient compared to some of their counterparts in developing countries that were built much later.

    China has the fastest bullet train in the world, which means they improved on the already existing tech, which means they had the ability to innovate with, improve on, and apply the tech they acquire

    Not necessarily. For a number of reasons, countries don’t always want the fastest trains (or any trains at all in the case of the USA). It’s not unlike the situation with supersonic air travel. Faster isn’t always better. For pre-existing rail systems like SNCF in France, that were built when the technology was less mature, it probably wouldn’t make much sense to spend billions of dollars to upgrade and retrofit. Of course they have bullet train technology, every developed country does. It’s likely the same technology China has co-opted. It’s much easier for China to implement these technologies as they are starting ralatively from scratch.

    • Replies: @random rand
  388. Factorize says:

    Okechukwu,

    what is so fascinating is that not only can these questions now be posed in such a specific scientific manner, but they can also be answered. Until recently clear answers for many of these questions could not be given. Ancient genetic sequences will provide us great insight into the cognitive evolution of our species.

    The four individuals from the article had their full genomes sequenced and their genotypes for SNPs found in human populations related to intelligence could be identified. My suspicion would be that their IQ was substantially less than that of average Europeans. The selective forces that they were under likely were not strong enough to greatly change their geno-g.

    Further, when genotypic IQ does substantially change it is reasonable to expect that there should be obvious indicators from real world achievements. The recent article that found a possible increase in European IQ over the last several thousand years is consistent with the history of development through that era.

    You are certainly correct in being skeptical about a guess for what the intelligence levels of these early humans might have been. The current evidence suggests that various forces have caused cognitive ability to increase and also decrease. However, we finally might soon have some answers.

  389. @Okechukwu

    Nope. It’s been around since the fledgling days of the Internet. Sorry, there’s no invention or innovation here.

    Yeah huh, which country had integrated mobile platforms before wechat appeared? Do you consider facebook an innovation? Do you think social tech is a thing?

    In fact China is a late adopter of many of these technologies.

    Even more evidence of China’s innovative capacity if the late adopter has beaten the rest of the world.

    Fine, but these platforms have been around for nearly 20 years.

    And, what are they, if they had been around for 20 years? Which is the platform that beat wechat by 20 years?

    Remember, Japanese bullet trains have been around much longer and China has the benefit of that experience.

    Doesn’t change the fact China drastically improved the existing tech. This statement is irrelevant to my original argument, where China innovated on the already existing tech.

    Not necessarily.

    If you truly think it does not require tech innovation to research 501km/h trains which does not yet exist on earth then there’s not much I can say.

    For a number of reasons, countries don’t always want the fastest trains (or any trains at all in the case of the USA).

    This is irrelevant to my argument. You were stating that Chinese people cannot innovate. I am merely showing they can. There’s also no evidence countries like France do have the tech to go at such a high speed.

    Of course they have bullet train technology, every developed country does.

    Yeah, and China’s tech is better.

    It’s much easier for China to implement these technologies as they are starting ralatively from scratch.

    China drastically improved on the existing tech, which means they went above and beyond the existing tech rather than simply implementing the existing tech. If China had no innovative ability then the best they can do is reach the capabilities of the already existing tech, not improve on it.

    You seem dead set on trying to say Chinese people have no innovative capacity despite the myriad of evidence that they do have innovative ability. You try to state that all developed countries have bullet train tech, which is irrelevant to my argument that China has better bullet train tech because they innovated on the existing tech. You try to say that Chinese mobile platforms are not innovations, despite them obviously being innovations because no countries had a integrated mobile platform before wechat, and you provide no counterexamples. I have no idea why you want to believe China has no ability to innovate since all evidence points against this statement.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    , @Okechukwu
  390. @random rand

    对牛弹琴,是没用的.

    • Replies: @random rand
  391. gda says:
    @Okechukwu

    Keep digging – maybe you’ll get to China (Korea) yet.

    “Sub-Saharan Africans ultimately rejected colonialism because upon interaction with Europeans they didn’t find them to be cognitively superior. Often they found the opposite to be the case.”

    “The largest corporations in the world are making a beeline to Africa to leverage the intellectual capital there.”

    “They are only now beginning to recognize that they were indeed backwards and that their alleged vaunted capacity for abstract thought could not conceive or foresee what Africans had known for millennia.”

    “Do you realize that just a handful of Black Americans have invented and innovated more modern technology than all of Asia combined?”

    “Well it’s already a foregone conclusion Lynn, Rushton, Braun et al. are frauds.”

    Who knew this thread was going to provide so many laugh-out-loud lines.

    The nice Korean lady has eviscerated you for all of us to see and politely withdrawn, and yet you continue to flail about, even as you bleed out on the sand.

    • LOL: utu
  392. Factorize says:

    Is this not a large unanswered question? Namely, will Asians stay home once achieving global dominance?

    Asians apparently undertook sea voyages pre-dating those of Europeans. After getting a glimpse of how other humans lived, they reboarded their ships, went home and never ventured out again.

    Should not there be concern that this behavior will reoccur?

    Japan has been in demographic collapse for almost half a century, yet has not created a more open immigration policy.

    If Asians continue to be uninterested in assuming the responsibilities of global leadership, with all the positive and negative consequences that this entails, then perhaps this role will need to continue to be filled by Western or other nations.

  393. Okechukwu says:
    @random rand

    Yeah huh, which country had integrated mobile platforms before wechat appeared? Do you consider facebook an innovation? Do you think social tech is a thing?

    Are you serious? Try Google for one, among many others. How desirable is this sort of integration anyway? Maybe that’s why wechat is exclusively a Chinese thing. It’s available to everyone, but only the Chinese are using it. I personally don’t want all my clients under the control of one entity, especially one that is located in China.

    Please calm your love affair with wechat. It’s just a social networking and messaging service, of which there are hundreds around the world, many of which compare very favorably to wechat.

    Even more evidence of China’s innovative capacity if the late adopter has beaten the rest of the world.

    So how come the rest of the world isn’t using it? Maybe wechat is better in your mind but not better in actual fact.

    Doesn’t change the fact China drastically improved the existing tech. This statement is irrelevant to my original argument, where China innovated on the already existing tech.

    No they haven’t. Bullet train tech is under constant review and improvement even if there are no immediate plans to introduce the new and improved systems. Every provider designs, builds and tests bullet trains that are at least as advanced as the latest Chinese models if not more so.

    Japan’s maglev train breaks world speed record with 600km/h test run

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/21/japans-maglev-train-notches-up-new-world-speed-record-in-test-run

    Ultra-Fast ‘Hyperloop’ Train Gets Test Track in California

    https://www.livescience.com/50936-hyperloop-test-track-california.html

    At 310 MPH, New Bullet Train Is World’s Fastest

    https://www.livescience.com/37195-japan-bullet-train-worlds-fastest-maglev-train.html

    Test trains reach 352km/h on Bretagne-Pays de la Loire high-speed line

    http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/high-speed/test-trains-reach-352km-h-on-bretagne-pays-de-la-loire-high-speed-line.html

    There’s also no evidence countries like France do have the tech to go at such a high speed.

    That’s delusional. Where do you think China stole the tech from in the first place? As stated, there are other considerations besides speed. Even China cut back on the speed of its trains after a couple of accidents. If you want real speed, catch a flight. You’ll get there 2 or 3 times faster. By the way, that’s the primary reason few people care about these trains in the United States.

    Yeah, and China’s tech is better.

    China’s tech is most assuredly not better than Japan’s. Japan is developed, while China is developing. China from the get-go has operated on stolen technology. Virtually all their weapons systems and space vehicles are stolen Russian designs. Since opening to the West, they’ve been stealing Western technology as well.

    China drastically improved on the existing tech, which means they went above and beyond the existing tech rather than simply implementing the existing tech.

    The evidence says otherwise as I’ve demonstrated. China is not the leader in high-speed rail or maglev tech. Research and development is ongoing everywhere, even if there are no immediate plans for implementation.

    • Replies: @random rand
  394. @Daniel Chieh

    Yeah can’t believe I even bothered. I just read his exchange with K-Drama Kumiho where he claimed South Koreans were living in the Stone Age and Asia had no inventions to speak of and … wow. Hard to argue with someone ignorant of reality.

    • Replies: @utu
  395. @Okechukwu

    This will be the last reply I will bother posting.

    Try Google for one, among many others.

    Google does not have a wechat like platform. Facebook messenger has been actively trying to copy wechat. So, no. They are not equals to wechat.

    Please calm your love affair with wechat. It’s just a social networking and messaging service, of which there are hundreds around the world, many of which compare very favorably to wechat.

    I don’t love wechat. The simple fact is there is nothing in the world that compares to it. Google does not have a decent mobile platform. Facebook messenger is magnitudes worse. You did not provide any counter examples.

    So how come the rest of the world isn’t using it?

    Because wechat is integrated with the Chinese economy.

    At 310 MPH, New Bullet Train Is World’s Fastest

    Old news. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/09/china-unveils-worlds-fastest-bullet-train-170921131029503.html

    Japan’s maglev train breaks world speed record with 600km/h test run

    That’s maglev not conventional rails. China is currently researching 600km/h maglev trains.

    Test trains reach 352km/h on Bretagne-Pays de la Loire high-speed line

    Nice, but refer to the aljazeera link. According to wikipedia: “The original 8-car train-set [CRH380A] recorded a top speed of 416.6 km/h (258.9 mph) during a trial run[3] and the longer 16-car train-set temporarily held the world record for the fastest production train at 486.1 km/h (302.0 mph).[4]” “The fastest trainset, CRH380BL, attained a maximum test speed of 487.3 km/h 302.8 mph).”

    That’s delusional. Where do you think China stole the tech from in the first place?

    From the Vulcans presumably because the test speed for French trains is slower than the test speed for Chinese trains.

    As stated, there are other considerations besides speed. Even China cut back on the speed of its trains after a couple of accidents.

    Yeah except it isn’t merely operational speed where China is faster. China has the fastest test speed.

    The evidence says otherwise as I’ve demonstrated.

    Nope.

    • Replies: @random rand
    , @Okechukwu
  396. Factorize says:

    对牛弹琴,是没用的

    Ah, yes, Google translates this as “It is useless to play piano” which is somewhat obscure.

    Anyone offer a better translation?
    Perhaps “It is best not to play the violin, if one has not practiced” ?

    • Replies: @random rand
    , @res
  397. utu says:
    @random rand

    Hard to argue with someone ignorant of reality.

    His reality is clearly affected by some form of irrational exuberance:

    You’d have to account for people like me and Afrosapiens, who are not exactly the least intelligent people in this discussion. In fact quite the contrary.

  398. Factorize says:

    utu, I for one am very glad that the era of arm chair psychometric self-assessment is nearly over. I suspect that many will be in for a surprise when SNPs alone will give high quality IQ assessments.

    This should happen within two years. I am very anxious to know what my geno-g might be. I will put down a rough guess of 115, though I am very unsure that this would be accurate.

    • Replies: @utu
  399. @random rand

    Since I made a mistake in my original reply I’ll correct it here as my real last reply to you I will bother posting.

    At 310 MPH, New Bullet Train Is World’s Fastest

    Since this is maglev, I wrongly gave a link regarding conventional rails. So here are links regarding Chinese maglev trains. https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/1/13487382/maglev-train-china-crrc-speed-record https://www.thebeijinger.com/blog/2017/09/02/china-debuts-ultra-fast-maglev-train-can-travel-beijing-shanghai-just-15-minutes

    My original argument that China’s conventional rails are by all accounts superior still stands.

  400. @Factorize

    对牛弹琴 means playing a guqin (a Chinese instrument) to a bull. It’s an idiomatic expression basically saying it is useless to do something to someone who has no way of understanding or appreciating what you are doing. It is mostly used to state that explaining something to an idiot is useless. 是没用的 is translated as “is useless” and is not an idiomatic expression. The literal translation of the whole sentence (对牛弹琴,是没用的) would be “playing a guqin to a bull is useless”.

    • Replies: @Anon
  401. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @random rand

    So in English idiom “pearls before swine”.

  402. Factorize says:

    Good one, anon!

    This is one of the type of questions that sometimes pops up on IQ tests.
    I could not think of a good English equivalent, though your choice is on target.

    Hopefully, we can do some covert ops to get the Chinese and others on board with English as the world standard language. Perhaps the kids could be encouraged to see English as cool.

    I took about a month to get a feel for Japanese. They have about three different alphabets with Chinese ideograms on top. They have tried a few times to rationalize the language, though this was accomplished.

    Moving to a single phonetically based language would be of benefit to all.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  403. Okechukwu says:
    @random rand

    Google does not have a wechat like platform.

    And wechat does not have a Google like platform. I told you it’s a matter of opinion as to what you like. In the West, people resist integration. I don’t want my G-mail connected to my Google phone, Hangouts, Wallet, Play, YouTube, etc. Integration is not a novel or innovative idea. It’s been around for ages and has met with stiff resistance.

    So, no. They are not equals to wechat.

    But all the reviews of wechat don’t make these glowing proclamations you make. It has strengths and weaknesses like every other platform. I wouldn’t in a million trade it for Skype or Whatsapp. I avoid Facebook so I can’t really comment on its functionality or features.

    Because wechat is integrated with the Chinese economy.

    Of course this makes it absolutely worthless. It would be like integrating Google or Facebook with the Treasury Department.

    You did not provide any counter examples.

    First prove that wechat is this revolutionary technology you claim it is. It’s using tech that has been around forever, and all reviews of it point to features that are better addressed by other platforms. I’m not saying it’s garbage. But it falls far short of what you’re claiming.

    Nice, but refer to the aljazeera link.

    I’m not disputing that China has fast trains. I’m disputing your contention that China is the world leader in bullet train tech. And once again, speed is not the overarching objective of train systems. They even have mandatory speed limits.

    From the Vulcans presumably because the test speed for French trains is slower than the test speed for Chinese trains.

    Assuming that the French are competing with the Chinese for speed (doubtful), how does Chinese trains being faster equal better technology? And who’s reporting these Chinese speeds? If it’s from the Chinese government it’s unreliable. Let me ask you a question. What’s more trustworthy, a report from France or one from China?

    Yeah except it isn’t merely operational speed where China is faster. China has the fastest test speed.

    See the above comment regarding the credibility of any reports from China. But it appears China takes bullet trains as a point of national pride. No one else seems to care. There are always planes, which can get you where you want to go much faster and with a much smaller environmental footprint. It’s the reason bullet trains have such a minuscule constituency in the United States.

  404. @Factorize

    Doubtful.

    There’s too much culture and history tied into the language for it to be given up(notice how the proverb ties into ancient musical instruments), and it has advantages both in being compact and holding unique nuances. In Geography of Thought, the author explores the idea that the language style leads to the typically holistic, context-heavy form of East Asian thought.

  405. utu says:
    @Factorize

    This should happen within two years. I am very anxious to know what my geno-g might be.

    Don’t be too eager to give them you SNPs for analysis. Who knows what else they may find out? What if you get a one way ticket to the Euthanasia Center?

  406. Factorize says:

    utu, yes, you certainly have a valid point.

    When I handed over my DNA to various genomics companies I had not thought that we would be, in 2017, at the threshold of a complete unlocking of the human genome. This is now a concern to me. What will the world be like if we could immediately genotype and then phenotype them? What if some people mistakenly believe that they bear a genetic Scarlet letter of shame and then live a life of misery when the genetic letter does not mean what they believe it does?

    Yet, an even more powerful force driving me to the unlocking of the Pandora’s box of genetic self-knowledge is to know who I am. Without knowing the code one cannot be confident that one’s self-perception reflects objective truth. The code should allow us to better match people’s genotype to an appropriate environment, leading to happier more productive people.

  407. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    The idea that all forms of intelligence largely depend on a single factor, g, seems, from the perspective of brain physiology, anatomy, and development, highly implausible.

    The brain is a complex organ — very complex. Brain functi0n is said to depend on more than eighty neurotransmitters, each of them with its own biosynthetic pathway, and possibly its own secretory, reuptake and catabolic mechanisms. How likely is it that every part of the brain and every brain function depends on all of these neurotransmitters equally? Not very, I would say, in which case there is reason to suppose that the speed and power of different mental facilities will not be well correlated, reflecting genetically determined variation in the physiological basis of different mental processes.

    Mental activity is compartmented among brain regions and structures that show proportional variation among individuals. For this reason also, therefore, one would expect a lack of exact correlation among different mental functions.

    Mental capacity depends on developmental changes, including neurogenesis associated with learning, which means that even in the absence of other causes of variation, one should expect variation among the facets of intelligence dependent on culture, schooling, motivation, etc.

    True, there are some features of the brain upon which all mental activity must depends: energy metabolism, membrane properties, blood flow, etc. Therefore, one should not be surprised if there is a low level of correlation among all aspects of mental capacity, as appears to be the case.

    But it is not a low level of correlation among aspects of intelligence that is implied by the pushers of g. Rather, by their manner of speaking about g, one understands that to not accept their contention as to the centrality of g is to mark one as being, well, not very intelligent or even an ignoramus.

    • Replies: @Santoculto
  408. @CanSpeccy

    The idea that all forms of intelligence largely depend on a single factor, g, seems, from the perspective of brain physiology, anatomy, and development, highly implausible.

    I thought when they talk about g they are talking about pattern recognition which is absolutely determinant in all types of cognitions.

    But they confuse crude pattern recognition with general ”intelligence” [cognitive skills].

    The primordial structure of intelligence as well behavior is exactly the pattern recognition.

    G is not how symmetric is your or my cognitive skills.

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 James Thompson Comments via RSS