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

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Genc Figure_4 fewer connections

The ISIR July 2017 meeting in Montreal seems a long time ago, and that feeling is entirely explicable by it being 10 months since I heard the lecture in question. I was chairing the session, which normally diminishes attention to the actual content, but this talk was the exception. It came up with a counter-intuitive finding, and it has been difficult to avoid talking about it. Brighter brains have fewer connections between neurones. Cool.

It has been a real struggle to keep quiet about this remarkable result, and a relief that the embargo has been lifted today, 14 months after receipt of the paper by the publishers. Publish and be damn delayed. Blogging is the future.

As you will see from the author list, particularly the last author, this is a team which has been working on this topic for decades, (with important results from at least 1988) and has always sought to have reliable measures and large sample sizes before publishing anything. In ISIR 2014, tired of reading neuro-bollocks in the media, I lobbed Rex Jung what I thought might be a tricky question: How reliable are your neuro-imaging measures? He replied that he and Rich Haier had always put their subjects into the scanner twice: once briefly so as to get benchmark reliability measures, and then again for the full session. Jung and Haier also held back from publication until they had large sample sizes, although in early years this meant a long wait, since they were mostly working in the odd free spaces between the high priority medical school clinical use of the sole scanner available. Things have got better in recent years.

Another feature of this duo is that when they were offered an celebratory session at ISIR 2017 they chose to invite their critics to knock hell into them. Several did, and I pursue them every now and then to make their P-FIT theory more specific. So, it is great to be able to report some new and very specific findings.

Diffusion markers of dendritic density and arborization in gray matter predict differences in intelligence. Erhan Genç, Christoph Fraenz, Caroline Schlüter, Patrick Friedrich, Rüdiger Hossiep, Manuel C. Voelkle, Josef M. Ling, Onur Güntürkün & Rex E. Jung

Nature Communications volume 9, Article number: 1905 (2018)
doi:10.1038/s41467-018-04268-8

The first two authors contributed equally. Take a good look at their reference list, which is a roll-call of the top people in the field, and those one should turn to for further comments on this paper and its implications.

Here is the main finding in full screen size, with the relevant explanations.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8/figures/4

Here is the link to the entire paper:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8

Here is the abstract:

Previous research has demonstrated that individuals with higher intelligence are more likely to have larger gray matter volume in brain areas predominantly located in parieto-frontal regions. These findings were usually interpreted to mean that individuals with more cortical brain volume possess more neurons and thus exhibit more computational capacity during reasoning. In addition, neuroimaging studies have shown that intelligent individuals, despite their larger brains, tend to exhibit lower rates of brain activity during reasoning. However, the microstructural architecture underlying both observations remains unclear. By combining advanced multi-shell diffusion tensor imaging with a culture-fair matrix-reasoning test, we found that higher intelligence in healthy individuals is related to lower values of dendritic density and arborization. These results suggest that the neuronal circuitry associated with higher intelligence is organized in a sparse and efficient manner, fostering more directed information processing and less cortical activity during reasoning.

“Intelligence is not a function of how hard the brain works but rather how efficiently it works”.

In terms of method, the team collected 259 participants (138 males) between 18 and 40 years of age (M = 24.31, SD = 4.41) which gives the analysis of results sufficient power. Participants had no history of psychiatric or neurological disorders and matched the standard inclusion criteria for fMRI examinations. Each participant completed the matrix-reasoning test and neuroimaging measurements.
To validate the results obtained from sample of 259 subjects, the team downloaded additional data provided by the Human Connectome Project, namely, the “S500 plus MEG2” release. This set includes 506 participants with data suitable for their analyses. The best papers now give what would formerly have been two papers, for the price of one. The first sample is the sample of discovery, the second the sample of validation. Some things in science are getting better.

The measures themselves are a new variant of diffusion imaging analysis. If you will forgive a simplistic analysis: a pipe full of water will show different measures if measured end-on (where all the water in the pipe vibrates with the imposed resonance) as compared to when measured at right angles to the pipe (where only a small amount of water is available for resonance to be detected). In this way you can deduce which way the dendrites run in the brain.

Currently, the most promising technique for the quantification of neurite morphology is a diffusion MRI technique known as neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI). This technique is based on a multi-shell high-angular-resolution diffusion imaging protocol and offers a novel way to analyze diffusion-weighted data with regard to tissue microstructure. It features a three-compartment model distinguishing intra-neurite, extra-neurite, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) environments. NODDI is based on a diffusion model that was successfully validated by histological examinations utilizing staining methods in gray and white matter of rats and ferrets. In addition, Zhang, Schneider have shown that NODDI is also capable of estimating diffusion markers of neurite density and orientation dispersion by in vivo measurements in humans. Direct validation of NODDI has recently been performed in a study investigating neurite dispersion as a potential marker of multiple sclerosis pathology in post-mortem spinal cord specimens. The authors reported that neurite density obtained from NODDI significantly matched neurite density, orientation dispersion, and myelin density obtained from histology. Furthermore, the authors also found that NODDI neurite dispersion matched the histological neurite dispersion. This indicates that NODDI metrics are closely reflecting their histological conditions.

The point is that this study confirms previous findings, that “measures of neurite density and arborization show negative relationships to measures of intelligence, implicating neural efficiency, particularly within parieto-frontal brain regions, as suggested by the vast majority of neuroimaging studies of intelligence”.

The study also provides a partial confirmation of the P-FIT theory, in that a majority of the observed associations between brain areas and intelligence conform to the predictions from P-FIT as proposed by Haier and Jung, or as further elaborated by Basten. The score could be called a 4 out of 5 area confirmation.

Our results indicate that neurite density and neurite orientation dispersion within the cortex are both negatively associated with intelligence. At first glance, this finding might appear counterintuitive to the central working hypothesis of differential neuroscience, which usually finds that “bigger is better” (i.e., more neuronal mass is associated with higher ability levels). However, our results conform well to findings on the mechanisms of maturation-induced and learning-induced synaptic plasticity.

Brain maturation is associated with a sharp increase of synapse number, followed by a massive activity-dependent synaptic pruning that reduces synaptic density by half, thereby enabling the establishment of typical mature cortical microarchitecture. Maturation-associated synaptic pruning is not only an event of early childhood, but proceeds at a rapid rate at least until the end of the second decade of life. Most importantly, the mechanisms of synaptic growth and pruning during maturation overlap with those of learning in the mature brain.

Consequently, diverse learning tasks are associated with simultaneous growth and retraction of dendritic and synaptic processes in involved neural zones. Microstructural studies with confocal imaging on organotypic brain cultures reveal that long-term potentiation initially induces synaptic growth, followed by an increased loss of connections within 10% of non-stimulated hippocampal spines. Thus, both the ability to produce and prune neural connections constitutes the neurobiological foundation of learning and cognition.

The authors say:

First, our findings confirm an important observation from previous research, namely, that bigger brains with a higher number of neurons are associated with higher intelligence.

Second, we demonstrate that higher intelligence is associated with cortical mantles with sparsely and well-organized dendritic arbor, thereby increasing processing speed and network efficiency.
Importantly, the findings obtained from our experimental sample were confirmed by the analysis of an independent validation sample from the Human Connectome Project. This replication of results is particularly striking given that both data sets are very different on many levels. For example, two different cognitive tests were used in order to measure intelligence, i.e., BOMAT and PMAT24. Both of them are culture-fair matrix-reasoning instruments capable of assessing the construct of fluid intelligence. Nevertheless, both tests tend to produce different results when testing individuals from high-IQ ranges. This might be attributed to the fact that BOMAT, in contrast to PMAT24 and other matrix-reasoning tests, was deliberately designed to avoid ceiling effects in very intelligent samples such as university students or high potentials.
[ ]
Both data sets indicate that intelligence is associated with neurite density and orientation dispersion. Equally important, both data sets also show that this association points into a negative direction. This general pattern is clearly visible in both data sets. Moreover, one has to acknowledge that most of the statistically significant cortical areas, despite lacking a perfect match between data sets, show an impressive overlap with regions previously identified as belonging to the P-FIT network (about 70%).

Finally, to the best of our knowledge, these results are the first to offer a neuroanatomical explanation underlying the neural efficiency hypothesis of intelligence.

Higher intelligence is organized in a sparse and efficient manner, fostering more directed information processing and less cortical activity during reasoning.

Let me repeat what I told Erhan Genc at the end of his presentation in July 2017.

“I think that this is a major finding”. It pushes the boundary of what we know about brainpower.

 
• Category: Science • Tags: Brain Scans, Brighter Brains, Intelligence, IQ 
Hide 153 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. dearieme says:

    Hindsight explains that “intelligent individuals, despite their larger brains, tend to exhibit lower rates of brain activity during reasoning” is a consequence of able people finding it a doddle to solve IQ test problems. But did anyone’s foresight predict that?

    Does anyone know the extent to which such features as brain size, high number of neurons, and cortical mantles with sparsely and well-organized dendritic arbor, are determined genetically?

    Anyway here’s a question for you, doc, about styles of solving puzzles. I find that I solve puzzles on the internet in two different ways. (i) I deduce the answer directly. (ii) I ‘see’ what the answer must be and then ask myself what would be a neat way to prove I’m right (‘neat’ = terse, or elegant, or amusing). Finding that neat way to proving the truth of an insight can take far longer than just deducing the answer in the first place – but it can be more fun. Maybe someday MRI will shed light on such questions too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.
    Your self-report of problem-solving is a covariate of your intellectual level. Currently there is no way to discern exactly how the subjects solve the problems presented to them, but the films taken of brain activity as people solve intelligence test items in a scanner suggest that the task is broken down into elements which are dealt with by different regions swapping partial solutions till the final result is integrated.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. @dearieme
    Hindsight explains that "intelligent individuals, despite their larger brains, tend to exhibit lower rates of brain activity during reasoning" is a consequence of able people finding it a doddle to solve IQ test problems. But did anyone's foresight predict that?

    Does anyone know the extent to which such features as brain size, high number of neurons, and cortical mantles with sparsely and well-organized dendritic arbor, are determined genetically?

    Anyway here's a question for you, doc, about styles of solving puzzles. I find that I solve puzzles on the internet in two different ways. (i) I deduce the answer directly. (ii) I 'see' what the answer must be and then ask myself what would be a neat way to prove I'm right ('neat' = terse, or elegant, or amusing). Finding that neat way to proving the truth of an insight can take far longer than just deducing the answer in the first place - but it can be more fun. Maybe someday MRI will shed light on such questions too.

    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.
    Your self-report of problem-solving is a covariate of your intellectual level. Currently there is no way to discern exactly how the subjects solve the problems presented to them, but the films taken of brain activity as people solve intelligence test items in a scanner suggest that the task is broken down into elements which are dealt with by different regions swapping partial solutions till the final result is integrated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Given the importance of pruning is it not perhaps a bit misleading to say that brain wiring is probably all under genetic control? That would presumably require one to be able to say that pruning was under genetic control. No doubt genes and epigenetics have an important part in how pruning works in a given individual but the detail needs elaboration and comparison with the genetic control of the original pre pruning brain needs attention, does it not?

    I see that res and others much more knowledgeable than I have focused on pruning to some extent. Can you say something more about the place of pruning in the creation of the efficient adult brain? (En passant I note that it would be interesting to know what similar studies - similar to the one you write about - of the young brains might show). Would you expect for example that the identical twin who went off to work as a circus acrobat at 12 would have more diffuse and less efficient cognitive patterns than those of the twin who remained at an academic school and got 4 A*s in maths and science A levels?

    , @jilles dykstra
    " there is no way to discern exactly "
    The word 'exactly' seems quite superfluous to me.
    Several times a day I'm amazed at how my brain works.
    Even when repairing a shoe of my grandson.
    Walking to my garage I had hardly any idea how to do it, then remembered a tool last used around 1973.
    , @Daniel Chieh

    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.

     

    Dr. Thompson,

    I've become increasingly dubious of this, in part due to the presence of more than a few chemicals(such as hormones) that are able to penetrate the blood-brain barrier but also with research that the brain actually does develop differently due to training in juggling as well as meditation. The results of the use of birth control in women have also demonstrated measurable changes in the brain and likely impacts its efficiency; certainly has non-temporary effects on the brain. There is also significant impact from physical exercise; even without assuming a nootropic effect, it at least has significant neuroprotective effect from aging and decline.

    I wouldn't disagree that it might largely genetically gated, but I think the evidence now is leaning nontrivially that the brain is not isolated from the rest of the body now.

    , @Anon
    Hasn’t lead paint been banned fitvsbout 75 years? Low IQ is rampant in 2 demographics in California despite the fact that most houses in California were built after the lead paint ban.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Allow me a return visit to both Divergent (cp. Convergent) thinking and also to pruning.

    Is there a connection? My hypothesis is that divergent/original thinkers/creative minds may have been subjected to less pruning? Does that make sense to you?

    If true it would be interesting to know about the trade offs. And specifically it would be interesting to know what training, or other characteristics, might allow some high IQ convergent thinkers to perform without appreciable handicap despite a profusion of unregimented thoughts which count as original thinking.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. On a non-biological level, it would be interesting to see if computational (engineering application) neural networks become more accurate with pruning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Good question. This page has a good overview of pruning neural networks: Pruning deep neural networks to make them fast and small
    https://jacobgil.github.io/deeplearning/pruning-deep-learning

    It looks like this is an active area of research which has not really made it to production use yet. The focus seems to be on decreasing size and increasing efficiency rather than improving accuracy.

    Another interesting connection here is "dropout." In DNN training dropout (selective deletion of neurons) is used to prevent model overfitting. Search for the Medium.com article "Dropout in (Deep) Machine learning"

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. res says:

    One thing which caught my eye (this was the only mention of myelin in the paper):

    The authors reported that neurite density obtained from NODDI significantly matched neurite density, orientation dispersion, and myelin density obtained from histology.

    Can anyone elaborate on what that matching entailed (e.g. positive correlation)? I looked around and found this paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811918301058
    which seems to indicate myelin and neurite density are positively correlated (R = 0.68!):
    Neurite density index (NDI), Orientation dispersion index (ODI), cortical thickness

    It seems to me a positive correlation of NDI with myelin adds another aspect of counterintuitiveness to this finding. Any thoughts?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Well, I should add one thing which I read(can't find source atm) which may contribute to why neuronal density would decrease IQ: effectively overdensity can lead to signal interference a bit like unwanted sparks getting into machinery and throwing off a process of cognition in this case. Such may be the case with some austic individuals, who show greater proficiency in certain areas despite having increased neuron death and neural isolation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. res says:
    @Johan Meyer
    On a non-biological level, it would be interesting to see if computational (engineering application) neural networks become more accurate with pruning.

    Good question. This page has a good overview of pruning neural networks: Pruning deep neural networks to make them fast and small

    https://jacobgil.github.io/deeplearning/pruning-deep-learning

    It looks like this is an active area of research which has not really made it to production use yet. The focus seems to be on decreasing size and increasing efficiency rather than improving accuracy.

    Another interesting connection here is “dropout.” In DNN training dropout (selective deletion of neurons) is used to prevent model overfitting. Search for the Medium.com article “Dropout in (Deep) Machine learning”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johan Meyer
    Will check them out, thanks
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. hyperbola says:

    A sample size of a few hundred means that this “study” is highly unreliable. Especially if we consider all the other “influences” which are claimed to contribute to intelligence. It seems telling that no statistics are given in any of the excerpts above and suspicious that “important results were obtained already in 1988″ when sample size was probably a few tens. There are also clear inconsistencies in the above:

    For example, two different cognitive tests were used in order to measure intelligence, i.e., BOMAT and PMAT24. Both of them are culture-fair matrix-reasoning instruments capable of assessing the construct of fluid intelligence. Nevertheless, both tests tend to produce different results when testing individuals from high-IQ ranges.

    In other words, the tests of IQ are inconsistent with each other, but the correlation with neuron density is preserved – a clear indication of serious problems.

    Seems more over estimation by psychologists. Striking that it also seems to contradict the recent claims about high IQ/youth fostering the learning of language. So children who learn languages (and many other things) rapidly do so because their intelligence is impaired by incomplete pruning of neurons!

    Read More
    • Replies: @jimmyriddle
    Language acquisition in infants is a special case, and not strongly related to general intelligence. That's why it is almost impossible to acquire a native accent after childhood - Kissinger has been in America since he was 15 and still sounds German.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. songbird says:

    It will be interesting to see if this has any bearing on politics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    None.

    Science exists only in politics when it is useful as a totem for for the faith which a given ideological group wishes to believe in already. When a probable majority of voters will agree that an estrogen-soaked brain operates exactly the same as a testosterone-soaked brain while at the same time affirming the importance of hormonal treatments for children for gender-identification, we are clearly dealing with powerful anterior cingulate cortexes here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @James Thompson
    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.
    Your self-report of problem-solving is a covariate of your intellectual level. Currently there is no way to discern exactly how the subjects solve the problems presented to them, but the films taken of brain activity as people solve intelligence test items in a scanner suggest that the task is broken down into elements which are dealt with by different regions swapping partial solutions till the final result is integrated.

    Given the importance of pruning is it not perhaps a bit misleading to say that brain wiring is probably all under genetic control? That would presumably require one to be able to say that pruning was under genetic control. No doubt genes and epigenetics have an important part in how pruning works in a given individual but the detail needs elaboration and comparison with the genetic control of the original pre pruning brain needs attention, does it not?

    I see that res and others much more knowledgeable than I have focused on pruning to some extent. Can you say something more about the place of pruning in the creation of the efficient adult brain? (En passant I note that it would be interesting to know what similar studies – similar to the one you write about – of the young brains might show). Would you expect for example that the identical twin who went off to work as a circus acrobat at 12 would have more diffuse and less efficient cognitive patterns than those of the twin who remained at an academic school and got 4 A*s in maths and science A levels?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. FKA Max says:


    “Brain maturation is associated with a sharp increase of synapse number, followed by a massive activity-dependent synaptic pruning that reduces synaptic density by half, thereby enabling the establishment of typical mature cortical microarchitecture. Maturation-associated synaptic pruning is not only an event of early childhood, but proceeds at a rapid rate at least until the end of the second decade of life. Most importantly, the mechanisms of synaptic growth and pruning during maturation overlap with those of learning in the mature brain.”

    Psychologist and psychology professor Robert McGivern from San Diego University confirmed the conclusions from the SUNY team. His study showed that at the onset of puberty, males and females take significantly longer to perform a simple matching activity than their pre- and post-puberty peers. However, McGivern and his associates attribute the longer time to an excess of synopses, or connections, in the brain that are waiting to be pruned. As a neglected tree, the connections in the brain also grow wild and need to be pruned for optimum potential. Puberty is the season for such pruning and organization that often makes it difficult for adolescents to process information.

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence-updated/#comment-1897268

    Until recently, most scientists believed the brain stopped changing after early childhood. There was little evidence to support or refute this until new, non-invasive brain imaging technology emerged, allowing scientists to record detailed images of the developing human brain.

    Brain imaging has revealed that certain areas, in particular the prefrontal cortex, continue to develop well into the teens and even into the twenties. Whether prefrontal cortex development underlies teenage angst and rebellion and other adolescent traits is a hot topic.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3323232/Why-the-teens-are-a-difficult-time.html

    The conclusion I draw from this is that IQ tests should probably not be administered before the age of 25, maybe, to ensure that complete or satisfactory pruning/development has been reached, in order to achieve the most accurate readings and results.

    The following – participants in the study who are below the age of 25 – could therefore be a major flaw or shortcoming of the study’s design, in my opinion, with age being/becoming a confounding factor, due to younger participants not having completed full brain development/pruning, yet:

    Methods

    Participants in the S259 sample

    Two hundred fifty-nine participants (138 males) between 18 and 40 years of age (M = 24.31, SD = 4.41) took part in the study.

    This is probably a better and more reliable cohort (S498), since mean age is 5 years (29.16) older/higher than in sample S259 (24.31):


    Participants in the S498 sample

    Thus, all of the reported analyses were performed on data from 498 participants (202 males) between 22 and 36 years of age (M = 29.16, SD = 3.48).

    Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
    Except that IQ is already stable and highly heritable by mid puberty, never mind 25. This suggests much of these brain changes in puberty and early adulthood are strongly mediated by heritable factors, and not the environment (at least within 'normal' environments).
    , @Anon
    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.
    , @EG
    As it is stated in the methods the authors controlled for the confounding factor of age by computing partial correlations or multiple regressions.
    , @Anon
    Do you even read the stuff you clip and paste? I think not. And clipping and pasting your old comments what’s up with that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Interesting, but what I miss is the idea, theory, that each neuron processes information:
    Roger Penrose, ‘The Emperor’s New Mind, Concerning computers, minds, and the laws of physics’, 1989 Oxford
    thus far more than some transistor switch.
    How, at the time the book was written, hardly any idea.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. @James Thompson
    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.
    Your self-report of problem-solving is a covariate of your intellectual level. Currently there is no way to discern exactly how the subjects solve the problems presented to them, but the films taken of brain activity as people solve intelligence test items in a scanner suggest that the task is broken down into elements which are dealt with by different regions swapping partial solutions till the final result is integrated.

    ” there is no way to discern exactly ”
    The word ‘exactly’ seems quite superfluous to me.
    Several times a day I’m amazed at how my brain works.
    Even when repairing a shoe of my grandson.
    Walking to my garage I had hardly any idea how to do it, then remembered a tool last used around 1973.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. It’s not size vs efficiency, it’s size and/or efficiency. One model doesn’t exclude the other.

    Now, didn’t the recent meta-analysis on intelligence genes highlight genes of the same type of pathways as the research here describes? I believe I read something recently that also posed that increased evolutionary selection on brain efficiency rather then size has been the predominant way of increasing humans intelligence since just going for a bigger head proved to be a bit icky due to hip and vagina size, squeezed baby skulls and labor-related deaths.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    It’s not size vs efficiency, it’s size and/or efficiency. One model doesn’t exclude the other.
     
    I agree with that in the outcome sense. In the developmental sense I think there are processes which operate in opposition with respect to those dimensions. In particular, growth vs. pruning. I suspect that is also true in the evolutionary sense. For one thing, that would help explain the larger brained but supposedly less intelligent Neanderthals. And how admixing some of those genetic variants might be helpful for human intelligence. Has anyone looked to see if there is any overlap between SNPs originating with Neanderthals and SNPs found by IQ/EA GWAS?

    This paper looks at Neanderthal influence in the UKBB: The Contribution of Neanderthals to Phenotypic Variation in Modern Humans
    https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(17)30379-8
    They give a table of all UKBB phenotypes in Table S1 and this:
    Table S3: Significantly associated phenotypes that show an over- or under-representation of Neandertal alleles
    I do not see any of the education or intelligence phenotypes in Table S3. That is an interesting table, but it is worth noting the high p-value and FDR rates for many entries.

    Abstract:

    Assessing the genetic contribution of Neanderthals to non-disease phenotypes in modern humans has been difficult because of the absence of large cohorts for which common phenotype information is available. Using baseline phenotypes collected for 112,000 individuals by the UK Biobank, we can now elaborate on previous findings that identified associations between signatures of positive selection on Neanderthal DNA and various modern human traits but not any specific phenotypic consequences. Here, we show that Neanderthal DNA affects skin tone and hair color, height, sleeping patterns, mood, and smoking status in present-day Europeans. Interestingly, multiple Neanderthal alleles at different loci contribute to skin and hair color in present-day Europeans, and these Neanderthal alleles contribute to both lighter and darker skin tones and hair color, suggesting that Neanderthals themselves were most likely variable in these traits.

    For an alternate methodology see the list of (putative) Neanderthal SNPs at this blog post: https://web.archive.org/web/20100612084618/http://spittoon.23andme.com/2010/05/06/new-evidence-suggests-interbreeding-between-humans-and-neanderthals/
    I checked this list of SNPs against the full Lee EA SNP list (from Piffer's R code) and got no matches.

    That list only had 15 SNPs though. Let's try with the full list of 6200+ SNPs from Table S4 of the paper above. Unfortunately that list did not include rsIDs, but I was able to get them from (note Table S4 uses hg19 not the hg38 default here) http://db.systemsbiology.net/kaviar/

    Merging that list with the Lee EA SNPs gave only these two:

    MarkerName CHR POS A1 A2 EAF Beta SE Pval
    3076 rs73075037 20 3141098 A G 0.2993 -0.00868 0.00169 2.9e-07
    7316 rs3780836 9 130912857 C T 0.9898 0.02167 0.00535 5.2e-05

    https://www.gwascentral.org/marker/HGVM2284927/results?t=ZERO

    Looking at rs3780836 more closely, from Table S4 it appears (I would appreciate a double check) the reference allele is C and the Neanderthal allele is T (frequency 0.019 in UKBB). This is interesting because the effect size is quite large (~4x the mean, comparable to the smallest p-value SNPs). Here are the summary statistics for all effect sizes in the UKBB EA study:
    summary(gwas$Beta)
    Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max.
    -9.982e-02 -8.660e-03 -2.500e-05 3.586e-05 8.560e-03 8.792e-02

    So if I interpret things correctly rs3780836 T is a low frequency allele with a large positive effect on EA originating from Neanderthals. Interesting.

    Looks like it is most common in Asia: http://popgen.uchicago.edu/ggv/?data=%221000genomes%22&chr=9&pos=130912857
    About 50% frequency in Peruvians?! What is up with that? Japanese frequency is >75% so perhaps that is the explanation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Peruvians
    Makes me wonder about the representativeness of the 1000 Genomes PEL - Peruvians from Lima, Peru sample.

    P.S. If anyone is interested, I ran across this spreadsheet which looks like it contains a 2100 SNP PGS for height from the UKBB: https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41416-018-0063-4/MediaObjects/41416_2018_63_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx
    From this paper: Height and overall cancer risk and mortality: evidence from a Mendelian randomisation study on 310,000 UK Biobank participants
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41416-018-0063-4
    From the paper:

    We used a total of 2059 independent genetic variants as instruments for standing height, explaining ~11% of the phenotypic variance.
     
    Interesting how far off that is from the ~40% achieved by Hsu et al. using the UKBB data.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. j2 says:

    The conclusion is that what we have called high IQ is actually low IQ. Those with lowest IQ do best in the school since they do not question anything or think about the questions but just straight go to the answer following the methods the teacher told them. Their brain is pruned of all alternative ways of thinking, so they are fine for this Orwellian society. It is all very logical.

    Read More
    • Replies: @üeljang
    "The conclusion is that what we have called high IQ is actually low IQ."

    How about analyses of neurite density and neurite orientation dispersion versus psychopathy/sociopathy and other personality traits?

    , @Santoculto
    They are domesticated or ''puppies'', quantitatively smart, what IQ measure, but qualitatively disappointing... and i think most of this ''intelligence-experts'' are unconfortable to analyse this aspects. One of the reasons psychology is not a full science is that behavior without real world contexts make little sense.

    domestication often mean =high quantitative or computational capacity but low qualitative or survive-like capacity.

    All the time when they talk about ''highly intelligent'' people, we must translate this to ''highly intelligent WORKERS'', it's what they want. It's ''still'' a class struggle.

    It doesn't mean IQ no have any value, it does, but many factual-correct tools THIS people invented are used by evil elites to take the control over the people.

    IQ = teeths quality.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. m___ says:

    Concerning formatting not content

    Concerning the feeds to your(and other authors’) specific articles and their comments, not the whole of the articles(column) of James Thompson –do not work.

    A per column, in this case http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/ feed is present in the list of possibilities to subscribe too, but doing so does not result. Using client software “live bookmarks” of the Firefox browser.

    This is annoying concerning specific columns one would like to subscribe to, in case of having added a comment oneself, in case of primary content as the above column. One of the “blog” features of interest is that the author, can add, tweak, correct his writings and in our opinion should do so, this contrary to a dead printed analog text. That makes rss/atom usefull and additional to flat bookmarking.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. @James Thompson
    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.
    Your self-report of problem-solving is a covariate of your intellectual level. Currently there is no way to discern exactly how the subjects solve the problems presented to them, but the films taken of brain activity as people solve intelligence test items in a scanner suggest that the task is broken down into elements which are dealt with by different regions swapping partial solutions till the final result is integrated.

    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.

    Dr. Thompson,

    I’ve become increasingly dubious of this, in part due to the presence of more than a few chemicals(such as hormones) that are able to penetrate the blood-brain barrier but also with research that the brain actually does develop differently due to training in juggling as well as meditation. The results of the use of birth control in women have also demonstrated measurable changes in the brain and likely impacts its efficiency; certainly has non-temporary effects on the brain. There is also significant impact from physical exercise; even without assuming a nootropic effect, it at least has significant neuroprotective effect from aging and decline.

    I wouldn’t disagree that it might largely genetically gated, but I think the evidence now is leaning nontrivially that the brain is not isolated from the rest of the body now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    That juggling link was interesting. Thanks. It intrigues me that the brain changes did not appear to be proportional to skill achieved. Any thoughts on that?
    , @Anon
    Birth control has been around for about 5,000 years. Exactly what method of birth control are you talking about?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @res
    One thing which caught my eye (this was the only mention of myelin in the paper):

    The authors reported that neurite density obtained from NODDI significantly matched neurite density, orientation dispersion, and myelin density obtained from histology.
     
    Can anyone elaborate on what that matching entailed (e.g. positive correlation)? I looked around and found this paper: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811918301058
    which seems to indicate myelin and neurite density are positively correlated (R = 0.68!):
    Neurite density index (NDI), Orientation dispersion index (ODI), cortical thickness

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S1053811918301058-gr2_lrg.jpg

    It seems to me a positive correlation of NDI with myelin adds another aspect of counterintuitiveness to this finding. Any thoughts?

    Well, I should add one thing which I read(can’t find source atm) which may contribute to why neuronal density would decrease IQ: effectively overdensity can lead to signal interference a bit like unwanted sparks getting into machinery and throwing off a process of cognition in this case. Such may be the case with some austic individuals, who show greater proficiency in certain areas despite having increased neuron death and neural isolation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    That makes sense. I wonder if the total myelin (more neurons -> more myelin) vs. myelin per neuron could explain some of this. It would be interesting to see what a multivariate regression of IQ on NDI and myelin (or perhaps NDI and myelin per neuron would be better) would show. Any thoughts?

    If you think of myelin as an insulator in your analogy then it would become even more important at high NDI.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Biff says:

    MobyDick outsmarted Ahab with his larger brain – that’s all I need to know(he also had a bigger Dick).

    Read More
    • LOL: Meimou
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. @songbird
    It will be interesting to see if this has any bearing on politics.

    None.

    Science exists only in politics when it is useful as a totem for for the faith which a given ideological group wishes to believe in already. When a probable majority of voters will agree that an estrogen-soaked brain operates exactly the same as a testosterone-soaked brain while at the same time affirming the importance of hormonal treatments for children for gender-identification, we are clearly dealing with powerful anterior cingulate cortexes here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @songbird
    I was speaking (albeit rather vaguely) in the more literal sense, of brain structures and biological predispositions. I think it quite likely that most of politics is evolutionary strategy (weaponized by technology), so perhaps nothing significant would show up on this spectrum, after all.

    I do have the forlorn hope that one day people will realize that elections are basically just censuses, and adopt a more libertarian view of government. Or at least that new civilizations will spring up that will have hard requirements on the immigrant: must have a non-SJW brain; we will scan and test gene frequencies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. One wonders if “intelligence” cultists realize all well-tempered clavichords may not necessarily be well tempered. Or, if in fact, some are just nuts.

    Braasch’s Yale biography page says she received not one, but two degrees from the University of Minnesota — aerospace engineering and mechanical engineering — and graduated summa cum laude in both. She was a recipient of an “Astronaut Scholarship Foundation” scholarship for three consecutive years in the mid-1990s.

    She completed both engineering degrees in just five years, by age 22

    “I was racking up prizes and awards and scholarships and fellowships and internships and whatever other honors I could get my hands on,” Braasch writes. “I wanted medals and certificates and esteem. Mostly esteem. I was fueled by rage and hatred. Hatred and rage.”

    http://www.citypages.com/news/ah-shit-yale-woman-who-called-cops-on-napping-black-student-is-from-minnesota/482373941

    Yes, “intelligence” is all good. Yup.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    One wonders if “intelligence” cultists realize all well-tempered clavichords may not necessarily be well tempered. Or, if in fact, some are just nuts. Yes, “intelligence” is all good. Yup.
     
    Oh, now don't be sheete-y. Here now we have exciting evidence that well-spaced dendrites absorb bad information faster than dense dendrites. It's proof that Escalades beat the hell outa Fiats, see? And they go crazy waaaaay faster.
    , @Anon
    So why isn’t she working? Not many jobs in aerospace, but plenty of jobs in mechanical engineering.
    , @utu
    Reading about this women at Yale made me think of Tom Wolfe's novel "I Am Charlotte Simmons."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Ultimate intelligence “tests” is heuristics or factual understanding (and I also coined the term aesthetic consciousness to explain emotional or sentient judgment after cognitive/sensorial perception). This is “organic cognitive potential”. As we know a lot of so called higher IQ individuals are very poor on heuristics, and also in moral heuristics…

    But I hope someday hbds and its “intelligence-experts” colleagues will talk about qualitative aspects of intelligence… Or not.

    Seems impossible for them to accept the existence of highly intelligent people with lower or below average IQ and highly stupid people with above or higher IQ people.

    Intelligence is not only the cognitive or computational aspect but also emotional and Intellectual (often this is basically the combination between emotional and cognitive and or real world achievements of all sort).

    I read somewhere that highly creative people at least based on divergent test scores have highly connected brains… If I remember correctly.

    If we start to think about humans as we do about non human living beings for example certain “point of views” would be at priori treated as more-correct: “anti Semitism”: Capacity to detect implicit patterns about macro political and cultural changes caused by eternal “victims” or “misunderstood angels”…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    ''doble peepow''

    Chinese credit is not TOTALLY wrong at all, indeed would be interesting if ''we'' have intellectual credit too... our capacity to retain high quality- information specially about the most important facts for us.

    Chinese social credit is yes, wrong or have potential to be very wrong, just because east asians are highly intelligent simple-minded, on avg.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. üeljang says:
    @j2
    The conclusion is that what we have called high IQ is actually low IQ. Those with lowest IQ do best in the school since they do not question anything or think about the questions but just straight go to the answer following the methods the teacher told them. Their brain is pruned of all alternative ways of thinking, so they are fine for this Orwellian society. It is all very logical.

    “The conclusion is that what we have called high IQ is actually low IQ.”

    How about analyses of neurite density and neurite orientation dispersion versus psychopathy/sociopathy and other personality traits?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @Santoculto
    Ultimate intelligence "tests" is heuristics or factual understanding (and I also coined the term aesthetic consciousness to explain emotional or sentient judgment after cognitive/sensorial perception). This is "organic cognitive potential". As we know a lot of so called higher IQ individuals are very poor on heuristics, and also in moral heuristics...

    But I hope someday hbds and its "intelligence-experts" colleagues will talk about qualitative aspects of intelligence... Or not.

    Seems impossible for them to accept the existence of highly intelligent people with lower or below average IQ and highly stupid people with above or higher IQ people.

    Intelligence is not only the cognitive or computational aspect but also emotional and Intellectual (often this is basically the combination between emotional and cognitive and or real world achievements of all sort).

    I read somewhere that highly creative people at least based on divergent test scores have highly connected brains... If I remember correctly.

    If we start to think about humans as we do about non human living beings for example certain "point of views" would be at priori treated as more-correct: "anti Semitism": Capacity to detect implicit patterns about macro political and cultural changes caused by eternal "victims" or "misunderstood angels"...

    ”doble peepow”

    Chinese credit is not TOTALLY wrong at all, indeed would be interesting if ”we” have intellectual credit too… our capacity to retain high quality- information specially about the most important facts for us.

    Chinese social credit is yes, wrong or have potential to be very wrong, just because east asians are highly intelligent simple-minded, on avg.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @j2
    The conclusion is that what we have called high IQ is actually low IQ. Those with lowest IQ do best in the school since they do not question anything or think about the questions but just straight go to the answer following the methods the teacher told them. Their brain is pruned of all alternative ways of thinking, so they are fine for this Orwellian society. It is all very logical.

    They are domesticated or ”puppies”, quantitatively smart, what IQ measure, but qualitatively disappointing… and i think most of this ”intelligence-experts” are unconfortable to analyse this aspects. One of the reasons psychology is not a full science is that behavior without real world contexts make little sense.

    domestication often mean =high quantitative or computational capacity but low qualitative or survive-like capacity.

    All the time when they talk about ”highly intelligent” people, we must translate this to ”highly intelligent WORKERS”, it’s what they want. It’s ”still” a class struggle.

    It doesn’t mean IQ no have any value, it does, but many factual-correct tools THIS people invented are used by evil elites to take the control over the people.

    IQ = teeths quality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Inevitably psychology in the real sense towards real philosophy...
    , @Anon
    Psychology isn’t a science at all. It’s just a mass of lies. Consider until about 1880 homosexuality was considered a sex preference. Depending on the society it might be illegal or sinful.

    Then around 1880 the bogus psychology was invented by a bunch of horny old perverts . They decided that homosexuality was a mental illness that could only be cured by years, nay decades of talk therapy. It was quite profitable for the psychology fraudsters

    Then around 1970 the gays decided they didn’t like being categorized as mentally ill because of their sex practices. So within a year the horny old perverts meet and removed homosexuality from the list of mental illness

    Psychologists are no longer allowed to testify as expert court witnesses Why?

    Because the judicial council commissioned some studies that proved practicing degreed licensed psychologists knew no more about mental illness than the average person who never studied psychology.

    Some science huh?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Santoculto
    They are domesticated or ''puppies'', quantitatively smart, what IQ measure, but qualitatively disappointing... and i think most of this ''intelligence-experts'' are unconfortable to analyse this aspects. One of the reasons psychology is not a full science is that behavior without real world contexts make little sense.

    domestication often mean =high quantitative or computational capacity but low qualitative or survive-like capacity.

    All the time when they talk about ''highly intelligent'' people, we must translate this to ''highly intelligent WORKERS'', it's what they want. It's ''still'' a class struggle.

    It doesn't mean IQ no have any value, it does, but many factual-correct tools THIS people invented are used by evil elites to take the control over the people.

    IQ = teeths quality.

    Inevitably psychology in the real sense towards real philosophy…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @jacques sheete
    One wonders if "intelligence" cultists realize all well-tempered clavichords may not necessarily be well tempered. Or, if in fact, some are just nuts.

    Braasch's Yale biography page says she received not one, but two degrees from the University of Minnesota -- aerospace engineering and mechanical engineering -- and graduated summa cum laude in both. She was a recipient of an "Astronaut Scholarship Foundation" scholarship for three consecutive years in the mid-1990s.

    She completed both engineering degrees in just five years, by age 22...

    "I was racking up prizes and awards and scholarships and fellowships and internships and whatever other honors I could get my hands on," Braasch writes. "I wanted medals and certificates and esteem. Mostly esteem. I was fueled by rage and hatred. Hatred and rage."

    http://www.citypages.com/news/ah-shit-yale-woman-who-called-cops-on-napping-black-student-is-from-minnesota/482373941

     

    Yes, "intelligence" is all good. Yup.

    One wonders if “intelligence” cultists realize all well-tempered clavichords may not necessarily be well tempered. Or, if in fact, some are just nuts. Yes, “intelligence” is all good. Yup.

    Oh, now don’t be sheete-y. Here now we have exciting evidence that well-spaced dendrites absorb bad information faster than dense dendrites. It’s proof that Escalades beat the hell outa Fiats, see? And they go crazy waaaaay faster.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    And they go crazy waaaaay faster.
     
    No "study" needed to ascertain that truth!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Jake says:

    “Intelligence is not a function of how hard the brain works but rather how efficiently it works”.

    That made me think first of the old Affirmative Action defense puked out by every black: we have to work twice as hard as whites just to be able to get Affirmative Action.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    “Intelligence is not a function of how hard the brain works but rather how efficiently it works”.
     
    Silliness. Efficiency is mostly irrelevant. Producing the most effective response to a problem is intelligence, plain and simple. Doing that more quickly is more efficient intelligence.

    Having the right answer is the minimal required function.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. “Intelligence is not a function of how hard the brain works but rather how efficiently it works”.

    Intelligence IS the achievement/ the behavior, FROM the most intimate to the most generalizable, for example, ”food ethical choice” [our ''wise-aged'' Thompy can't understand].

    And of course, always repetitive [but ''intelligence experts'' also are very repetitive too]:

    self-knowledge

    Only reason defaux smarter people aren’t eliminated in nature is exactly because that confortable human environment many them often live.

    If you can live your whole life believing in bulshit and environment will not, sooner or late, eliminated you, so…

    and worst, when environment SELECT you exactly because your bulshitism, from religion to current ideology.

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

    Fig. 2 scatter plots at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8
    which they call “partial correlation analyses” do not inspire confidence that there is anything to it.

    Perhaps it should be emphasized that the picture on top of this note which is Fig. 4 in the article is a schematic depiction. So what we are being shown was drawn by an artist based on…on what?

    Please note, this depiction does not correspond to the actual magnitude of effect sizes reported in the study. For the purpose of an easier visual understanding, differences in both macrostructural and microstructural brain properties are highly accentuated

    It would be interesting to indicate on one of scatter plots from Fig. 2 points that have very low and very hight neurite densities so we could see how this neurite density is related to intelligence particularly on the plot with correlation r≈0.0.

    Read More
    • Troll: manorchurch
    • Replies: @res

    Fig. 2 scatter plots at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8
    which they call “partial correlation analyses” do not inspire confidence that there is anything to it.
     
    Controlling for age and sex seems reasonable to me. I wonder if that attenuates the relationships or not. I think the top two plots do indicate something is going on there. It is also worth noting that the orientation (right two plots) is more significant in both cases (bottom right is p = 0.06, just misses significance).

    https://media.springernature.com/lw900/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41467-018-04268-8/MediaObjects/41467_2018_4268_Fig2_HTML.jpg
    , @CanSpeccy
    This is a fine example of the sensationalist, tendentious, but highly tweetable paper that Nature, a commercial publishing venture, likes to publish. That Manorchurch considers you a troll for pointing out the triviality of the observed effects reveals how readily the general public is taken in by scientific twaddle dressed up with fake evidence.

    For example, the drawing in Figure 4, which as you point out vastly exaggerates the inferred difference in neurite density between cortical regions of high and low BOMAT-scoring individuals, also illustrates the variation in IQ with brain volume by means of two rectangles, one being 49% larger than the other. That is a preposterous way to illustrate the trivial effect of brain volume on IQ. Moreover, it is remains to be shown that after excluding those afflicted with some kind of brain pathology, for example as a result of infection by the Zika virus, a cause of microcephaly, the correlation between IQ and brain volume remains.

    But for what it's worth, the data in Figure 2 show that neurite density inferred from NODDI measurements on the basis of correlations observed in rats and ferrets, accounts for about 1.6% of the variation in BOMAT test scores. Pfui.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @Jake
    “Intelligence is not a function of how hard the brain works but rather how efficiently it works”.

    That made me think first of the old Affirmative Action defense puked out by every black: we have to work twice as hard as whites just to be able to get Affirmative Action.

    “Intelligence is not a function of how hard the brain works but rather how efficiently it works”.

    Silliness. Efficiency is mostly irrelevant. Producing the most effective response to a problem is intelligence, plain and simple. Doing that more quickly is more efficient intelligence.

    Having the right answer is the minimal required function.

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

    Fixation on intelligence is useless. Is it “intelligent” for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests? I am referring to the intelligentsia in western countries who can’t wait to wipe out their own selves through the welcoming attitude they have to mass immigration of parties who are obviously hostile to them.

    What is so schit hot about “computational capacity” if you can’t see what is right in front of your nose? Are you really intelligent if you don’t worry about the welfare of your own children and grandchildren? The slugs in my garden are smarter than the highly “intelligent” who are running things for us – right into the ground.

    How many intelligent, high-IQ folks are good at running their own personal lives? If people were truly intelligent, would they not also automatically be wise to what is in their own interests? Indeed, isn’t that the ultimate test of intelligence? Trying to separate intelligence and wisdom is not a smart thing to do at all. It is not an issue of high-IQ intelligence vs shrewdness & horse sense. These aren’t two different things. It only looks that way to those of standard-issue “high” intelligence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Usefulness of useful idiots increases with their IQ.

    "High IQ" Bolsheviks had to murder "low IQ" peasants because they could not indoctrinate them while they had no difficulty indoctrinating the so-called intelligentsia.
    , @MarkinLA
    Is it “intelligent” for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests?

    It is not intelligent to you (and most normal people). However, to them, they are "beyond" that type of thinking and see "farther" than you and realize what is "truly" important. Therefore, what they think is the real intelligent thought.
    , @JackOH
    Liza, agree, pretty much. Our local high-IQ state university faculty are organized into a labor union, an organization mostly thought of as a way for lower-IQ workers to check the power of higher-IQ managements and owners. Plus, by virtue of them being the masters in the master-pupil relationship, many faculty cultivate a truly obnoxious sage-on-the-stage persona, where they simply feign knowledge they don't actually have through bad manners and a haughty, stand-offish manner.

    The low-IQ thug is a retail threat to a good society. The high-IQ thugs, lawyers and politicians and so on, do it wholesale with clean fingernails and Mont Blanc pens.

    I like Prof. Thompson's contributions here, and the comments of folks who seem to have expertise where I have none. But, I think there's other stuff going on in the world besides IQ.

    , @Anon
    Totally agree. Education is just another word for brainwashing. Since about 1950!in America 1970 in Europe the educated elites seem to want to kill all Whites off thinking they will survive.

    But they won’t.

    Pick the synonym for conservative
    Correct answer loser.

    Synonym for educated intellectual
    Correct answer brainwashed zombie
    , @CanSpeccy

    Is it “intelligent” for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests?
     
    Intelligence, as that is understood by the IQists, is a measure not of the capacity for adaptive behavior, but of potential value to the power structure: a measure, that is, of value as a wage slave.

    To be a slave is not what any intellectually and emotionally well-adapted person wants to be. To the latter, intelligence is manifest not only by the ability to perform verbal and numerical logical operations, but the wit and wisdom to apply those abilities in ways that maximize the chance of a fulfilled life. To those whose emotions are, in the Darwinian sense, well adapted, a fulfilled life will be one that conduces to the successful perpetuation of one's own family, tribe, race and nation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @FKA Max

    "Brain maturation is associated with a sharp increase of synapse number, followed by a massive activity-dependent synaptic pruning that reduces synaptic density by half, thereby enabling the establishment of typical mature cortical microarchitecture. Maturation-associated synaptic pruning is not only an event of early childhood, but proceeds at a rapid rate at least until the end of the second decade of life. Most importantly, the mechanisms of synaptic growth and pruning during maturation overlap with those of learning in the mature brain."

    Psychologist and psychology professor Robert McGivern from San Diego University confirmed the conclusions from the SUNY team. His study showed that at the onset of puberty, males and females take significantly longer to perform a simple matching activity than their pre- and post-puberty peers. However, McGivern and his associates attribute the longer time to an excess of synopses, or connections, in the brain that are waiting to be pruned. As a neglected tree, the connections in the brain also grow wild and need to be pruned for optimum potential. Puberty is the season for such pruning and organization that often makes it difficult for adolescents to process information.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence-updated/#comment-1897268

    Until recently, most scientists believed the brain stopped changing after early childhood. There was little evidence to support or refute this until new, non-invasive brain imaging technology emerged, allowing scientists to record detailed images of the developing human brain.

    Brain imaging has revealed that certain areas, in particular the prefrontal cortex, continue to develop well into the teens and even into the twenties. Whether prefrontal cortex development underlies teenage angst and rebellion and other adolescent traits is a hot topic.
     

    - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3323232/Why-the-teens-are-a-difficult-time.html

    The conclusion I draw from this is that IQ tests should probably not be administered before the age of 25, maybe, to ensure that complete or satisfactory pruning/development has been reached, in order to achieve the most accurate readings and results.

    The following - participants in the study who are below the age of 25 - could therefore be a major flaw or shortcoming of the study's design, in my opinion, with age being/becoming a confounding factor, due to younger participants not having completed full brain development/pruning, yet:


    Methods

    Participants in the S259 sample

    Two hundred fifty-nine participants (138 males) between 18 and 40 years of age (M = 24.31, SD = 4.41) took part in the study.
     

    This is probably a better and more reliable cohort (S498), since mean age is 5 years (29.16) older/higher than in sample S259 (24.31):


    Participants in the S498 sample

    Thus, all of the reported analyses were performed on data from 498 participants (202 males) between 22 and 36 years of age (M = 29.16, SD = 3.48).
     

    Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8

    Except that IQ is already stable and highly heritable by mid puberty, never mind 25. This suggests much of these brain changes in puberty and early adulthood are strongly mediated by heritable factors, and not the environment (at least within ‘normal’ environments).

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Agreed, but some of FKA Max's points might be important if it is possible to influence development by targeted interventions. Also see Daniel Chieh's comment 15.

    This (from FKA Max) on the other hand is misguided IMO: "The conclusion I draw from this is that IQ tests should probably not be administered before the age of 25"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. utu says:
    @Liza
    Fixation on intelligence is useless. Is it "intelligent" for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests? I am referring to the intelligentsia in western countries who can't wait to wipe out their own selves through the welcoming attitude they have to mass immigration of parties who are obviously hostile to them.

    What is so schit hot about "computational capacity" if you can't see what is right in front of your nose? Are you really intelligent if you don't worry about the welfare of your own children and grandchildren? The slugs in my garden are smarter than the highly "intelligent" who are running things for us - right into the ground.

    How many intelligent, high-IQ folks are good at running their own personal lives? If people were truly intelligent, would they not also automatically be wise to what is in their own interests? Indeed, isn't that the ultimate test of intelligence? Trying to separate intelligence and wisdom is not a smart thing to do at all. It is not an issue of high-IQ intelligence vs shrewdness & horse sense. These aren't two different things. It only looks that way to those of standard-issue "high" intelligence.

    Usefulness of useful idiots increases with their IQ.

    “High IQ” Bolsheviks had to murder “low IQ” peasants because they could not indoctrinate them while they had no difficulty indoctrinating the so-called intelligentsia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The Bolsheviks murdered the kulaks, who were the high IQ capitalist farmers and potential competition of the urban intelligentsia.
    , @Anon
    As I said educated is the synonym for brainwashed zombie.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. MarkinLA says:
    @Liza
    Fixation on intelligence is useless. Is it "intelligent" for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests? I am referring to the intelligentsia in western countries who can't wait to wipe out their own selves through the welcoming attitude they have to mass immigration of parties who are obviously hostile to them.

    What is so schit hot about "computational capacity" if you can't see what is right in front of your nose? Are you really intelligent if you don't worry about the welfare of your own children and grandchildren? The slugs in my garden are smarter than the highly "intelligent" who are running things for us - right into the ground.

    How many intelligent, high-IQ folks are good at running their own personal lives? If people were truly intelligent, would they not also automatically be wise to what is in their own interests? Indeed, isn't that the ultimate test of intelligence? Trying to separate intelligence and wisdom is not a smart thing to do at all. It is not an issue of high-IQ intelligence vs shrewdness & horse sense. These aren't two different things. It only looks that way to those of standard-issue "high" intelligence.

    Is it “intelligent” for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests?

    It is not intelligent to you (and most normal people). However, to them, they are “beyond” that type of thinking and see “farther” than you and realize what is “truly” important. Therefore, what they think is the real intelligent thought.

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

    I’m pressed for time, but this seems consistent with Gerald Edelman’s hypothesis of “Neural Darwinism“, but it’s a very difficult theory to understand let alone summarize. When I read it back in ’89, the summary was the densest scientific prose I had ever encountered, and remains so to this day.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Interesting. Thanks. I think the Amazon reviews are worthwhile: https://www.amazon.com/Neural-Darwinism-Theory-Neuronal-Selection/dp/0465049346

    Some more reviews:
    http://science.sciencemag.org/content/240/4860/1802
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0004370289900040 (16 pages)
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg12617205-400-review-darwin-on-the-brain/

    Related 1993 paper: http://www.acamedia.info/letters/an_Peter_von_Salis/references/neurosciences_institute/edelman1993.pdf
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. res says:
    @T.Theodore
    It's not size vs efficiency, it's size and/or efficiency. One model doesn't exclude the other.

    Now, didn't the recent meta-analysis on intelligence genes highlight genes of the same type of pathways as the research here describes? I believe I read something recently that also posed that increased evolutionary selection on brain efficiency rather then size has been the predominant way of increasing humans intelligence since just going for a bigger head proved to be a bit icky due to hip and vagina size, squeezed baby skulls and labor-related deaths.

    It’s not size vs efficiency, it’s size and/or efficiency. One model doesn’t exclude the other.

    I agree with that in the outcome sense. In the developmental sense I think there are processes which operate in opposition with respect to those dimensions. In particular, growth vs. pruning. I suspect that is also true in the evolutionary sense. For one thing, that would help explain the larger brained but supposedly less intelligent Neanderthals. And how admixing some of those genetic variants might be helpful for human intelligence. Has anyone looked to see if there is any overlap between SNPs originating with Neanderthals and SNPs found by IQ/EA GWAS?

    This paper looks at Neanderthal influence in the UKBB: The Contribution of Neanderthals to Phenotypic Variation in Modern Humans

    https://www.cell.com/ajhg/fulltext/S0002-9297(17)30379-8

    They give a table of all UKBB phenotypes in Table S1 and this:
    Table S3: Significantly associated phenotypes that show an over- or under-representation of Neandertal alleles
    I do not see any of the education or intelligence phenotypes in Table S3. That is an interesting table, but it is worth noting the high p-value and FDR rates for many entries.

    Abstract:

    Assessing the genetic contribution of Neanderthals to non-disease phenotypes in modern humans has been difficult because of the absence of large cohorts for which common phenotype information is available. Using baseline phenotypes collected for 112,000 individuals by the UK Biobank, we can now elaborate on previous findings that identified associations between signatures of positive selection on Neanderthal DNA and various modern human traits but not any specific phenotypic consequences. Here, we show that Neanderthal DNA affects skin tone and hair color, height, sleeping patterns, mood, and smoking status in present-day Europeans. Interestingly, multiple Neanderthal alleles at different loci contribute to skin and hair color in present-day Europeans, and these Neanderthal alleles contribute to both lighter and darker skin tones and hair color, suggesting that Neanderthals themselves were most likely variable in these traits.

    For an alternate methodology see the list of (putative) Neanderthal SNPs at this blog post: https://web.archive.org/web/20100612084618/http://spittoon.23andme.com/2010/05/06/new-evidence-suggests-interbreeding-between-humans-and-neanderthals/
    I checked this list of SNPs against the full Lee EA SNP list (from Piffer’s R code) and got no matches.

    That list only had 15 SNPs though. Let’s try with the full list of 6200+ SNPs from Table S4 of the paper above. Unfortunately that list did not include rsIDs, but I was able to get them from (note Table S4 uses hg19 not the hg38 default here) http://db.systemsbiology.net/kaviar/

    Merging that list with the Lee EA SNPs gave only these two:

    MarkerName CHR POS A1 A2 EAF Beta SE Pval
    3076 rs73075037 20 3141098 A G 0.2993 -0.00868 0.00169 2.9e-07
    7316 rs3780836 9 130912857 C T 0.9898 0.02167 0.00535 5.2e-05

    https://www.gwascentral.org/marker/HGVM2284927/results?t=ZERO

    Looking at rs3780836 more closely, from Table S4 it appears (I would appreciate a double check) the reference allele is C and the Neanderthal allele is T (frequency 0.019 in UKBB). This is interesting because the effect size is quite large (~4x the mean, comparable to the smallest p-value SNPs). Here are the summary statistics for all effect sizes in the UKBB EA study:
    summary(gwas$Beta)
    Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max.
    -9.982e-02 -8.660e-03 -2.500e-05 3.586e-05 8.560e-03 8.792e-02

    So if I interpret things correctly rs3780836 T is a low frequency allele with a large positive effect on EA originating from Neanderthals. Interesting.

    Looks like it is most common in Asia: http://popgen.uchicago.edu/ggv/?data=%221000genomes%22&chr=9&pos=130912857
    About 50% frequency in Peruvians?! What is up with that? Japanese frequency is >75% so perhaps that is the explanation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Peruvians
    Makes me wonder about the representativeness of the 1000 Genomes PEL – Peruvians from Lima, Peru sample.

    P.S. If anyone is interested, I ran across this spreadsheet which looks like it contains a 2100 SNP PGS for height from the UKBB: https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41416-018-0063-4/MediaObjects/41416_2018_63_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx
    From this paper: Height and overall cancer risk and mortality: evidence from a Mendelian randomisation study on 310,000 UK Biobank participants

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41416-018-0063-4

    From the paper:

    We used a total of 2059 independent genetic variants as instruments for standing height, explaining ~11% of the phenotypic variance.

    Interesting how far off that is from the ~40% achieved by Hsu et al. using the UKBB data.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.

     

    Dr. Thompson,

    I've become increasingly dubious of this, in part due to the presence of more than a few chemicals(such as hormones) that are able to penetrate the blood-brain barrier but also with research that the brain actually does develop differently due to training in juggling as well as meditation. The results of the use of birth control in women have also demonstrated measurable changes in the brain and likely impacts its efficiency; certainly has non-temporary effects on the brain. There is also significant impact from physical exercise; even without assuming a nootropic effect, it at least has significant neuroprotective effect from aging and decline.

    I wouldn't disagree that it might largely genetically gated, but I think the evidence now is leaning nontrivially that the brain is not isolated from the rest of the body now.

    That juggling link was interesting. Thanks. It intrigues me that the brain changes did not appear to be proportional to skill achieved. Any thoughts on that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I'm guessing that "effort" and time involved might have something to do with myelin insulation added(the harder it is, but the more the brain has to do it, the more myelin the brain lays down). Probably genetically regulated as well.

    Here's to wild guessing, anyway.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. res says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    Well, I should add one thing which I read(can't find source atm) which may contribute to why neuronal density would decrease IQ: effectively overdensity can lead to signal interference a bit like unwanted sparks getting into machinery and throwing off a process of cognition in this case. Such may be the case with some austic individuals, who show greater proficiency in certain areas despite having increased neuron death and neural isolation.

    That makes sense. I wonder if the total myelin (more neurons -> more myelin) vs. myelin per neuron could explain some of this. It would be interesting to see what a multivariate regression of IQ on NDI and myelin (or perhaps NDI and myelin per neuron would be better) would show. Any thoughts?

    If you think of myelin as an insulator in your analogy then it would become even more important at high NDI.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EG
    The NDI myelin association is not a straightforward one. The Grussu et al study (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acn3.445) confirms this association on a histological level for cases of multiple sclerosis, but this association is absent in healthy individuals. Even if we have an association between NDI myelin, the shared variance is at around 50%. The remaining 50% of variance of NDI could have an influence on intelligence "independently" from myelin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. res says:
    @utu
    Fig. 2 scatter plots at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8
    which they call "partial correlation analyses" do not inspire confidence that there is anything to it.

    Perhaps it should be emphasized that the picture on top of this note which is Fig. 4 in the article is a schematic depiction. So what we are being shown was drawn by an artist based on...on what?

    Please note, this depiction does not correspond to the actual magnitude of effect sizes reported in the study. For the purpose of an easier visual understanding, differences in both macrostructural and microstructural brain properties are highly accentuated
     
    It would be interesting to indicate on one of scatter plots from Fig. 2 points that have very low and very hight neurite densities so we could see how this neurite density is related to intelligence particularly on the plot with correlation r≈0.0.

    Fig. 2 scatter plots at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8
    which they call “partial correlation analyses” do not inspire confidence that there is anything to it.

    Controlling for age and sex seems reasonable to me. I wonder if that attenuates the relationships or not. I think the top two plots do indicate something is going on there. It is also worth noting that the orientation (right two plots) is more significant in both cases (bottom right is p = 0.06, just misses significance).

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    Controlling for age and sex seems reasonable to me.
     
    Yes. Why not show couple scatter plots for women, men and different age groups separately? But in general one must be careful when interpreting results of multivariate regression. They actually bring up this issue:

    This condition, in which an independent variable shows no correlation with the dependent variable, but makes a significant contribution in the context of a multiple regression analysis with other variables, is called “suppression” in statistics. The variable suppresses variance that is not related to the dependent measure in other independent variables and thereby enhances predictive power of the variable set as a whole
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. res says:
    @Anonymous Jew
    Except that IQ is already stable and highly heritable by mid puberty, never mind 25. This suggests much of these brain changes in puberty and early adulthood are strongly mediated by heritable factors, and not the environment (at least within 'normal' environments).

    Agreed, but some of FKA Max’s points might be important if it is possible to influence development by targeted interventions. Also see Daniel Chieh’s comment 15.

    This (from FKA Max) on the other hand is misguided IMO: “The conclusion I draw from this is that IQ tests should probably not be administered before the age of 25″

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. res says:
    @EH
    I'm pressed for time, but this seems consistent with Gerald Edelman's hypothesis of "Neural Darwinism", but it's a very difficult theory to understand let alone summarize. When I read it back in '89, the summary was the densest scientific prose I had ever encountered, and remains so to this day.
    Read More
    • Replies: @EH
    Thanks, good references.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Looking through the reactions it surprises me that hardly anyone writes that we hardly have a clue how our brain works, or how intelligence can be defined.
    I even did not see a definition of brain.
    Anyone who knows a little about the odd way different organs, seen evolutionary, interact which each other knows that even a definition of brain is lacking, or difficult.
    What I also do not see mentioned is conciousness, or free will.
    The only book I know that tries to shed light on all this is
    Roger Penrose, ‘The Emperor’s New Mind, Concerning computers, minds, and the laws of physics’, 1989 Oxford
    Penrose speculates that quantum mechanics may solve the free will puzzle.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Penrose speculates that quantum mechanics may solve the free will puzzle.
     
    Whatever merit the Penrose Hameroff model of the mind may have, it will not provide an account of free will since free will is an illusion. To quote myself:

    If Cain willed to kill Abel, how could he have acted otherwise than to go ahead and kill him? Could he, at the same time, have willed not to will to kill Abel? But if so, what if the will to kill Abel were stronger? Could he then have willed to will not to kill Abel more strongly? This leads to an infinite regress.

    The conclusion seems to be that we will what we will and that's that for good or ill. And if sometimes our actions are theoretically unpredictable due to classical or quantum indeterminism, our actions are nevertheless driven either by chance or necessity, which is rather different from the idea that most people have of free will.
     

    The concept of free will is nevertheless important in judging questions of legal responsibility. To quote myself further:

    To many, the notion that Cain could do no other than kill his brother means that he was not morally responsible for his actions and therefore should not have been held accountable or punished. But "moral responsibility" is not synonymous with "legal responsibility." Under the law of sane and civilized society, Cain would be held responsible for killing Abel, for the simple reason that he did indeed kill Abel.

    Furthermore, under the law of any sane and civilized society, Cain would be punished for killing Abel, not because of his moral culpability but to deter others who might otherwise emulate his crime.
     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. JackOH says:
    @Liza
    Fixation on intelligence is useless. Is it "intelligent" for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests? I am referring to the intelligentsia in western countries who can't wait to wipe out their own selves through the welcoming attitude they have to mass immigration of parties who are obviously hostile to them.

    What is so schit hot about "computational capacity" if you can't see what is right in front of your nose? Are you really intelligent if you don't worry about the welfare of your own children and grandchildren? The slugs in my garden are smarter than the highly "intelligent" who are running things for us - right into the ground.

    How many intelligent, high-IQ folks are good at running their own personal lives? If people were truly intelligent, would they not also automatically be wise to what is in their own interests? Indeed, isn't that the ultimate test of intelligence? Trying to separate intelligence and wisdom is not a smart thing to do at all. It is not an issue of high-IQ intelligence vs shrewdness & horse sense. These aren't two different things. It only looks that way to those of standard-issue "high" intelligence.

    Liza, agree, pretty much. Our local high-IQ state university faculty are organized into a labor union, an organization mostly thought of as a way for lower-IQ workers to check the power of higher-IQ managements and owners. Plus, by virtue of them being the masters in the master-pupil relationship, many faculty cultivate a truly obnoxious sage-on-the-stage persona, where they simply feign knowledge they don’t actually have through bad manners and a haughty, stand-offish manner.

    The low-IQ thug is a retail threat to a good society. The high-IQ thugs, lawyers and politicians and so on, do it wholesale with clean fingernails and Mont Blanc pens.

    I like Prof. Thompson’s contributions here, and the comments of folks who seem to have expertise where I have none. But, I think there’s other stuff going on in the world besides IQ.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liza
    @Jack OH. Thanks for replying to my comment. I can't just click on "Agree" because I don't have enough comments here on Unz. So, maybe I should just say a bunch of BS 10 times in one month and then voila, I get to "Agree". LOL.
    , @jacques sheete

    But, I think there’s other stuff going on in the world besides IQ.
     
    ;)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu
    Fig. 2 scatter plots at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8
    which they call "partial correlation analyses" do not inspire confidence that there is anything to it.

    Perhaps it should be emphasized that the picture on top of this note which is Fig. 4 in the article is a schematic depiction. So what we are being shown was drawn by an artist based on...on what?

    Please note, this depiction does not correspond to the actual magnitude of effect sizes reported in the study. For the purpose of an easier visual understanding, differences in both macrostructural and microstructural brain properties are highly accentuated
     
    It would be interesting to indicate on one of scatter plots from Fig. 2 points that have very low and very hight neurite densities so we could see how this neurite density is related to intelligence particularly on the plot with correlation r≈0.0.

    This is a fine example of the sensationalist, tendentious, but highly tweetable paper that Nature, a commercial publishing venture, likes to publish. That Manorchurch considers you a troll for pointing out the triviality of the observed effects reveals how readily the general public is taken in by scientific twaddle dressed up with fake evidence.

    For example, the drawing in Figure 4, which as you point out vastly exaggerates the inferred difference in neurite density between cortical regions of high and low BOMAT-scoring individuals, also illustrates the variation in IQ with brain volume by means of two rectangles, one being 49% larger than the other. That is a preposterous way to illustrate the trivial effect of brain volume on IQ. Moreover, it is remains to be shown that after excluding those afflicted with some kind of brain pathology, for example as a result of infection by the Zika virus, a cause of microcephaly, the correlation between IQ and brain volume remains.

    But for what it’s worth, the data in Figure 2 show that neurite density inferred from NODDI measurements on the basis of correlations observed in rats and ferrets, accounts for about 1.6% of the variation in BOMAT test scores. Pfui.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    ...how readily the general public is taken in by scientific twaddle dressed up with fake evidence.
     
    True, but they love their twaddle whether scientific or not and they take it straight. No embellishment needed, not that it doesn't help.
    , @utu
    Yes, sensationalism and probably much the worse. I do not blame our host here for it but the Nature. I give our host a benefit of doubt that he even as practicing IQist believer if he was an editor of Nature he would not allow for this kind of deceptive chutzpah to slide. This artist rendered picture (Fig. 4) is scandalous because it misrepresents magnitude of discovery, if there is any, in a very suggestive and compelling way. This artist renders picture makes the discovery.

    If differences between lo and hi iq's were anything like in this artist rendered picture the correlations would be high but they are pathetically low, basically negligible in reality (in Fig. 2).

    This artist render picture is what makes the sale here but it is FAKE! Everybody here focuses on it and will go home holding this meme of how dendrite look in stupid people comparing to smart people in mind, but this is BS. The differences between lo and hi whatever they are imperceptible. Otherwise they would not need artist rendition!

    Furthermore this artist rendered Fig. 4 has a feel of NAZI propaganda poster pointing to cleanliness, orderliness and organization of nice Nordic lad's mind as opposed to disorderliness and messiness of some dirty Ostjuden or Gypsy brain. The paper is Made in Germany, right? I wonder how will they feel when they get hit with NAZI insinuations? Hey, CanSpeccy perhaps you could write a letter to them just for kicks to see them getting shits. You can pretend you are a very offended Holocaust surviver.

    But seriously, I demand to know what the the artist was shown and told before he produced this picture!

    NB: the 1930's style gave all gov propaganda posters whether in the US, Soviet Union or NAZI Germany the same feel.

    (The guy who "trolled" me is on revenge warpath because I "trolled" him recently for lack of more adequate button as he was arguing some IQist nonsense.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Liza says:
    @JackOH
    Liza, agree, pretty much. Our local high-IQ state university faculty are organized into a labor union, an organization mostly thought of as a way for lower-IQ workers to check the power of higher-IQ managements and owners. Plus, by virtue of them being the masters in the master-pupil relationship, many faculty cultivate a truly obnoxious sage-on-the-stage persona, where they simply feign knowledge they don't actually have through bad manners and a haughty, stand-offish manner.

    The low-IQ thug is a retail threat to a good society. The high-IQ thugs, lawyers and politicians and so on, do it wholesale with clean fingernails and Mont Blanc pens.

    I like Prof. Thompson's contributions here, and the comments of folks who seem to have expertise where I have none. But, I think there's other stuff going on in the world besides IQ.

    @Jack OH. Thanks for replying to my comment. I can’t just click on “Agree” because I don’t have enough comments here on Unz. So, maybe I should just say a bunch of BS 10 times in one month and then voila, I get to “Agree”. LOL.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    So, maybe I should just say a bunch of BS 10 times in one month...
     
    Well, if you do that, you needn't fear being "different."
    , @JackOH
    Liza, thanks, and a belated "Welcome aboard". Lots of good stuff on these pages.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @jilles dykstra
    Looking through the reactions it surprises me that hardly anyone writes that we hardly have a clue how our brain works, or how intelligence can be defined.
    I even did not see a definition of brain.
    Anyone who knows a little about the odd way different organs, seen evolutionary, interact which each other knows that even a definition of brain is lacking, or difficult.
    What I also do not see mentioned is conciousness, or free will.
    The only book I know that tries to shed light on all this is
    Roger Penrose, 'The Emperor's New Mind, Concerning computers, minds, and the laws of physics', 1989 Oxford
    Penrose speculates that quantum mechanics may solve the free will puzzle.

    Penrose speculates that quantum mechanics may solve the free will puzzle.

    Whatever merit the Penrose Hameroff model of the mind may have, it will not provide an account of free will since free will is an illusion. To quote myself:

    If Cain willed to kill Abel, how could he have acted otherwise than to go ahead and kill him? Could he, at the same time, have willed not to will to kill Abel? But if so, what if the will to kill Abel were stronger? Could he then have willed to will not to kill Abel more strongly? This leads to an infinite regress.

    The conclusion seems to be that we will what we will and that’s that for good or ill. And if sometimes our actions are theoretically unpredictable due to classical or quantum indeterminism, our actions are nevertheless driven either by chance or necessity, which is rather different from the idea that most people have of free will.

    The concept of free will is nevertheless important in judging questions of legal responsibility. To quote myself further:

    To many, the notion that Cain could do no other than kill his brother means that he was not morally responsible for his actions and therefore should not have been held accountable or punished. But “moral responsibility” is not synonymous with “legal responsibility.” Under the law of sane and civilized society, Cain would be held responsible for killing Abel, for the simple reason that he did indeed kill Abel.

    Furthermore, under the law of any sane and civilized society, Cain would be punished for killing Abel, not because of his moral culpability but to deter others who might otherwise emulate his crime.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Maybe you have the time and intellectual stamina to do us all a favour by reading, explaining and reviewing "The Mind Matters' by David Hodgson.

    I read an article in Quadrant Magazine by him on free will (at least that was the part that interested me) and corresponded with him. He referred to his book. We aimed to meet after he retired from the New South Wales Court of Appeal bench which I had assumed would be at 70. In NSW it was 72 and he died within months after retiring so I never got round to finishing the reading for my tutorial.

    After topping New South Wales in mathematics before a university law degree he went as a Rhodes Scholar to Oxford where the professor supervising his PhD said he was the most intelligent student he had ever had. For the purpose of "The Mind Matters" he taught himself Quantum Mechanics while he was a judge... Maybe we'll need to call on our host Ron to grade it for us.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. songbird says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    None.

    Science exists only in politics when it is useful as a totem for for the faith which a given ideological group wishes to believe in already. When a probable majority of voters will agree that an estrogen-soaked brain operates exactly the same as a testosterone-soaked brain while at the same time affirming the importance of hormonal treatments for children for gender-identification, we are clearly dealing with powerful anterior cingulate cortexes here.

    I was speaking (albeit rather vaguely) in the more literal sense, of brain structures and biological predispositions. I think it quite likely that most of politics is evolutionary strategy (weaponized by technology), so perhaps nothing significant would show up on this spectrum, after all.

    I do have the forlorn hope that one day people will realize that elections are basically just censuses, and adopt a more libertarian view of government. Or at least that new civilizations will spring up that will have hard requirements on the immigrant: must have a non-SJW brain; we will scan and test gene frequencies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Nobody knows what IQ tests (all of them) are measuring. However, we all know that there is a difference in intelligence between people. It is sometimes quite striking.
    Interestingly, people studying animal behavior say that the smarter the animal, the greater individual variation in any task that involves cognition. E.g., mice show much less variation than dogs, dogs less than chimps. Naturally, the variation in human intelligence is huge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. @manorchurch

    One wonders if “intelligence” cultists realize all well-tempered clavichords may not necessarily be well tempered. Or, if in fact, some are just nuts. Yes, “intelligence” is all good. Yup.
     
    Oh, now don't be sheete-y. Here now we have exciting evidence that well-spaced dendrites absorb bad information faster than dense dendrites. It's proof that Escalades beat the hell outa Fiats, see? And they go crazy waaaaay faster.

    And they go crazy waaaaay faster.

    No “study” needed to ascertain that truth!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @CanSpeccy
    This is a fine example of the sensationalist, tendentious, but highly tweetable paper that Nature, a commercial publishing venture, likes to publish. That Manorchurch considers you a troll for pointing out the triviality of the observed effects reveals how readily the general public is taken in by scientific twaddle dressed up with fake evidence.

    For example, the drawing in Figure 4, which as you point out vastly exaggerates the inferred difference in neurite density between cortical regions of high and low BOMAT-scoring individuals, also illustrates the variation in IQ with brain volume by means of two rectangles, one being 49% larger than the other. That is a preposterous way to illustrate the trivial effect of brain volume on IQ. Moreover, it is remains to be shown that after excluding those afflicted with some kind of brain pathology, for example as a result of infection by the Zika virus, a cause of microcephaly, the correlation between IQ and brain volume remains.

    But for what it's worth, the data in Figure 2 show that neurite density inferred from NODDI measurements on the basis of correlations observed in rats and ferrets, accounts for about 1.6% of the variation in BOMAT test scores. Pfui.

    …how readily the general public is taken in by scientific twaddle dressed up with fake evidence.

    True, but they love their twaddle whether scientific or not and they take it straight. No embellishment needed, not that it doesn’t help.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @JackOH
    Liza, agree, pretty much. Our local high-IQ state university faculty are organized into a labor union, an organization mostly thought of as a way for lower-IQ workers to check the power of higher-IQ managements and owners. Plus, by virtue of them being the masters in the master-pupil relationship, many faculty cultivate a truly obnoxious sage-on-the-stage persona, where they simply feign knowledge they don't actually have through bad manners and a haughty, stand-offish manner.

    The low-IQ thug is a retail threat to a good society. The high-IQ thugs, lawyers and politicians and so on, do it wholesale with clean fingernails and Mont Blanc pens.

    I like Prof. Thompson's contributions here, and the comments of folks who seem to have expertise where I have none. But, I think there's other stuff going on in the world besides IQ.

    But, I think there’s other stuff going on in the world besides IQ.

    ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    Yeah. Deceit and trickery among our overlords seem to me not to require a stratospheric IQ.

    Ohio's bureau of unemployment comp has quietly introduced unusual reporting rules that go against the spirit of the law to interpret "liberally" the relevant statutes. The chump--er, citizen--who was once laid off, collected a few weeks of unemployment, then got called back to work, now faces new requirements. He has to fill out "career planning" mumbo-jumbo, with multiple deadlines extending beyond the period he was actually collecting unemployment comp. Failure to do so, from what I understand, disqualifies the applicant from collecting comp the next time around.

    Nice racket. "Saves" unemployment comp. Probably leads to underreporting of the unemployed. High IQ not required to hobble a chump with novel and cumbersome reporting requirements.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @Liza
    @Jack OH. Thanks for replying to my comment. I can't just click on "Agree" because I don't have enough comments here on Unz. So, maybe I should just say a bunch of BS 10 times in one month and then voila, I get to "Agree". LOL.

    So, maybe I should just say a bunch of BS 10 times in one month…

    Well, if you do that, you needn’t fear being “different.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liza
    @Jacques Sheete. LOL!

    Hope the above comment counts as #3 for the 30-day period starting today!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. EH says:
    @res
    Interesting. Thanks. I think the Amazon reviews are worthwhile: https://www.amazon.com/Neural-Darwinism-Theory-Neuronal-Selection/dp/0465049346

    Some more reviews:
    http://science.sciencemag.org/content/240/4860/1802
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0004370289900040 (16 pages)
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg12617205-400-review-darwin-on-the-brain/

    Related 1993 paper: http://www.acamedia.info/letters/an_Peter_von_Salis/references/neurosciences_institute/edelman1993.pdf

    Thanks, good references.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @res
    Good question. This page has a good overview of pruning neural networks: Pruning deep neural networks to make them fast and small
    https://jacobgil.github.io/deeplearning/pruning-deep-learning

    It looks like this is an active area of research which has not really made it to production use yet. The focus seems to be on decreasing size and increasing efficiency rather than improving accuracy.

    Another interesting connection here is "dropout." In DNN training dropout (selective deletion of neurons) is used to prevent model overfitting. Search for the Medium.com article "Dropout in (Deep) Machine learning"

    Will check them out, thanks

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. “Second, we demonstrate that higher intelligence is associated with cortical mantles with sparsely and well-organized dendritic arbor, thereby increasing processing speed and network efficiency.”

    This sounds suspiciously similar to what arborists find when they try to prune fruit trees for maximum production.

    I’ve talked with the arborists who came around and ended up pruning a sizable number of fruit trees in my neighborhood — and they followed the same idea — fewer and better branches of the tree produced better and more fruit. The proof of their theory was in the years after their pruning and the owners reported vastly improved fruit-bearing of their trees.

    Very interesting article here — thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Liza
    @Anthony. So, how do we go about pruning brains?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Liza says:
    @jacques sheete

    So, maybe I should just say a bunch of BS 10 times in one month...
     
    Well, if you do that, you needn't fear being "different."

    @Jacques Sheete. LOL!

    Hope the above comment counts as #3 for the 30-day period starting today!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Liza says:
    @Anthony Aaron
    "Second, we demonstrate that higher intelligence is associated with cortical mantles with sparsely and well-organized dendritic arbor, thereby increasing processing speed and network efficiency."

    This sounds suspiciously similar to what arborists find when they try to prune fruit trees for maximum production.

    I've talked with the arborists who came around and ended up pruning a sizable number of fruit trees in my neighborhood -- and they followed the same idea -- fewer and better branches of the tree produced better and more fruit. The proof of their theory was in the years after their pruning and the owners reported vastly improved fruit-bearing of their trees.

    Very interesting article here -- thanks.

    @Anthony. So, how do we go about pruning brains?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Anonymous[400] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    Usefulness of useful idiots increases with their IQ.

    "High IQ" Bolsheviks had to murder "low IQ" peasants because they could not indoctrinate them while they had no difficulty indoctrinating the so-called intelligentsia.

    The Bolsheviks murdered the kulaks, who were the high IQ capitalist farmers and potential competition of the urban intelligentsia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    It was not about IQ. It was about Christianity and owning the means of production and thus being economically independent that made them impregnable to Bolshevik propaganda BS. City intelligentsia which was atheist and usually had no tangible property thought of themselves as being more intelligent and more progressive than peasants (this is a favorite Jewish anti-peasant prejudice to feel contempt for peasants which has nothing to do with pogroms) was actually much more susceptible to BS than the peasants.

    It was no different then than what it is now. SJW's are basically Jewish in spirit and stupidity just like their grandfather Bolsheviks. Fortunately they are not killing the deplorables and other peasants yet as their grandfather Bolsheviks did in Russia. But they can. They are capable of killing their enemies. Read the Old Testament.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. utu says:
    @CanSpeccy
    This is a fine example of the sensationalist, tendentious, but highly tweetable paper that Nature, a commercial publishing venture, likes to publish. That Manorchurch considers you a troll for pointing out the triviality of the observed effects reveals how readily the general public is taken in by scientific twaddle dressed up with fake evidence.

    For example, the drawing in Figure 4, which as you point out vastly exaggerates the inferred difference in neurite density between cortical regions of high and low BOMAT-scoring individuals, also illustrates the variation in IQ with brain volume by means of two rectangles, one being 49% larger than the other. That is a preposterous way to illustrate the trivial effect of brain volume on IQ. Moreover, it is remains to be shown that after excluding those afflicted with some kind of brain pathology, for example as a result of infection by the Zika virus, a cause of microcephaly, the correlation between IQ and brain volume remains.

    But for what it's worth, the data in Figure 2 show that neurite density inferred from NODDI measurements on the basis of correlations observed in rats and ferrets, accounts for about 1.6% of the variation in BOMAT test scores. Pfui.

    Yes, sensationalism and probably much the worse. I do not blame our host here for it but the Nature. I give our host a benefit of doubt that he even as practicing IQist believer if he was an editor of Nature he would not allow for this kind of deceptive chutzpah to slide. This artist rendered picture (Fig. 4) is scandalous because it misrepresents magnitude of discovery, if there is any, in a very suggestive and compelling way. This artist renders picture makes the discovery.

    If differences between lo and hi iq’s were anything like in this artist rendered picture the correlations would be high but they are pathetically low, basically negligible in reality (in Fig. 2).

    This artist render picture is what makes the sale here but it is FAKE! Everybody here focuses on it and will go home holding this meme of how dendrite look in stupid people comparing to smart people in mind, but this is BS. The differences between lo and hi whatever they are imperceptible. Otherwise they would not need artist rendition!

    Furthermore this artist rendered Fig. 4 has a feel of NAZI propaganda poster pointing to cleanliness, orderliness and organization of nice Nordic lad’s mind as opposed to disorderliness and messiness of some dirty Ostjuden or Gypsy brain. The paper is Made in Germany, right? I wonder how will they feel when they get hit with NAZI insinuations? Hey, CanSpeccy perhaps you could write a letter to them just for kicks to see them getting shits. You can pretend you are a very offended Holocaust surviver.

    But seriously, I demand to know what the the artist was shown and told before he produced this picture!

    NB: the 1930′s style gave all gov propaganda posters whether in the US, Soviet Union or NAZI Germany the same feel.

    (The guy who “trolled” me is on revenge warpath because I “trolled” him recently for lack of more adequate button as he was arguing some IQist nonsense.)

    Read More
    • Troll: manorchurch
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    The paper is Made in Germany, right? I wonder how will they feel when they get hit with NAZI insinuations? Hey, CanSpeccy perhaps you could write a letter to them just for kicks to see them getting shits. You can pretend you are a very offended Holocaust surviver.
     
    Nah. They'd never publish it. Editors, in my experience, are loathe to admit an error of judgement, and the Editor of Nature (Sir Philip Campbell, FRAS, FInstP, astrophysicist) probably thinks he's God.

    Anyway, the inspiration for this well-polished example of scientific sleight of hand pretty certainly came not from the bunch of Germans at the Universitaet Bunchum, or wherever, but from this guy, who is a seriously for profit academic back on the good ol' US of A, the home of fake news, fake, food, fake sex and, evidently, fake science. Jung's CV is worth examining. He's pretty well solved all the big questions concerning the mind by putting people's heads in a scanner.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. utu says:
    @res

    Fig. 2 scatter plots at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8
    which they call “partial correlation analyses” do not inspire confidence that there is anything to it.
     
    Controlling for age and sex seems reasonable to me. I wonder if that attenuates the relationships or not. I think the top two plots do indicate something is going on there. It is also worth noting that the orientation (right two plots) is more significant in both cases (bottom right is p = 0.06, just misses significance).

    https://media.springernature.com/lw900/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41467-018-04268-8/MediaObjects/41467_2018_4268_Fig2_HTML.jpg

    Controlling for age and sex seems reasonable to me.

    Yes. Why not show couple scatter plots for women, men and different age groups separately? But in general one must be careful when interpreting results of multivariate regression. They actually bring up this issue:

    This condition, in which an independent variable shows no correlation with the dependent variable, but makes a significant contribution in the context of a multiple regression analysis with other variables, is called “suppression” in statistics. The variable suppresses variance that is not related to the dependent measure in other independent variables and thereby enhances predictive power of the variable set as a whole

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. utu says:
    @Anonymous
    The Bolsheviks murdered the kulaks, who were the high IQ capitalist farmers and potential competition of the urban intelligentsia.

    It was not about IQ. It was about Christianity and owning the means of production and thus being economically independent that made them impregnable to Bolshevik propaganda BS. City intelligentsia which was atheist and usually had no tangible property thought of themselves as being more intelligent and more progressive than peasants (this is a favorite Jewish anti-peasant prejudice to feel contempt for peasants which has nothing to do with pogroms) was actually much more susceptible to BS than the peasants.

    It was no different then than what it is now. SJW’s are basically Jewish in spirit and stupidity just like their grandfather Bolsheviks. Fortunately they are not killing the deplorables and other peasants yet as their grandfather Bolsheviks did in Russia. But they can. They are capable of killing their enemies. Read the Old Testament.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Absolutely right. Whether you’re a dishwasher or dr. If you’re dependent on a job you’re a dependent.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. @hyperbola
    A sample size of a few hundred means that this "study" is highly unreliable. Especially if we consider all the other "influences" which are claimed to contribute to intelligence. It seems telling that no statistics are given in any of the excerpts above and suspicious that "important results were obtained already in 1988" when sample size was probably a few tens. There are also clear inconsistencies in the above:

    For example, two different cognitive tests were used in order to measure intelligence, i.e., BOMAT and PMAT24. Both of them are culture-fair matrix-reasoning instruments capable of assessing the construct of fluid intelligence. Nevertheless, both tests tend to produce different results when testing individuals from high-IQ ranges.
     
    In other words, the tests of IQ are inconsistent with each other, but the correlation with neuron density is preserved - a clear indication of serious problems.

    Seems more over estimation by psychologists. Striking that it also seems to contradict the recent claims about high IQ/youth fostering the learning of language. So children who learn languages (and many other things) rapidly do so because their intelligence is impaired by incomplete pruning of neurons!

    Language acquisition in infants is a special case, and not strongly related to general intelligence. That’s why it is almost impossible to acquire a native accent after childhood – Kissinger has been in America since he was 15 and still sounds German.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I believe Kissinger’s accent was carefully cultivated to make him distinctive or something. I wouldn’t be surprised if he had an acting coach to keep his accent intact all those years.
    , @hyperbola
    I chose to use acquisition of language as an example only because an equally specious article on language appeared here on unz recently. If one looks at the actual data (Fig. 2), the so-called correlations can only be regarded as highly misleading.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.

     

    Dr. Thompson,

    I've become increasingly dubious of this, in part due to the presence of more than a few chemicals(such as hormones) that are able to penetrate the blood-brain barrier but also with research that the brain actually does develop differently due to training in juggling as well as meditation. The results of the use of birth control in women have also demonstrated measurable changes in the brain and likely impacts its efficiency; certainly has non-temporary effects on the brain. There is also significant impact from physical exercise; even without assuming a nootropic effect, it at least has significant neuroprotective effect from aging and decline.

    I wouldn't disagree that it might largely genetically gated, but I think the evidence now is leaning nontrivially that the brain is not isolated from the rest of the body now.

    Birth control has been around for about 5,000 years. Exactly what method of birth control are you talking about?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/womens-brains-on-steroids/

    Obviously something that can get through the blood-brain barrier.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. JackOH says:
    @Liza
    @Jack OH. Thanks for replying to my comment. I can't just click on "Agree" because I don't have enough comments here on Unz. So, maybe I should just say a bunch of BS 10 times in one month and then voila, I get to "Agree". LOL.

    Liza, thanks, and a belated “Welcome aboard”. Lots of good stuff on these pages.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @jacques sheete
    One wonders if "intelligence" cultists realize all well-tempered clavichords may not necessarily be well tempered. Or, if in fact, some are just nuts.

    Braasch's Yale biography page says she received not one, but two degrees from the University of Minnesota -- aerospace engineering and mechanical engineering -- and graduated summa cum laude in both. She was a recipient of an "Astronaut Scholarship Foundation" scholarship for three consecutive years in the mid-1990s.

    She completed both engineering degrees in just five years, by age 22...

    "I was racking up prizes and awards and scholarships and fellowships and internships and whatever other honors I could get my hands on," Braasch writes. "I wanted medals and certificates and esteem. Mostly esteem. I was fueled by rage and hatred. Hatred and rage."

    http://www.citypages.com/news/ah-shit-yale-woman-who-called-cops-on-napping-black-student-is-from-minnesota/482373941

     

    Yes, "intelligence" is all good. Yup.

    So why isn’t she working? Not many jobs in aerospace, but plenty of jobs in mechanical engineering.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Liza
    Fixation on intelligence is useless. Is it "intelligent" for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests? I am referring to the intelligentsia in western countries who can't wait to wipe out their own selves through the welcoming attitude they have to mass immigration of parties who are obviously hostile to them.

    What is so schit hot about "computational capacity" if you can't see what is right in front of your nose? Are you really intelligent if you don't worry about the welfare of your own children and grandchildren? The slugs in my garden are smarter than the highly "intelligent" who are running things for us - right into the ground.

    How many intelligent, high-IQ folks are good at running their own personal lives? If people were truly intelligent, would they not also automatically be wise to what is in their own interests? Indeed, isn't that the ultimate test of intelligence? Trying to separate intelligence and wisdom is not a smart thing to do at all. It is not an issue of high-IQ intelligence vs shrewdness & horse sense. These aren't two different things. It only looks that way to those of standard-issue "high" intelligence.

    Totally agree. Education is just another word for brainwashing. Since about 1950!in America 1970 in Europe the educated elites seem to want to kill all Whites off thinking they will survive.

    But they won’t.

    Pick the synonym for conservative
    Correct answer loser.

    Synonym for educated intellectual
    Correct answer brainwashed zombie

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Anon
    Birth control has been around for about 5,000 years. Exactly what method of birth control are you talking about?

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/womens-brains-on-steroids/

    Obviously something that can get through the blood-brain barrier.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I read the article. There was no conclusion. It claimed that BC hormones might have some permanent effect on the brain.

    It’s just grant hustling. So far the authors have found nothing. It’s just speculating The authors are looking for grants to continue their research.

    Thanks for doing the research and posting the article
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. utu says:
    @jacques sheete
    One wonders if "intelligence" cultists realize all well-tempered clavichords may not necessarily be well tempered. Or, if in fact, some are just nuts.

    Braasch's Yale biography page says she received not one, but two degrees from the University of Minnesota -- aerospace engineering and mechanical engineering -- and graduated summa cum laude in both. She was a recipient of an "Astronaut Scholarship Foundation" scholarship for three consecutive years in the mid-1990s.

    She completed both engineering degrees in just five years, by age 22...

    "I was racking up prizes and awards and scholarships and fellowships and internships and whatever other honors I could get my hands on," Braasch writes. "I wanted medals and certificates and esteem. Mostly esteem. I was fueled by rage and hatred. Hatred and rage."

    http://www.citypages.com/news/ah-shit-yale-woman-who-called-cops-on-napping-black-student-is-from-minnesota/482373941

     

    Yes, "intelligence" is all good. Yup.

    Reading about this women at Yale made me think of Tom Wolfe’s novel “I Am Charlotte Simmons.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I read Charlotte Simmons. She wasn’t anything like the nutso at Yale. She felt out of place because of her family background which was nice normal loving supportive working class.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @FKA Max

    "Brain maturation is associated with a sharp increase of synapse number, followed by a massive activity-dependent synaptic pruning that reduces synaptic density by half, thereby enabling the establishment of typical mature cortical microarchitecture. Maturation-associated synaptic pruning is not only an event of early childhood, but proceeds at a rapid rate at least until the end of the second decade of life. Most importantly, the mechanisms of synaptic growth and pruning during maturation overlap with those of learning in the mature brain."

    Psychologist and psychology professor Robert McGivern from San Diego University confirmed the conclusions from the SUNY team. His study showed that at the onset of puberty, males and females take significantly longer to perform a simple matching activity than their pre- and post-puberty peers. However, McGivern and his associates attribute the longer time to an excess of synopses, or connections, in the brain that are waiting to be pruned. As a neglected tree, the connections in the brain also grow wild and need to be pruned for optimum potential. Puberty is the season for such pruning and organization that often makes it difficult for adolescents to process information.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence-updated/#comment-1897268

    Until recently, most scientists believed the brain stopped changing after early childhood. There was little evidence to support or refute this until new, non-invasive brain imaging technology emerged, allowing scientists to record detailed images of the developing human brain.

    Brain imaging has revealed that certain areas, in particular the prefrontal cortex, continue to develop well into the teens and even into the twenties. Whether prefrontal cortex development underlies teenage angst and rebellion and other adolescent traits is a hot topic.
     

    - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3323232/Why-the-teens-are-a-difficult-time.html

    The conclusion I draw from this is that IQ tests should probably not be administered before the age of 25, maybe, to ensure that complete or satisfactory pruning/development has been reached, in order to achieve the most accurate readings and results.

    The following - participants in the study who are below the age of 25 - could therefore be a major flaw or shortcoming of the study's design, in my opinion, with age being/becoming a confounding factor, due to younger participants not having completed full brain development/pruning, yet:


    Methods

    Participants in the S259 sample

    Two hundred fifty-nine participants (138 males) between 18 and 40 years of age (M = 24.31, SD = 4.41) took part in the study.
     

    This is probably a better and more reliable cohort (S498), since mean age is 5 years (29.16) older/higher than in sample S259 (24.31):


    Participants in the S498 sample

    Thus, all of the reported analyses were performed on data from 498 participants (202 males) between 22 and 36 years of age (M = 29.16, SD = 3.48).
     

    Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.
     
    If this was so the variance of IQ distribution that is not accounted by genes that amounts to 25%-50% according to twin studies must have been caused by environmental factors prior to starting the school, i.e., in the first six years of life. What environment factors in first six years of life account for up 50% of IQ variance? If we identified them we could change them and possible reduce the IQ variance in population by factor of 2 from SD^2=(15)^2=225 to 112.5=(10.6)^2=SD^2. This effect of trimming standard deviation would occur mostly on the low end of the bell curve as the effect of changing of environment factors would be only positive.

    Perhaps if you have IQ that you. hight not be happy about you should ask what would be your IQ max limit if you had the most optimal environment in the first six years of life? After asking the question you can proceed with murdering your parents or staring a revolution.
    , @FKA Max
    Also a reply to comment #31: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483

    How do you explain these findings then:


    Met allele carriers’ scores improved markedly with increasing yrs ed, whereas the scores of Val/Val individuals were only marginally influenced by yrs ed. There was a crossover of effects at 11–12 yrs ed: in the less educated group, Met allele carriers actually performed worse than Val/Val individuals perhaps because of emotional vulnerability to educational adversity, but in the better educated group, Met allele carriers excelled.
    [...]
    In 1972, at the age of 4, there was a 10 point IQ difference between blacks and whites on average in the United States. In 2002, the gap had narrowed by 5 points, but there was still a 5 point difference at age 4. By the age of 24, the gap widened to a 17 point difference. This is better than the 22 point difference found in 1972 for age 24, but it’s still quite alarming.
     
    -

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?

    Black-White difference in 1972

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -10 -12.4 -14.8 -17.2 -19.6 -22.0

    Black-White difference in 2002

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -5 -7.5 -9.8 -12.2 -14.6 -17
     
    - https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Santoculto
    They are domesticated or ''puppies'', quantitatively smart, what IQ measure, but qualitatively disappointing... and i think most of this ''intelligence-experts'' are unconfortable to analyse this aspects. One of the reasons psychology is not a full science is that behavior without real world contexts make little sense.

    domestication often mean =high quantitative or computational capacity but low qualitative or survive-like capacity.

    All the time when they talk about ''highly intelligent'' people, we must translate this to ''highly intelligent WORKERS'', it's what they want. It's ''still'' a class struggle.

    It doesn't mean IQ no have any value, it does, but many factual-correct tools THIS people invented are used by evil elites to take the control over the people.

    IQ = teeths quality.

    Psychology isn’t a science at all. It’s just a mass of lies. Consider until about 1880 homosexuality was considered a sex preference. Depending on the society it might be illegal or sinful.

    Then around 1880 the bogus psychology was invented by a bunch of horny old perverts . They decided that homosexuality was a mental illness that could only be cured by years, nay decades of talk therapy. It was quite profitable for the psychology fraudsters

    Then around 1970 the gays decided they didn’t like being categorized as mentally ill because of their sex practices. So within a year the horny old perverts meet and removed homosexuality from the list of mental illness

    Psychologists are no longer allowed to testify as expert court witnesses Why?

    Because the judicial council commissioned some studies that proved practicing degreed licensed psychologists knew no more about mental illness than the average person who never studied psychology.

    Some science huh?

    Read More
    • Replies: @hyperbola
    Psychology is a religious/racist fraud that was never meant to be a science.

    Sigmund Freud, Psychoanalysis, and the War on the West
    “We are bringing them the plague.”—Sigmund Freud, on his way to America in 1909[1]
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/24/sigmund-freud-psychoanalysis-and-the-war-on-the-west/

    ...Jewish psychologists played a big role in bringing about this cultural warfare. “Under Jewish influence, American psychology became Talmudic as well….it was seen as a weapon against Christian culture.”[5]

    Freud was on a Jewish mission. Jewish professor of psychiatry Thomas Szasz of New York University writes that “one of Freud’s most powerful motives in life was…to inflict vengeance on Christianity.”[10]

    Other Jewish scholars such as Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter noted the same thing, adding that....

    ....Freud in fact had a secret library in which he housed books on the Kabbala, and a copy of the Zohar,[16] which is “the most important document in Jewish mysticism,” and which, among other things, “taught the Jews to sacrifice Christian virgins for God’s pleasure.”[17]

    In addition, Freud took part in the B’nai B’rith lodge in Vienna, and “among his recreations was his weekly game of taroc, a popular card game based on Kabbala.”[18]

    As we shall see, Freud used scientific pretensions to unleash a venom—psychoanalysis—upon the Western world, but psychoanalysis has close to nothing to do with science....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    Usefulness of useful idiots increases with their IQ.

    "High IQ" Bolsheviks had to murder "low IQ" peasants because they could not indoctrinate them while they had no difficulty indoctrinating the so-called intelligentsia.

    As I said educated is the synonym for brainwashed zombie.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. utu says:
    @Anon
    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.

    If this was so the variance of IQ distribution that is not accounted by genes that amounts to 25%-50% according to twin studies must have been caused by environmental factors prior to starting the school, i.e., in the first six years of life. What environment factors in first six years of life account for up 50% of IQ variance? If we identified them we could change them and possible reduce the IQ variance in population by factor of 2 from SD^2=(15)^2=225 to 112.5=(10.6)^2=SD^2. This effect of trimming standard deviation would occur mostly on the low end of the bell curve as the effect of changing of environment factors would be only positive.

    Perhaps if you have IQ that you. hight not be happy about you should ask what would be your IQ max limit if you had the most optimal environment in the first six years of life? After asking the question you can proceed with murdering your parents or staring a revolution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    I was tested to get into my private school when I was 4. Lowest IQ admitted was 115. The school accepted me. At the end of first grade conference the teacher told my mother my IQ tested to 127.

    So I guess my first 6 years were ok.

    That school still requires a test. I’m the oldest of 5 sibs 4 tested in the 120s. One brother tested 133.

    So what? And what business is it of yours?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    It was not about IQ. It was about Christianity and owning the means of production and thus being economically independent that made them impregnable to Bolshevik propaganda BS. City intelligentsia which was atheist and usually had no tangible property thought of themselves as being more intelligent and more progressive than peasants (this is a favorite Jewish anti-peasant prejudice to feel contempt for peasants which has nothing to do with pogroms) was actually much more susceptible to BS than the peasants.

    It was no different then than what it is now. SJW's are basically Jewish in spirit and stupidity just like their grandfather Bolsheviks. Fortunately they are not killing the deplorables and other peasants yet as their grandfather Bolsheviks did in Russia. But they can. They are capable of killing their enemies. Read the Old Testament.

    Absolutely right. Whether you’re a dishwasher or dr. If you’re dependent on a job you’re a dependent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @jimmyriddle
    Language acquisition in infants is a special case, and not strongly related to general intelligence. That's why it is almost impossible to acquire a native accent after childhood - Kissinger has been in America since he was 15 and still sounds German.

    I believe Kissinger’s accent was carefully cultivated to make him distinctive or something. I wouldn’t be surprised if he had an acting coach to keep his accent intact all those years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/womens-brains-on-steroids/

    Obviously something that can get through the blood-brain barrier.

    I read the article. There was no conclusion. It claimed that BC hormones might have some permanent effect on the brain.

    It’s just grant hustling. So far the authors have found nothing. It’s just speculating The authors are looking for grants to continue their research.

    Thanks for doing the research and posting the article

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Well, it passes the smell test, too. Besides the obvious self-reports from women on birth control, if you used any other chemical that could easily get through the blood-brain barrier such as NGF, testosterone or any other neurally active hormone, you will probably get alterations in the brain. The prefrontal cortex will alter itself slightly differently even on viewing the same thing from a different angle for two twins(the brain sets up neural connections based on perceptions, thus differences in memory will be actual physical differences in conectivity, at least, if not more).

    Once such connections and neural alterations exist, and with hormones its going to be fairly brute, the only way the brain can later fix it is through neural die-off and pruning, and that usually doesn't just happen on its own.

    There's really no logical reason to expect that the brain will behave in a way that's completely distinct from any other organ in the body. Yes, it has that blood-brain barrier to protect it, but once anything gets through it and in the modern world, that's an increasing number of chemicals, its playing host to unexpected actors in its environment now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    Reading about this women at Yale made me think of Tom Wolfe's novel "I Am Charlotte Simmons."

    I read Charlotte Simmons. She wasn’t anything like the nutso at Yale. She felt out of place because of her family background which was nice normal loving supportive working class.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    It was just my first thought after reading about Sarah Braasch which was her were poor and rural origins. John Derbyshire captures this in his today's note about Wolfe:

    The class angle. Modern U.S. society is addled with class snobbery. Poor and rural Americans are coarse-looking, ill-dressed, speak in dialect, and have lousy dietary habits. Rich suburban and high-urban Americans would much rather have nothing to do with them. When confrontations do occur, the rustics are insecure but defensive, the rich patronizing but impatient, with a frisson of guilt. Again, these are things known to everyone, but we are not supposed to notice them. Wolfe does notice them, and draws them to a “t.”
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.
     
    If this was so the variance of IQ distribution that is not accounted by genes that amounts to 25%-50% according to twin studies must have been caused by environmental factors prior to starting the school, i.e., in the first six years of life. What environment factors in first six years of life account for up 50% of IQ variance? If we identified them we could change them and possible reduce the IQ variance in population by factor of 2 from SD^2=(15)^2=225 to 112.5=(10.6)^2=SD^2. This effect of trimming standard deviation would occur mostly on the low end of the bell curve as the effect of changing of environment factors would be only positive.

    Perhaps if you have IQ that you. hight not be happy about you should ask what would be your IQ max limit if you had the most optimal environment in the first six years of life? After asking the question you can proceed with murdering your parents or staring a revolution.

    I was tested to get into my private school when I was 4. Lowest IQ admitted was 115. The school accepted me. At the end of first grade conference the teacher told my mother my IQ tested to 127.

    So I guess my first 6 years were ok.

    That school still requires a test. I’m the oldest of 5 sibs 4 tested in the 120s. One brother tested 133.

    So what? And what business is it of yours?

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    So what? And what business is it of yours?
     
    I do not care. I did not ask about your IQ. I only suggest that you can kill your parents if you are unhappy with it.

    This is not about your IQ anyway. In my comment I was trying to redirect to the conclusion that large part of IQs if we take various claims made by IQists on the face value lead to conclusion thatch first six years of life is critical when IQs can be significantly impoved. Potentially the variance can be shrunk by 50% by moving IQ's upwards.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:

    In these days of affirmative action which will
    never end in our or our children’s or grandchildren’s lifetimes why in the world do White people still discuss IQ??

    Pathetic, think if you’re really smart and get perfect test scores and do all your homework and obey all the rules and join all the clubs you’ll get some reward? Pathetic

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  78. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  79. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @James Thompson
    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.
    Your self-report of problem-solving is a covariate of your intellectual level. Currently there is no way to discern exactly how the subjects solve the problems presented to them, but the films taken of brain activity as people solve intelligence test items in a scanner suggest that the task is broken down into elements which are dealt with by different regions swapping partial solutions till the final result is integrated.

    Hasn’t lead paint been banned fitvsbout 75 years? Low IQ is rampant in 2 demographics in California despite the fact that most houses in California were built after the lead paint ban.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johan Meyer
    Lead paint was banned in the late 1970s in the US. Lead petrol/gasoline fallout is still a problem in many areas. Youth should be much less affected, and youth convictions for serious crimes have dropped considerably. Perhaps it is time for a new longitudinal study of youth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Liza
    Fixation on intelligence is useless. Is it "intelligent" for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests? I am referring to the intelligentsia in western countries who can't wait to wipe out their own selves through the welcoming attitude they have to mass immigration of parties who are obviously hostile to them.

    What is so schit hot about "computational capacity" if you can't see what is right in front of your nose? Are you really intelligent if you don't worry about the welfare of your own children and grandchildren? The slugs in my garden are smarter than the highly "intelligent" who are running things for us - right into the ground.

    How many intelligent, high-IQ folks are good at running their own personal lives? If people were truly intelligent, would they not also automatically be wise to what is in their own interests? Indeed, isn't that the ultimate test of intelligence? Trying to separate intelligence and wisdom is not a smart thing to do at all. It is not an issue of high-IQ intelligence vs shrewdness & horse sense. These aren't two different things. It only looks that way to those of standard-issue "high" intelligence.

    Is it “intelligent” for persons of high IQ and great achievement in science, engineering, professions, art, inventing things, etc. to be incapable of even identifying with their own interests?

    Intelligence, as that is understood by the IQists, is a measure not of the capacity for adaptive behavior, but of potential value to the power structure: a measure, that is, of value as a wage slave.

    To be a slave is not what any intellectually and emotionally well-adapted person wants to be. To the latter, intelligence is manifest not only by the ability to perform verbal and numerical logical operations, but the wit and wisdom to apply those abilities in ways that maximize the chance of a fulfilled life. To those whose emotions are, in the Darwinian sense, well adapted, a fulfilled life will be one that conduces to the successful perpetuation of one’s own family, tribe, race and nation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. utu says:
    @Anon
    I was tested to get into my private school when I was 4. Lowest IQ admitted was 115. The school accepted me. At the end of first grade conference the teacher told my mother my IQ tested to 127.

    So I guess my first 6 years were ok.

    That school still requires a test. I’m the oldest of 5 sibs 4 tested in the 120s. One brother tested 133.

    So what? And what business is it of yours?

    So what? And what business is it of yours?

    I do not care. I did not ask about your IQ. I only suggest that you can kill your parents if you are unhappy with it.

    This is not about your IQ anyway. In my comment I was trying to redirect to the conclusion that large part of IQs if we take various claims made by IQists on the face value lead to conclusion thatch first six years of life is critical when IQs can be significantly impoved. Potentially the variance can be shrunk by 50% by moving IQ’s upwards.

    Read More
    • Troll: manorchurch
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. utu says:
    @Anon
    I read Charlotte Simmons. She wasn’t anything like the nutso at Yale. She felt out of place because of her family background which was nice normal loving supportive working class.

    It was just my first thought after reading about Sarah Braasch which was her were poor and rural origins. John Derbyshire captures this in his today’s note about Wolfe:

    The class angle. Modern U.S. society is addled with class snobbery. Poor and rural Americans are coarse-looking, ill-dressed, speak in dialect, and have lousy dietary habits. Rich suburban and high-urban Americans would much rather have nothing to do with them. When confrontations do occur, the rustics are insecure but defensive, the rich patronizing but impatient, with a frisson of guilt. Again, these are things known to everyone, but we are not supposed to notice them. Wolfe does notice them, and draws them to a “t.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    You’re right about rural. But Charlottes family was poor only in comparison to the very rich kids she met at Duke

    And her family was supportive and living and normal, not religious fanatics
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. j2 says:

    Did they control for personality traits? It is known that Extraversion and Agreeableness correlate negatively with grey material density (density of neurons), see

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23512407

    “These results suggest that pro-social personality traits seem to be associated with decreases in grey matter density in more frontal regions for Extraversion, and more posterior regions for Agreeableness.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  84. FKA Max says:
    @Anon
    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.

    Also a reply to comment #31: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483

    How do you explain these findings then:

    Met allele carriers’ scores improved markedly with increasing yrs ed, whereas the scores of Val/Val individuals were only marginally influenced by yrs ed. There was a crossover of effects at 11–12 yrs ed: in the less educated group, Met allele carriers actually performed worse than Val/Val individuals perhaps because of emotional vulnerability to educational adversity, but in the better educated group, Met allele carriers excelled.
    [...]
    In 1972, at the age of 4, there was a 10 point IQ difference between blacks and whites on average in the United States. In 2002, the gap had narrowed by 5 points, but there was still a 5 point difference at age 4. By the age of 24, the gap widened to a 17 point difference. This is better than the 22 point difference found in 1972 for age 24, but it’s still quite alarming.

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?

    Black-White difference in 1972

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -10 -12.4 -14.8 -17.2 -19.6 -22.0

    Black-White difference in 2002

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -5 -7.5 -9.8 -12.2 -14.6 -17

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    I forgot to provide the link/source to the first quoted paragraph in my above post:

    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence-updated/#comment-1903682

    This is the first study cited:

    COMT Val158Met and cognition: main effects and interaction with educational attainment Enoch et al. (2008) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1601-183X.2008.00441.x/abstract

    , @utu
    The same question one may ask why heritability twin studies show that heritability increases with age. This means that IQ's of two identical twins converge as they grow older in childhood beyond 6 years old.

    Basically IQ is not stable. It is a myth. But it is a necessary myth to justify the concept of g, i.e., that IQ is chiefly genetic.

    There is a serious empirical question. How possibly we could verify stability of IQ? It seems simple. Just keep giving people tests at different ages and compare, right? No, it can't be done because tests for different ages are different or scaled differently. And in adulthood how frequently can you give tests w/o affecting the outcome of tests?

    Where are the studies showing stability? The longitude Scottish study showed correlation of 0.7-0.75 form teens to old age. Does it mean that IQ is really stable?

    The stability myth is a part of reification process that occurs among the believers of the IQism. Every -ism is to large extent based on various reifications to make people believe that something that has a dubious ontology is actually real. Like the 'will of proletariat' or 'historical forces' which can be invoked and used to send you to Gulag for 10 years. It means they are real since they have such power.
    , @res

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?
     
    1. You are comparing within group differences to between group differences.
    2. Different rates of maturation for different groups.
    , @Anon
    I bet you didn’t even read your clip
    And paste. Go argue with some one else.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. FKA Max says:
    @FKA Max
    Also a reply to comment #31: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483

    How do you explain these findings then:


    Met allele carriers’ scores improved markedly with increasing yrs ed, whereas the scores of Val/Val individuals were only marginally influenced by yrs ed. There was a crossover of effects at 11–12 yrs ed: in the less educated group, Met allele carriers actually performed worse than Val/Val individuals perhaps because of emotional vulnerability to educational adversity, but in the better educated group, Met allele carriers excelled.
    [...]
    In 1972, at the age of 4, there was a 10 point IQ difference between blacks and whites on average in the United States. In 2002, the gap had narrowed by 5 points, but there was still a 5 point difference at age 4. By the age of 24, the gap widened to a 17 point difference. This is better than the 22 point difference found in 1972 for age 24, but it’s still quite alarming.
     
    -

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?

    Black-White difference in 1972

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -10 -12.4 -14.8 -17.2 -19.6 -22.0

    Black-White difference in 2002

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -5 -7.5 -9.8 -12.2 -14.6 -17
     
    - https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight

    I forgot to provide the link/source to the first quoted paragraph in my above post:

    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence-updated/#comment-1903682

    This is the first study cited:

    COMT Val158Met and cognition: main effects and interaction with educational attainment Enoch et al. (2008) http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1601-183X.2008.00441.x/abstract

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. JackOH says:
    @jacques sheete

    But, I think there’s other stuff going on in the world besides IQ.
     
    ;)

    Yeah. Deceit and trickery among our overlords seem to me not to require a stratospheric IQ.

    Ohio’s bureau of unemployment comp has quietly introduced unusual reporting rules that go against the spirit of the law to interpret “liberally” the relevant statutes. The chump–er, citizen–who was once laid off, collected a few weeks of unemployment, then got called back to work, now faces new requirements. He has to fill out “career planning” mumbo-jumbo, with multiple deadlines extending beyond the period he was actually collecting unemployment comp. Failure to do so, from what I understand, disqualifies the applicant from collecting comp the next time around.

    Nice racket. “Saves” unemployment comp. Probably leads to underreporting of the unemployed. High IQ not required to hobble a chump with novel and cumbersome reporting requirements.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @res
    That juggling link was interesting. Thanks. It intrigues me that the brain changes did not appear to be proportional to skill achieved. Any thoughts on that?

    I’m guessing that “effort” and time involved might have something to do with myelin insulation added(the harder it is, but the more the brain has to do it, the more myelin the brain lays down). Probably genetically regulated as well.

    Here’s to wild guessing, anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. utu says:
    @FKA Max
    Also a reply to comment #31: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483

    How do you explain these findings then:


    Met allele carriers’ scores improved markedly with increasing yrs ed, whereas the scores of Val/Val individuals were only marginally influenced by yrs ed. There was a crossover of effects at 11–12 yrs ed: in the less educated group, Met allele carriers actually performed worse than Val/Val individuals perhaps because of emotional vulnerability to educational adversity, but in the better educated group, Met allele carriers excelled.
    [...]
    In 1972, at the age of 4, there was a 10 point IQ difference between blacks and whites on average in the United States. In 2002, the gap had narrowed by 5 points, but there was still a 5 point difference at age 4. By the age of 24, the gap widened to a 17 point difference. This is better than the 22 point difference found in 1972 for age 24, but it’s still quite alarming.
     
    -

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?

    Black-White difference in 1972

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -10 -12.4 -14.8 -17.2 -19.6 -22.0

    Black-White difference in 2002

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -5 -7.5 -9.8 -12.2 -14.6 -17
     
    - https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight

    The same question one may ask why heritability twin studies show that heritability increases with age. This means that IQ’s of two identical twins converge as they grow older in childhood beyond 6 years old.

    Basically IQ is not stable. It is a myth. But it is a necessary myth to justify the concept of g, i.e., that IQ is chiefly genetic.

    There is a serious empirical question. How possibly we could verify stability of IQ? It seems simple. Just keep giving people tests at different ages and compare, right? No, it can’t be done because tests for different ages are different or scaled differently. And in adulthood how frequently can you give tests w/o affecting the outcome of tests?

    Where are the studies showing stability? The longitude Scottish study showed correlation of 0.7-0.75 form teens to old age. Does it mean that IQ is really stable?

    The stability myth is a part of reification process that occurs among the believers of the IQism. Every -ism is to large extent based on various reifications to make people believe that something that has a dubious ontology is actually real. Like the ‘will of proletariat’ or ‘historical forces’ which can be invoked and used to send you to Gulag for 10 years. It means they are real since they have such power.

    Read More
    • Troll: manorchurch
    • Replies: @res

    The same question one may ask why heritability twin studies show that heritability increases with age. This means that IQ’s of two identical twins converge as they grow older in childhood beyond 6 years old.
     
    It seems reasonable to explain this as random environmental variation averaging out over time. And genetic drivers of environment (people do create their own environments to some degree) becoming more important as people enter phases of their life where they have more influence on their environment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. @Anon
    I read the article. There was no conclusion. It claimed that BC hormones might have some permanent effect on the brain.

    It’s just grant hustling. So far the authors have found nothing. It’s just speculating The authors are looking for grants to continue their research.

    Thanks for doing the research and posting the article

    Well, it passes the smell test, too. Besides the obvious self-reports from women on birth control, if you used any other chemical that could easily get through the blood-brain barrier such as NGF, testosterone or any other neurally active hormone, you will probably get alterations in the brain. The prefrontal cortex will alter itself slightly differently even on viewing the same thing from a different angle for two twins(the brain sets up neural connections based on perceptions, thus differences in memory will be actual physical differences in conectivity, at least, if not more).

    Once such connections and neural alterations exist, and with hormones its going to be fairly brute, the only way the brain can later fix it is through neural die-off and pruning, and that usually doesn’t just happen on its own.

    There’s really no logical reason to expect that the brain will behave in a way that’s completely distinct from any other organ in the body. Yes, it has that blood-brain barrier to protect it, but once anything gets through it and in the modern world, that’s an increasing number of chemicals, its playing host to unexpected actors in its environment now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. EG says:
    @res
    That makes sense. I wonder if the total myelin (more neurons -> more myelin) vs. myelin per neuron could explain some of this. It would be interesting to see what a multivariate regression of IQ on NDI and myelin (or perhaps NDI and myelin per neuron would be better) would show. Any thoughts?

    If you think of myelin as an insulator in your analogy then it would become even more important at high NDI.

    The NDI myelin association is not a straightforward one. The Grussu et al study (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acn3.445) confirms this association on a histological level for cases of multiple sclerosis, but this association is absent in healthy individuals. Even if we have an association between NDI myelin, the shared variance is at around 50%. The remaining 50% of variance of NDI could have an influence on intelligence “independently” from myelin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Thanks for the link. I'm not sure how to interpret its assessment of the NDI myelin relationship. Some relevant bits:

    The relationship within focal lesions between NSF (histological neuro-axonal density) and NDI (MRI-derived neurite density) is complex. While NDI always decreases within lesions, NSF does not necessarily behave similarly, highlighting variable degrees of axonal loss in different lesions (Fig. 2). In contrast, NDI always drops dramatically within lesions, similar to myelin density MSF. This finding is not surprising as NDI is a surrogate index equivalent to NSF/(1–MSF)26,43 (post hoc analysis confirms a correlation between these two measures).
     
    Is that NDI = NSF/(1–MSF) relationship only in MS cases?

    Importantly, NODDI NDI offers sensitivity to the local density of axon/dendrites but is also strongly influenced by variations of myelination, limiting its interpretability without the support of myelin mapping techniques.
     

    Finally, we point out that this work shows the potential utility of NODDI metrics, but also highlights some caveats related to their interpretation. We stress that NODDI metrics should always be interpreted with care: NODDI indices are designed to measure geometrical features of neurite morphology, but in practice they can be influenced by other factors, as for example myelin for the case of NDI.
     
    Here is Figure 6 showing r = 0.74 (r^2 = 55%) for MS cases and essentially no correlation for the control cases.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5590517/bin/ACN3-4-663-g006.jpg

    Here is another paper link which includes the figures as images and has Supplemental Material: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5590517/

    Table S3 has the complete regression models. Search for ndi_model4 to find the NDI ~ MSF + NSF models. The MS model has R^2 = 61%, the control model has R^2 = 0.

    The lack of an NDI ~ MSF relationship in the controls is very surprising to me. Any thoughts on how neurite density would not relate at all to myelin? Does that observation hold up in larger studies? If I read correctly, there were only four people in this study:

    We related quantitative metrics from histology and MRI in four post mortem spinal cord specimens (two controls; two progressive multiple sclerosis cases).
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. EG says:
    @FKA Max

    "Brain maturation is associated with a sharp increase of synapse number, followed by a massive activity-dependent synaptic pruning that reduces synaptic density by half, thereby enabling the establishment of typical mature cortical microarchitecture. Maturation-associated synaptic pruning is not only an event of early childhood, but proceeds at a rapid rate at least until the end of the second decade of life. Most importantly, the mechanisms of synaptic growth and pruning during maturation overlap with those of learning in the mature brain."

    Psychologist and psychology professor Robert McGivern from San Diego University confirmed the conclusions from the SUNY team. His study showed that at the onset of puberty, males and females take significantly longer to perform a simple matching activity than their pre- and post-puberty peers. However, McGivern and his associates attribute the longer time to an excess of synopses, or connections, in the brain that are waiting to be pruned. As a neglected tree, the connections in the brain also grow wild and need to be pruned for optimum potential. Puberty is the season for such pruning and organization that often makes it difficult for adolescents to process information.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence-updated/#comment-1897268

    Until recently, most scientists believed the brain stopped changing after early childhood. There was little evidence to support or refute this until new, non-invasive brain imaging technology emerged, allowing scientists to record detailed images of the developing human brain.

    Brain imaging has revealed that certain areas, in particular the prefrontal cortex, continue to develop well into the teens and even into the twenties. Whether prefrontal cortex development underlies teenage angst and rebellion and other adolescent traits is a hot topic.
     

    - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3323232/Why-the-teens-are-a-difficult-time.html

    The conclusion I draw from this is that IQ tests should probably not be administered before the age of 25, maybe, to ensure that complete or satisfactory pruning/development has been reached, in order to achieve the most accurate readings and results.

    The following - participants in the study who are below the age of 25 - could therefore be a major flaw or shortcoming of the study's design, in my opinion, with age being/becoming a confounding factor, due to younger participants not having completed full brain development/pruning, yet:


    Methods

    Participants in the S259 sample

    Two hundred fifty-nine participants (138 males) between 18 and 40 years of age (M = 24.31, SD = 4.41) took part in the study.
     

    This is probably a better and more reliable cohort (S498), since mean age is 5 years (29.16) older/higher than in sample S259 (24.31):


    Participants in the S498 sample

    Thus, all of the reported analyses were performed on data from 498 participants (202 males) between 22 and 36 years of age (M = 29.16, SD = 3.48).
     

    Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8

    As it is stated in the methods the authors controlled for the confounding factor of age by computing partial correlations or multiple regressions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. res says:
    @FKA Max
    Also a reply to comment #31: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483

    How do you explain these findings then:


    Met allele carriers’ scores improved markedly with increasing yrs ed, whereas the scores of Val/Val individuals were only marginally influenced by yrs ed. There was a crossover of effects at 11–12 yrs ed: in the less educated group, Met allele carriers actually performed worse than Val/Val individuals perhaps because of emotional vulnerability to educational adversity, but in the better educated group, Met allele carriers excelled.
    [...]
    In 1972, at the age of 4, there was a 10 point IQ difference between blacks and whites on average in the United States. In 2002, the gap had narrowed by 5 points, but there was still a 5 point difference at age 4. By the age of 24, the gap widened to a 17 point difference. This is better than the 22 point difference found in 1972 for age 24, but it’s still quite alarming.
     
    -

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?

    Black-White difference in 1972

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -10 -12.4 -14.8 -17.2 -19.6 -22.0

    Black-White difference in 2002

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -5 -7.5 -9.8 -12.2 -14.6 -17
     
    - https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?

    1. You are comparing within group differences to between group differences.
    2. Different rates of maturation for different groups.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Different rates of maturation for different groups.
     
    Yes, and different rates of maturation for different individuals within groups. Some white girls menstruate at at the age of eight, some not til their teens. So why would IQ develop uniformly within the group?

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?
    , @FKA Max

    1. You are comparing within group differences to between group differences.
    2. Different rates of maturation for different groups.
     
    res,

    I am not quite sure how this is relevant to refuting the point "that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school." http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2334148 or "Except that IQ is already stable and highly heritable by mid puberty, never mind 25." - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483 ? Maybe, if you could, go into the details of this argument I would appreciate, because it doesn't necessarily make sense to me that different maturation rates can make this big of a difference in widening IQ test score differentials with increasing age. I think the explanation is much more likely environmental/cultural, etc.

    The differing maturation rates and stages between the races don't explain this widening IQ gap with age, in my opinion. They are too minuscule -- but I could be wrong about this -- to be a significant factor/influence. Shouldn't the gap stay pretty stable and not continue widening with age or is this some sort of compound growth/maturation?

    I mean it is not like blacks are fully grown by age 16 and whites continue to develop till age 24 or something like that, and East Asians take even longer till age 30. According to Rushton and his hypothesis blacks are 1-2 years ahead of whites and presumably 3-4 years ahead in maturation compared to East Asians:


    One study of over 17,000 American girls in the 1997 issue of Pediatrics found that puberty begins a year earlier for Black girls than for White girls. By age eight, 48% of the Black girls (but only 15% of the White girls) had some breast development, pubic hair, or both. For Whites this did not happen until ten years. The age when girls began to menstruate was between 11 and 12 for Black girls. White girls began a year later.

    Sexual maturity in boys also differs by race. By age 11, 60% of Black boys have reached the stage of puberty marked by fast penis growth. Two percent have already had sex. White boys tend not to reach this stage for another 1.5 years. Orientals lag one to two years behind Whites in both sexual development and the start of sexual interest.
     

    - p. 14 http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm Archived link: http://archive.is/tEoA3

    To illustrate the point look at the following figure from the paper, the head size gap does not widen with increasing age, it stays pretty much stable as one would expect throughout development:

    http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Chart_02.jpg

    Source: p. 11 http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm

    But maybe I am missing something...

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. res says:
    @utu
    The same question one may ask why heritability twin studies show that heritability increases with age. This means that IQ's of two identical twins converge as they grow older in childhood beyond 6 years old.

    Basically IQ is not stable. It is a myth. But it is a necessary myth to justify the concept of g, i.e., that IQ is chiefly genetic.

    There is a serious empirical question. How possibly we could verify stability of IQ? It seems simple. Just keep giving people tests at different ages and compare, right? No, it can't be done because tests for different ages are different or scaled differently. And in adulthood how frequently can you give tests w/o affecting the outcome of tests?

    Where are the studies showing stability? The longitude Scottish study showed correlation of 0.7-0.75 form teens to old age. Does it mean that IQ is really stable?

    The stability myth is a part of reification process that occurs among the believers of the IQism. Every -ism is to large extent based on various reifications to make people believe that something that has a dubious ontology is actually real. Like the 'will of proletariat' or 'historical forces' which can be invoked and used to send you to Gulag for 10 years. It means they are real since they have such power.

    The same question one may ask why heritability twin studies show that heritability increases with age. This means that IQ’s of two identical twins converge as they grow older in childhood beyond 6 years old.

    It seems reasonable to explain this as random environmental variation averaging out over time. And genetic drivers of environment (people do create their own environments to some degree) becoming more important as people enter phases of their life where they have more influence on their environment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Why not explain it in terms of IQ scores rather than invoking that children have some IQ now and different IQ later if we are not even certain what IQ is. But we know that tests exist and there is method to create score for the tests.

    All we have are empirical results that children take tests. The simplest explanation might be that as they grow older they make less random mistakes and thus correlation between the scores of twins increases.

    To verify this one would have to study test retest correlations at different ages. If test retest correlations do not change then I am wrong and something else is happening than random errors.

    Anyway, the talking point to the world at large is that IQ is stable remains, right? IQ does not change!

    The IQism is very strong on claims concerning some reified entity and very weak on errors analysis of their methodology.

    Whatever claim is being made as to the value of heritability the question pops up what about the environmental part? If heritability is, say 50% could we reduce variance by 50% if we improved environment? Why the IQist do not seem interested in this aspect that if they did it would show that they have some semblance of human concerns? Instead they seem to dream of tattooing IQ scores of people's foreheads in their utopia and then doing high five and saying 'the job well done'.

    .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @res

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?
     
    1. You are comparing within group differences to between group differences.
    2. Different rates of maturation for different groups.

    Different rates of maturation for different groups.

    Yes, and different rates of maturation for different individuals within groups. Some white girls menstruate at at the age of eight, some not til their teens. So why would IQ develop uniformly within the group?

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?
     
    LOL. Sounds like you think the comment base should consist of but ten cogent remarks? Double LOL.
    , @res

    Yes, and different rates of maturation for different individuals within groups. Some white girls menstruate at at the age of eight, some not til their teens. So why would IQ develop uniformly within the group?
     
    This seems like a classic within/between groups differences issue. IQ does not develop uniformly within the group, but the variations are statistically small so it appears roughly stable with age. It is important to note that this apparent stability depends on the group used for age norming the tests!

    But if there are systematic differences in between group maturation rates then those should show up in group averaged intelligence vs. age curves (and create differing gaps by age).

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?
     
    I am assuming you mean "Different rates of maturation for different groups." Rushton tends to be the best initial reference for things like this (and follow the collection of studies he references). See pages 1012-1013 of http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-race-brain-size-r-k-theory-sex-rushton-personality-individual-differences-1988.pdf

    If you'd like more evidence I can present the underlying studies as well as more done since 1988.

    To be clear, my point does not depend on there being genetic differences in between group maturation rate. Whatever the underlying reasons, it seems reasonable to expect group differences in maturation rate to correspond to group differences in IQ trajectory. Even the CDC admits there are group differences in maturation rates--they just focus on claiming it is environmental rather than genetic: https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/growthcharts/training/overview/page4.html

    CDC promotes one set of growth charts for all racial and ethnic groups. Racial- and ethnic-specific charts are not recommended because studies support the premise that differences in growth among various racial and ethnic groups are the result of environmental rather than genetic influences (Garza and de Onis, 2004; Lusky, 2000; Mei, Yip, Trowbridge, 1998; Kuczmarski et al 2002).
     
    P.S. You might consider how your final sentence applies to your own evidence-free statements.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. res says:
    @EG
    The NDI myelin association is not a straightforward one. The Grussu et al study (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acn3.445) confirms this association on a histological level for cases of multiple sclerosis, but this association is absent in healthy individuals. Even if we have an association between NDI myelin, the shared variance is at around 50%. The remaining 50% of variance of NDI could have an influence on intelligence "independently" from myelin.

    Thanks for the link. I’m not sure how to interpret its assessment of the NDI myelin relationship. Some relevant bits:

    The relationship within focal lesions between NSF (histological neuro-axonal density) and NDI (MRI-derived neurite density) is complex. While NDI always decreases within lesions, NSF does not necessarily behave similarly, highlighting variable degrees of axonal loss in different lesions (Fig. 2). In contrast, NDI always drops dramatically within lesions, similar to myelin density MSF. This finding is not surprising as NDI is a surrogate index equivalent to NSF/(1–MSF)26,43 (post hoc analysis confirms a correlation between these two measures).

    Is that NDI = NSF/(1–MSF) relationship only in MS cases?

    Importantly, NODDI NDI offers sensitivity to the local density of axon/dendrites but is also strongly influenced by variations of myelination, limiting its interpretability without the support of myelin mapping techniques.

    Finally, we point out that this work shows the potential utility of NODDI metrics, but also highlights some caveats related to their interpretation. We stress that NODDI metrics should always be interpreted with care: NODDI indices are designed to measure geometrical features of neurite morphology, but in practice they can be influenced by other factors, as for example myelin for the case of NDI.

    Here is Figure 6 showing r = 0.74 (r^2 = 55%) for MS cases and essentially no correlation for the control cases.

    Here is another paper link which includes the figures as images and has Supplemental Material: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5590517/

    Table S3 has the complete regression models. Search for ndi_model4 to find the NDI ~ MSF + NSF models. The MS model has R^2 = 61%, the control model has R^2 = 0.

    The lack of an NDI ~ MSF relationship in the controls is very surprising to me. Any thoughts on how neurite density would not relate at all to myelin? Does that observation hold up in larger studies? If I read correctly, there were only four people in this study:

    We related quantitative metrics from histology and MRI in four post mortem spinal cord specimens (two controls; two progressive multiple sclerosis cases).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @CanSpeccy

    Different rates of maturation for different groups.
     
    Yes, and different rates of maturation for different individuals within groups. Some white girls menstruate at at the age of eight, some not til their teens. So why would IQ develop uniformly within the group?

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?

    LOL. Sounds like you think the comment base should consist of but ten cogent remarks? Double LOL.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    His focus on evidence is even funnier given how seldom he presents any.
    , @CanSpeccy

    Sounds like you think the comment base should consist of but ten cogent remarks?
     
    It would certainly be great if all comments were cogent, but that is too much to hope. However, one can work toward clarity by debunking what is manifestly bunkum, vacuity, or outright misrepresentation, as with Figure 4 of the article featured here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu
    Yes, sensationalism and probably much the worse. I do not blame our host here for it but the Nature. I give our host a benefit of doubt that he even as practicing IQist believer if he was an editor of Nature he would not allow for this kind of deceptive chutzpah to slide. This artist rendered picture (Fig. 4) is scandalous because it misrepresents magnitude of discovery, if there is any, in a very suggestive and compelling way. This artist renders picture makes the discovery.

    If differences between lo and hi iq's were anything like in this artist rendered picture the correlations would be high but they are pathetically low, basically negligible in reality (in Fig. 2).

    This artist render picture is what makes the sale here but it is FAKE! Everybody here focuses on it and will go home holding this meme of how dendrite look in stupid people comparing to smart people in mind, but this is BS. The differences between lo and hi whatever they are imperceptible. Otherwise they would not need artist rendition!

    Furthermore this artist rendered Fig. 4 has a feel of NAZI propaganda poster pointing to cleanliness, orderliness and organization of nice Nordic lad's mind as opposed to disorderliness and messiness of some dirty Ostjuden or Gypsy brain. The paper is Made in Germany, right? I wonder how will they feel when they get hit with NAZI insinuations? Hey, CanSpeccy perhaps you could write a letter to them just for kicks to see them getting shits. You can pretend you are a very offended Holocaust surviver.

    But seriously, I demand to know what the the artist was shown and told before he produced this picture!

    NB: the 1930's style gave all gov propaganda posters whether in the US, Soviet Union or NAZI Germany the same feel.

    (The guy who "trolled" me is on revenge warpath because I "trolled" him recently for lack of more adequate button as he was arguing some IQist nonsense.)

    The paper is Made in Germany, right? I wonder how will they feel when they get hit with NAZI insinuations? Hey, CanSpeccy perhaps you could write a letter to them just for kicks to see them getting shits. You can pretend you are a very offended Holocaust surviver.

    Nah. They’d never publish it. Editors, in my experience, are loathe to admit an error of judgement, and the Editor of Nature (Sir Philip Campbell, FRAS, FInstP, astrophysicist) probably thinks he’s God.

    Anyway, the inspiration for this well-polished example of scientific sleight of hand pretty certainly came not from the bunch of Germans at the Universitaet Bunchum, or wherever, but from this guy, who is a seriously for profit academic back on the good ol’ US of A, the home of fake news, fake, food, fake sex and, evidently, fake science. Jung’s CV is worth examining. He’s pretty well solved all the big questions concerning the mind by putting people’s heads in a scanner.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Don't write to editor. Write to their department at German university that this artist rendering of low and high IQ brains made you think of Nazi propaganda how it pictured the deficient brains of lower races while the brains of the Master Race race were pure, organized, orderly... You would like to find out what motivated and inspired the artist who was directed by researchers to do this stigmatizing rendition and bring the worst connotations from the tragic past.... that should never be repeated. And you would like them to retract the paper and republish with actual pictures taken from their scans and not made by florid imagination of the artist who perhaps is innocent but somehow his imagination was tainted by possibly still function Neo-Nazi memes in German society. And then you may hint that you will go away if they donate $xxx to your Never Again foundation with headquarters in your basement. Believe me, Germans do pay.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Different rates of maturation for different groups.
     
    Yes, and different rates of maturation for different individuals within groups. Some white girls menstruate at at the age of eight, some not til their teens. So why would IQ develop uniformly within the group?

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?

    Yes, and different rates of maturation for different individuals within groups. Some white girls menstruate at at the age of eight, some not til their teens. So why would IQ develop uniformly within the group?

    This seems like a classic within/between groups differences issue. IQ does not develop uniformly within the group, but the variations are statistically small so it appears roughly stable with age. It is important to note that this apparent stability depends on the group used for age norming the tests!

    But if there are systematic differences in between group maturation rates then those should show up in group averaged intelligence vs. age curves (and create differing gaps by age).

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?

    I am assuming you mean “Different rates of maturation for different groups.” Rushton tends to be the best initial reference for things like this (and follow the collection of studies he references). See pages 1012-1013 of http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-race-brain-size-r-k-theory-sex-rushton-personality-individual-differences-1988.pdf

    If you’d like more evidence I can present the underlying studies as well as more done since 1988.

    To be clear, my point does not depend on there being genetic differences in between group maturation rate. Whatever the underlying reasons, it seems reasonable to expect group differences in maturation rate to correspond to group differences in IQ trajectory. Even the CDC admits there are group differences in maturation rates–they just focus on claiming it is environmental rather than genetic: https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/growthcharts/training/overview/page4.html

    CDC promotes one set of growth charts for all racial and ethnic groups. Racial- and ethnic-specific charts are not recommended because studies support the premise that differences in growth among various racial and ethnic groups are the result of environmental rather than genetic influences (Garza and de Onis, 2004; Lusky, 2000; Mei, Yip, Trowbridge, 1998; Kuczmarski et al 2002).

    P.S. You might consider how your final sentence applies to your own evidence-free statements.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    IQ does not develop uniformly within the group, but the variations are statistically small so it appears roughly stable with age.
     
    From someone who accuses me of failing to provide evidence in support of my assertion of fact, that is a fine piece of wiffle waffle without any supporting data.

    I am assuming you mean “Different rates of maturation for different groups.”
     
    No, I was referring to Anon's bald and certainly false statement that:

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.
     
    For one thing, what the Hell do K to 8 teachers know about the stability of student's IQ's, do they test them every week or what? And what does Anon know about the opinion of "every Kindergarten to 8 teacher"? F all, obviously.

    The fact is children do not develop in lockstep. Some boys need to shave at the age of ten, others have but a whisp of fuzz at the age of 18. Same sort of variation is obvious in other areas of physical development. Why then would the development of the brain be any different?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. res says:
    @manorchurch

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?
     
    LOL. Sounds like you think the comment base should consist of but ten cogent remarks? Double LOL.

    His focus on evidence is even funnier given how seldom he presents any.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch
    If one questions the purported validity and/or accuracy and/or applicability of "evidence" presented by someone else, in what way is one obligated to present evidence at all?

    If you were to say "The sky is green", I might be inclined to observe that "It looks blue to me.", but there is no requirement on my part to do anything other than demand you justify your statement. If you assert the sky is green, the burden is on you to prove it so, not on me to prove it not so.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @res
    His focus on evidence is even funnier given how seldom he presents any.

    If one questions the purported validity and/or accuracy and/or applicability of “evidence” presented by someone else, in what way is one obligated to present evidence at all?

    If you were to say “The sky is green”, I might be inclined to observe that “It looks blue to me.”, but there is no requirement on my part to do anything other than demand you justify your statement. If you assert the sky is green, the burden is on you to prove it so, not on me to prove it not so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    If you assert the sky is green, the burden is on you to prove it so, not on me to prove it not so.
     
    Are you implying the questions we discuss here are resolvable in such a simplistic black and white (or would that be blue and green?) fashion? In other words, are the answers obvious by inspection? Who decides?

    There is no requirement on anyone to present evidence here, but I do think people who live in glass houses should refrain from stone throwing.

    I find your argument most frequently used as a cop out by hypocrites who want a different standard applied to themselves than they apply to others (cf. isolated demands for rigor). I have little patience with that.
    , @Greeny1
    > '"If you were to say “The sky is green”'

    In Biblical times green covered a range of colors.

    https://www.haaretz.com/.premium-word-of-the-day-yarok-1.5329433 "yarok ... the modern Hebrew word for green, but as we will see – in years of yore it was also the word for yellow and every color in between. "

    > '"I might be inclined to observe that “It looks blue to me.” '

    What? You Bible revisionist, believing in something not supported by the Bible. You did not read the bible in detail, boy. Welcome to the dark-side.

    https://www.haaretz.com/word-of-the-day-kakhol-1.5331764 "You may be surprised to find out that such a prevalent color appearing in sea and sky goes unnamed in the Hebrew Bible, nor is it mentioned in the Mishnah and Talmud. ... What about tekhelet, you ask? Well, while tekhlet in modern Hebrew means "light blue" (like the Russian word goluboy) - in Biblical times it referred to a dye made of a liquid extracted from a kind of sea urchin, which was purple."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. hyperbola says:
    @jimmyriddle
    Language acquisition in infants is a special case, and not strongly related to general intelligence. That's why it is almost impossible to acquire a native accent after childhood - Kissinger has been in America since he was 15 and still sounds German.

    I chose to use acquisition of language as an example only because an equally specious article on language appeared here on unz recently. If one looks at the actual data (Fig. 2), the so-called correlations can only be regarded as highly misleading.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. utu says:
    @res

    The same question one may ask why heritability twin studies show that heritability increases with age. This means that IQ’s of two identical twins converge as they grow older in childhood beyond 6 years old.
     
    It seems reasonable to explain this as random environmental variation averaging out over time. And genetic drivers of environment (people do create their own environments to some degree) becoming more important as people enter phases of their life where they have more influence on their environment.

    Why not explain it in terms of IQ scores rather than invoking that children have some IQ now and different IQ later if we are not even certain what IQ is. But we know that tests exist and there is method to create score for the tests.

    All we have are empirical results that children take tests. The simplest explanation might be that as they grow older they make less random mistakes and thus correlation between the scores of twins increases.

    To verify this one would have to study test retest correlations at different ages. If test retest correlations do not change then I am wrong and something else is happening than random errors.

    Anyway, the talking point to the world at large is that IQ is stable remains, right? IQ does not change!

    The IQism is very strong on claims concerning some reified entity and very weak on errors analysis of their methodology.

    Whatever claim is being made as to the value of heritability the question pops up what about the environmental part? If heritability is, say 50% could we reduce variance by 50% if we improved environment? Why the IQist do not seem interested in this aspect that if they did it would show that they have some semblance of human concerns? Instead they seem to dream of tattooing IQ scores of people’s foreheads in their utopia and then doing high five and saying ‘the job well done’.

    .

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    All we have are empirical results that children take tests. The simplest explanation might be that as they grow older they make less random mistakes and thus correlation between the scores of twins increases.
     
    Interesting thought. I would be interested in hearing what someone well versed in test design and scoring thinks about that.

    Anyway, the talking point to the world at large is that IQ is stable remains, right? IQ does not change!
     
    Those two sentences are different. The difference is important. High correlation is not the same as identical.

    Whatever claim is being made as to the value of heritability the question pops up what about the environmental part? If heritability is, say 50% could we reduce variance by 50% if we improved environment? Why the IQist do not seem interested in this aspect that if they did it would show that they have some semblance of human concerns?
     
    I am very interested in that question. The following facts are relevant though:
    1. IQ heritability appears to be higher than 0.5.
    2. Most of the rest is "unshared environment." That covers many things, including error. This is a good post about that: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/16/non-shared-environment-doesnt-just-mean-schools-and-peers/
    3. What studies we have of educational interventions tend to show little lasting effect. Nutritional interventions on certain deficient populations (e.g. iodine) seem to help. I have seen little evidence of intentional large group interventions having a significant and lasting effect.

    If I seem uninterested in improving environment (which is not the case) it is probably more disgust with how much the idea of improving IQ through intentional environmental change has been oversold relative to actual results. The Flynn Effect seems to be ample evidence that environmental improvement can matter, but we have not worked out how to make that an intentional thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @manorchurch

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?
     
    LOL. Sounds like you think the comment base should consist of but ten cogent remarks? Double LOL.

    Sounds like you think the comment base should consist of but ten cogent remarks?

    It would certainly be great if all comments were cogent, but that is too much to hope. However, one can work toward clarity by debunking what is manifestly bunkum, vacuity, or outright misrepresentation, as with Figure 4 of the article featured here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. hyperbola says:
    @Anon
    Psychology isn’t a science at all. It’s just a mass of lies. Consider until about 1880 homosexuality was considered a sex preference. Depending on the society it might be illegal or sinful.

    Then around 1880 the bogus psychology was invented by a bunch of horny old perverts . They decided that homosexuality was a mental illness that could only be cured by years, nay decades of talk therapy. It was quite profitable for the psychology fraudsters

    Then around 1970 the gays decided they didn’t like being categorized as mentally ill because of their sex practices. So within a year the horny old perverts meet and removed homosexuality from the list of mental illness

    Psychologists are no longer allowed to testify as expert court witnesses Why?

    Because the judicial council commissioned some studies that proved practicing degreed licensed psychologists knew no more about mental illness than the average person who never studied psychology.

    Some science huh?

    Psychology is a religious/racist fraud that was never meant to be a science.

    Sigmund Freud, Psychoanalysis, and the War on the West
    “We are bringing them the plague.”—Sigmund Freud, on his way to America in 1909[1]

    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/24/sigmund-freud-psychoanalysis-and-the-war-on-the-west/

    …Jewish psychologists played a big role in bringing about this cultural warfare. “Under Jewish influence, American psychology became Talmudic as well….it was seen as a weapon against Christian culture.”[5]

    Freud was on a Jewish mission. Jewish professor of psychiatry Thomas Szasz of New York University writes that “one of Freud’s most powerful motives in life was…to inflict vengeance on Christianity.”[10]

    Other Jewish scholars such as Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter noted the same thing, adding that….

    ….Freud in fact had a secret library in which he housed books on the Kabbala, and a copy of the Zohar,[16] which is “the most important document in Jewish mysticism,” and which, among other things, “taught the Jews to sacrifice Christian virgins for God’s pleasure.”[17]

    In addition, Freud took part in the B’nai B’rith lodge in Vienna, and “among his recreations was his weekly game of taroc, a popular card game based on Kabbala.”[18]

    As we shall see, Freud used scientific pretensions to unleash a venom—psychoanalysis—upon the Western world, but psychoanalysis has close to nothing to do with science….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Thanks, I know all about dr Fraud. He axtually set back advances in mental health about 130 years. Drs always thought there would be some chemical way to cure or alleviate symptoms.

    They now have Zoloft Prozac and numerous drugs that actually alleviate symptoms enough that’s it’s realky a cure.

    But for about 120 years it was talk talk talk therapy and the scientific research just stopped.
    You should look up his patient Dora. Her father wanted her to sleep with his business partner. She was 14 and refused. So Jewish papa sent her to Fraud to be cured of her frigidity.

    That theory of fridgity was total curse on women for about 7o years When some intellectual creep was turned down he would launch into a discussion that the woman was frigid and her health demanded that she have sex with el creep0

    The only reason his fraud became popular was that it was based on sex. So the idiot intellectuals could get a little frisson while discussing the latest psych theory

    Fraud also claimed little girls wanted to play with daddy’s penis because it’s siniliar to a doll.

    Truly sick mofa
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. utu says:
    @CanSpeccy

    The paper is Made in Germany, right? I wonder how will they feel when they get hit with NAZI insinuations? Hey, CanSpeccy perhaps you could write a letter to them just for kicks to see them getting shits. You can pretend you are a very offended Holocaust surviver.
     
    Nah. They'd never publish it. Editors, in my experience, are loathe to admit an error of judgement, and the Editor of Nature (Sir Philip Campbell, FRAS, FInstP, astrophysicist) probably thinks he's God.

    Anyway, the inspiration for this well-polished example of scientific sleight of hand pretty certainly came not from the bunch of Germans at the Universitaet Bunchum, or wherever, but from this guy, who is a seriously for profit academic back on the good ol' US of A, the home of fake news, fake, food, fake sex and, evidently, fake science. Jung's CV is worth examining. He's pretty well solved all the big questions concerning the mind by putting people's heads in a scanner.

    Don’t write to editor. Write to their department at German university that this artist rendering of low and high IQ brains made you think of Nazi propaganda how it pictured the deficient brains of lower races while the brains of the Master Race race were pure, organized, orderly… You would like to find out what motivated and inspired the artist who was directed by researchers to do this stigmatizing rendition and bring the worst connotations from the tragic past…. that should never be repeated. And you would like them to retract the paper and republish with actual pictures taken from their scans and not made by florid imagination of the artist who perhaps is innocent but somehow his imagination was tainted by possibly still function Neo-Nazi memes in German society. And then you may hint that you will go away if they donate $xxx to your Never Again foundation with headquarters in your basement. Believe me, Germans do pay.

    Read More
    • Troll: manorchurch
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    LOL

    You write, Utu. You'd do it much better than I could. And good luck with the shake down.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @res

    Yes, and different rates of maturation for different individuals within groups. Some white girls menstruate at at the age of eight, some not til their teens. So why would IQ develop uniformly within the group?
     
    This seems like a classic within/between groups differences issue. IQ does not develop uniformly within the group, but the variations are statistically small so it appears roughly stable with age. It is important to note that this apparent stability depends on the group used for age norming the tests!

    But if there are systematic differences in between group maturation rates then those should show up in group averaged intelligence vs. age curves (and create differing gaps by age).

    Anyway, why is anyone debating a ridiculous proposition advanced without the slightest evidence by someone claiming anonymity?
     
    I am assuming you mean "Different rates of maturation for different groups." Rushton tends to be the best initial reference for things like this (and follow the collection of studies he references). See pages 1012-1013 of http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-race-brain-size-r-k-theory-sex-rushton-personality-individual-differences-1988.pdf

    If you'd like more evidence I can present the underlying studies as well as more done since 1988.

    To be clear, my point does not depend on there being genetic differences in between group maturation rate. Whatever the underlying reasons, it seems reasonable to expect group differences in maturation rate to correspond to group differences in IQ trajectory. Even the CDC admits there are group differences in maturation rates--they just focus on claiming it is environmental rather than genetic: https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/growthcharts/training/overview/page4.html

    CDC promotes one set of growth charts for all racial and ethnic groups. Racial- and ethnic-specific charts are not recommended because studies support the premise that differences in growth among various racial and ethnic groups are the result of environmental rather than genetic influences (Garza and de Onis, 2004; Lusky, 2000; Mei, Yip, Trowbridge, 1998; Kuczmarski et al 2002).
     
    P.S. You might consider how your final sentence applies to your own evidence-free statements.

    IQ does not develop uniformly within the group, but the variations are statistically small so it appears roughly stable with age.

    From someone who accuses me of failing to provide evidence in support of my assertion of fact, that is a fine piece of wiffle waffle without any supporting data.

    I am assuming you mean “Different rates of maturation for different groups.”

    No, I was referring to Anon’s bald and certainly false statement that:

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.

    For one thing, what the Hell do K to 8 teachers know about the stability of student’s IQ’s, do they test them every week or what? And what does Anon know about the opinion of “every Kindergarten to 8 teacher”? F all, obviously.

    The fact is children do not develop in lockstep. Some boys need to shave at the age of ten, others have but a whisp of fuzz at the age of 18. Same sort of variation is obvious in other areas of physical development. Why then would the development of the brain be any different?

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    From someone who accuses me of failing to provide evidence in support of my assertion of fact, that is a fine piece of wiffle waffle without any supporting data.
     
    It is as well (or better) argued and supported as what you are writing. Are you disagreeing with either of these?
    - IQ does not develop uniformly within the group. (a point you made)
    - IQ appears roughly stable with age.

    If not, what explanation do you propose for reconciling those as an alternative to my "the variations are statistically small"?

    For evidence of the stability of IQ see http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0012-1649.27.1.18

    Developmental increases in the stability of intelligence are well established, at least through childhood. Evidence comes from several domains. It has been known for some time that correlations between juvenile and adult IQ increase throughout childhood (Anderson, 1939; Honzik, McFarlane & Allen, 1948), as do correlations between child and parent IQ (Honzik,
    1957) and between consecutive testings in childhood (Humphreys & Davey, 1988; Wilson, 1987). Whether increases in the stability of intelligence continue throughout adulthood has been studied less intensively, but the trend does seem to continue, albeit at a decelerated pace (Schuerger & Witt, 1989). Note that the stability of intelligence throughout the life span is conceptually separate from changes in its mean. Mean ability increases throughout childhood, remains stable in adulthood,
    and declines (to a controversial degree) in old age (Botwinick, 1977). The stability of intelligence depends on its predictability across time within individuals and is independent of changes in the mean.
     
    That paper has some interesting observations. For example, their hypothetical 3D plot of phenotypic intelligence vs. environment and genotype which is used to begin a discussion of changes over time and the canalization theory. This seems like as good a summary as any: "The canalization model implies that individuals get stuck in diverging ruts as they age. Stating the matter baldly makes it clear why the model has always seemed so plausible."

    Back to you:

    No, I was referring to Anon’s bald and certainly false statement that:
     
    Then please be more specific. How was I (or anyone) supposed to infer that from your comment?

    For one thing, what the Hell do K to 8 teachers know about the stability of student’s IQ’s, do they test them every week or what?
     
    Schools have records. And teachers talk to each other. I say this as someone whose academic reputation followed him through primary and secondary school. Teachers tended to be well aware of that sort of thing.

    Your criticism of "every" is on point, but Anon is far from the only commenter here to engage in a bit of hyperbole.

    The fact is children do not develop in lockstep.
     
    No kidding. The very first words you quoted from me are an acknowledgement of that.

    P.S. The funny thing is my initial (deleted) draft comment asked which assertion you meant, but upon rereading I decided your lead quote was the most likely interpretation so I rewrote my comment. Oh well...
    , @Anon
    I am right because I am always right therefore I am always right forever and ever amen.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. res says:
    @utu
    Why not explain it in terms of IQ scores rather than invoking that children have some IQ now and different IQ later if we are not even certain what IQ is. But we know that tests exist and there is method to create score for the tests.

    All we have are empirical results that children take tests. The simplest explanation might be that as they grow older they make less random mistakes and thus correlation between the scores of twins increases.

    To verify this one would have to study test retest correlations at different ages. If test retest correlations do not change then I am wrong and something else is happening than random errors.

    Anyway, the talking point to the world at large is that IQ is stable remains, right? IQ does not change!

    The IQism is very strong on claims concerning some reified entity and very weak on errors analysis of their methodology.

    Whatever claim is being made as to the value of heritability the question pops up what about the environmental part? If heritability is, say 50% could we reduce variance by 50% if we improved environment? Why the IQist do not seem interested in this aspect that if they did it would show that they have some semblance of human concerns? Instead they seem to dream of tattooing IQ scores of people's foreheads in their utopia and then doing high five and saying 'the job well done'.

    .

    All we have are empirical results that children take tests. The simplest explanation might be that as they grow older they make less random mistakes and thus correlation between the scores of twins increases.

    Interesting thought. I would be interested in hearing what someone well versed in test design and scoring thinks about that.

    Anyway, the talking point to the world at large is that IQ is stable remains, right? IQ does not change!

    Those two sentences are different. The difference is important. High correlation is not the same as identical.

    Whatever claim is being made as to the value of heritability the question pops up what about the environmental part? If heritability is, say 50% could we reduce variance by 50% if we improved environment? Why the IQist do not seem interested in this aspect that if they did it would show that they have some semblance of human concerns?

    I am very interested in that question. The following facts are relevant though:
    1. IQ heritability appears to be higher than 0.5.
    2. Most of the rest is “unshared environment.” That covers many things, including error. This is a good post about that: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/16/non-shared-environment-doesnt-just-mean-schools-and-peers/
    3. What studies we have of educational interventions tend to show little lasting effect. Nutritional interventions on certain deficient populations (e.g. iodine) seem to help. I have seen little evidence of intentional large group interventions having a significant and lasting effect.

    If I seem uninterested in improving environment (which is not the case) it is probably more disgust with how much the idea of improving IQ through intentional environmental change has been oversold relative to actual results. The Flynn Effect seems to be ample evidence that environmental improvement can matter, but we have not worked out how to make that an intentional thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    Interesting thought. I would be interested in hearing what someone well versed in test design and scoring thinks about that.
     
    In the realm of IQ tests and scales they are de facto the same as tests are normalized and scaled separately for each age group to have the same mean and variance so then a correlation of 1 implies equality.

    how much the idea of improving IQ through intentional environmental change has been oversold relative to actual results.
     
    The IQists are not too interested and environmentalist are disgusted with IQists so they do not even talk in these terms because they do not want to give even one inch. Then there are fantasists who will dream of genetical modification of IQ to 1,500 level. In the US the issue is mixed with and also chiefly driven by racial issues which guarantees that the issue can't be approached rationally. Nevertheless if heritability results are to be believed then it means that 25%-50% of variance in principle could be shrunk by modification of environment. These changes in environment should be identified and studied.

    If Steve Hsu ever achieved predictor function close to twin based heritability then residuals would show environmental factors. You could plot them against the polygenic score and in narrow intervals where polygenic score changes little you would have many residuals going up and down within upper and lower envelopes. All subjects in this group with right environmental adjustment in principle could be moved to the upper envelope if the interventions were don at the right time in their lives. The upper envelope does not define the absolute environmental upper limit but the limit of the current environment. Frankly, however I have more and more doubts whether Hsu's dream of finding the predictor function will be realized. The progress is way too slow indicating that there is a real problem there.

    Anyway, the environmental intervention/improvement is a very interesting issue but the fact that it is not talked about it tells a lot about the real motives and attitudes of people who are into the IQism. They are not interest in intelligence. They are interested in genetic intelligence part only. This is not surprising as this field was started by a bunch of racists. If however younger researchers begin to emphasize the environmental part of intelligence they could improve the image and reputation of this field.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. res says:
    @manorchurch
    If one questions the purported validity and/or accuracy and/or applicability of "evidence" presented by someone else, in what way is one obligated to present evidence at all?

    If you were to say "The sky is green", I might be inclined to observe that "It looks blue to me.", but there is no requirement on my part to do anything other than demand you justify your statement. If you assert the sky is green, the burden is on you to prove it so, not on me to prove it not so.

    If you assert the sky is green, the burden is on you to prove it so, not on me to prove it not so.

    Are you implying the questions we discuss here are resolvable in such a simplistic black and white (or would that be blue and green?) fashion? In other words, are the answers obvious by inspection? Who decides?

    There is no requirement on anyone to present evidence here, but I do think people who live in glass houses should refrain from stone throwing.

    I find your argument most frequently used as a cop out by hypocrites who want a different standard applied to themselves than they apply to others (cf. isolated demands for rigor). I have little patience with that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    Are you implying the questions we discuss here are resolvable in such a simplistic black and white (or would that be blue and green?) fashion?
     
    No, I am stating that an assertion of fact leaves the burden of proof on he who asserts. Read it again, if you are having comprehension issues with simple English sentences.

    In other words, are the answers obvious by inspection? Who decides?
     
    Non sequitur, and don't bullshit just to bullshit.

    There is no requirement on anyone to present evidence here, but I do think people who live in glass houses should refrain from stone throwing.
     
    Requirement? Who said there was a requirement? Something stated as fact is NOT fact without supporting verifiable evidence. You may, per the usual, choose to just bullshit and let fly.

    I find your argument most frequently used as a cop out by hypocrites who want a different standard applied to themselves than they apply to others (cf. isolated demands for rigor). I have little patience with that.
     
    I find your failure to present neither argument, refutation, nor evidence merely typical. Your flaring irritation at being called on it is also typical. Personally, I am tres patient with that, too, boy. :-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu
    Don't write to editor. Write to their department at German university that this artist rendering of low and high IQ brains made you think of Nazi propaganda how it pictured the deficient brains of lower races while the brains of the Master Race race were pure, organized, orderly... You would like to find out what motivated and inspired the artist who was directed by researchers to do this stigmatizing rendition and bring the worst connotations from the tragic past.... that should never be repeated. And you would like them to retract the paper and republish with actual pictures taken from their scans and not made by florid imagination of the artist who perhaps is innocent but somehow his imagination was tainted by possibly still function Neo-Nazi memes in German society. And then you may hint that you will go away if they donate $xxx to your Never Again foundation with headquarters in your basement. Believe me, Germans do pay.

    LOL

    You write, Utu. You’d do it much better than I could. And good luck with the shake down.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch
    Lotsa rage around here today. :-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. res says:
    @CanSpeccy

    IQ does not develop uniformly within the group, but the variations are statistically small so it appears roughly stable with age.
     
    From someone who accuses me of failing to provide evidence in support of my assertion of fact, that is a fine piece of wiffle waffle without any supporting data.

    I am assuming you mean “Different rates of maturation for different groups.”
     
    No, I was referring to Anon's bald and certainly false statement that:

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.
     
    For one thing, what the Hell do K to 8 teachers know about the stability of student's IQ's, do they test them every week or what? And what does Anon know about the opinion of "every Kindergarten to 8 teacher"? F all, obviously.

    The fact is children do not develop in lockstep. Some boys need to shave at the age of ten, others have but a whisp of fuzz at the age of 18. Same sort of variation is obvious in other areas of physical development. Why then would the development of the brain be any different?

    From someone who accuses me of failing to provide evidence in support of my assertion of fact, that is a fine piece of wiffle waffle without any supporting data.

    It is as well (or better) argued and supported as what you are writing. Are you disagreeing with either of these?
    - IQ does not develop uniformly within the group. (a point you made)
    - IQ appears roughly stable with age.

    If not, what explanation do you propose for reconciling those as an alternative to my “the variations are statistically small”?

    For evidence of the stability of IQ see http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0012-1649.27.1.18

    Developmental increases in the stability of intelligence are well established, at least through childhood. Evidence comes from several domains. It has been known for some time that correlations between juvenile and adult IQ increase throughout childhood (Anderson, 1939; Honzik, McFarlane & Allen, 1948), as do correlations between child and parent IQ (Honzik,
    1957) and between consecutive testings in childhood (Humphreys & Davey, 1988; Wilson, 1987). Whether increases in the stability of intelligence continue throughout adulthood has been studied less intensively, but the trend does seem to continue, albeit at a decelerated pace (Schuerger & Witt, 1989). Note that the stability of intelligence throughout the life span is conceptually separate from changes in its mean. Mean ability increases throughout childhood, remains stable in adulthood,
    and declines (to a controversial degree) in old age (Botwinick, 1977). The stability of intelligence depends on its predictability across time within individuals and is independent of changes in the mean.

    That paper has some interesting observations. For example, their hypothetical 3D plot of phenotypic intelligence vs. environment and genotype which is used to begin a discussion of changes over time and the canalization theory. This seems like as good a summary as any: “The canalization model implies that individuals get stuck in diverging ruts as they age. Stating the matter baldly makes it clear why the model has always seemed so plausible.”

    Back to you:

    No, I was referring to Anon’s bald and certainly false statement that:

    Then please be more specific. How was I (or anyone) supposed to infer that from your comment?

    For one thing, what the Hell do K to 8 teachers know about the stability of student’s IQ’s, do they test them every week or what?

    Schools have records. And teachers talk to each other. I say this as someone whose academic reputation followed him through primary and secondary school. Teachers tended to be well aware of that sort of thing.

    Your criticism of “every” is on point, but Anon is far from the only commenter here to engage in a bit of hyperbole.

    The fact is children do not develop in lockstep.

    No kidding. The very first words you quoted from me are an acknowledgement of that.

    P.S. The funny thing is my initial (deleted) draft comment asked which assertion you meant, but upon rereading I decided your lead quote was the most likely interpretation so I rewrote my comment. Oh well…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. utu says:
    @res

    All we have are empirical results that children take tests. The simplest explanation might be that as they grow older they make less random mistakes and thus correlation between the scores of twins increases.
     
    Interesting thought. I would be interested in hearing what someone well versed in test design and scoring thinks about that.

    Anyway, the talking point to the world at large is that IQ is stable remains, right? IQ does not change!
     
    Those two sentences are different. The difference is important. High correlation is not the same as identical.

    Whatever claim is being made as to the value of heritability the question pops up what about the environmental part? If heritability is, say 50% could we reduce variance by 50% if we improved environment? Why the IQist do not seem interested in this aspect that if they did it would show that they have some semblance of human concerns?
     
    I am very interested in that question. The following facts are relevant though:
    1. IQ heritability appears to be higher than 0.5.
    2. Most of the rest is "unshared environment." That covers many things, including error. This is a good post about that: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/16/non-shared-environment-doesnt-just-mean-schools-and-peers/
    3. What studies we have of educational interventions tend to show little lasting effect. Nutritional interventions on certain deficient populations (e.g. iodine) seem to help. I have seen little evidence of intentional large group interventions having a significant and lasting effect.

    If I seem uninterested in improving environment (which is not the case) it is probably more disgust with how much the idea of improving IQ through intentional environmental change has been oversold relative to actual results. The Flynn Effect seems to be ample evidence that environmental improvement can matter, but we have not worked out how to make that an intentional thing.

    Interesting thought. I would be interested in hearing what someone well versed in test design and scoring thinks about that.

    In the realm of IQ tests and scales they are de facto the same as tests are normalized and scaled separately for each age group to have the same mean and variance so then a correlation of 1 implies equality.

    how much the idea of improving IQ through intentional environmental change has been oversold relative to actual results.

    The IQists are not too interested and environmentalist are disgusted with IQists so they do not even talk in these terms because they do not want to give even one inch. Then there are fantasists who will dream of genetical modification of IQ to 1,500 level. In the US the issue is mixed with and also chiefly driven by racial issues which guarantees that the issue can’t be approached rationally. Nevertheless if heritability results are to be believed then it means that 25%-50% of variance in principle could be shrunk by modification of environment. These changes in environment should be identified and studied.

    If Steve Hsu ever achieved predictor function close to twin based heritability then residuals would show environmental factors. You could plot them against the polygenic score and in narrow intervals where polygenic score changes little you would have many residuals going up and down within upper and lower envelopes. All subjects in this group with right environmental adjustment in principle could be moved to the upper envelope if the interventions were don at the right time in their lives. The upper envelope does not define the absolute environmental upper limit but the limit of the current environment. Frankly, however I have more and more doubts whether Hsu’s dream of finding the predictor function will be realized. The progress is way too slow indicating that there is a real problem there.

    Anyway, the environmental intervention/improvement is a very interesting issue but the fact that it is not talked about it tells a lot about the real motives and attitudes of people who are into the IQism. They are not interest in intelligence. They are interested in genetic intelligence part only. This is not surprising as this field was started by a bunch of racists. If however younger researchers begin to emphasize the environmental part of intelligence they could improve the image and reputation of this field.

    Read More
    • LOL: manorchurch
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Nevertheless if heritability results are to be believed then it means that 25%-50% of variance in principle could be shrunk by modification of environment. These changes in environment should be identified and studied.

    Just for fun, what if those environmental factors had to do with race, like say willingness to spend long hours studying instead of balling or willingness of parents to try and teach their kids to read or add by 3? How far do you think your discussion of environment would go? The problem is that environment isn't just living in a house with a coat of lead paint safely under 10 coats of non-lead paint and pretending the lead paint is the culprit and if we just removed it the gap would close as the environmentalists assert.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @res

    If you assert the sky is green, the burden is on you to prove it so, not on me to prove it not so.
     
    Are you implying the questions we discuss here are resolvable in such a simplistic black and white (or would that be blue and green?) fashion? In other words, are the answers obvious by inspection? Who decides?

    There is no requirement on anyone to present evidence here, but I do think people who live in glass houses should refrain from stone throwing.

    I find your argument most frequently used as a cop out by hypocrites who want a different standard applied to themselves than they apply to others (cf. isolated demands for rigor). I have little patience with that.

    Are you implying the questions we discuss here are resolvable in such a simplistic black and white (or would that be blue and green?) fashion?

    No, I am stating that an assertion of fact leaves the burden of proof on he who asserts. Read it again, if you are having comprehension issues with simple English sentences.

    In other words, are the answers obvious by inspection? Who decides?

    Non sequitur, and don’t bullshit just to bullshit.

    There is no requirement on anyone to present evidence here, but I do think people who live in glass houses should refrain from stone throwing.

    Requirement? Who said there was a requirement? Something stated as fact is NOT fact without supporting verifiable evidence. You may, per the usual, choose to just bullshit and let fly.

    I find your argument most frequently used as a cop out by hypocrites who want a different standard applied to themselves than they apply to others (cf. isolated demands for rigor). I have little patience with that.

    I find your failure to present neither argument, refutation, nor evidence merely typical. Your flaring irritation at being called on it is also typical. Personally, I am tres patient with that, too, boy. :-)

    Read More
    • LOL: res
    • Replies: @res

    boy
     
    When you have nothing else it is time for the insults.

    https://slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/graham.png

    Or as I used to like to say here:

    Ad hominems – best way ever to say to someone arguing with you – “you win.”
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @CanSpeccy
    LOL

    You write, Utu. You'd do it much better than I could. And good luck with the shake down.

    Lotsa rage around here today. :-)

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Lotsa rage around here today.
     
    Rage is about all you got when you're defending the claim that one point something percent of the variation in a questionable measure of intelligence is accounted for by imperceptible (without artistic enhancement) variation in dendrite density — assuming, that is, that the relation between some type of head scan and dendrite density in rats and ferrets is valid for humans, and ignoring the fact that in some parts of the brain the relationship is positive and in other parts it is negative.

    For the defenders of this kind of science it appears that the choice is between bluster and bullying on the one hand, or throwing in the towel and quitting the profession on the other hand. That we're seeing, at this point in the discussion, folks bringing out flick knives and knuckle dusters is thus pretty much inevitable.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @manorchurch
    Lotsa rage around here today. :-)

    Lotsa rage around here today.

    Rage is about all you got when you’re defending the claim that one point something percent of the variation in a questionable measure of intelligence is accounted for by imperceptible (without artistic enhancement) variation in dendrite density — assuming, that is, that the relation between some type of head scan and dendrite density in rats and ferrets is valid for humans, and ignoring the fact that in some parts of the brain the relationship is positive and in other parts it is negative.

    For the defenders of this kind of science it appears that the choice is between bluster and bullying on the one hand, or throwing in the towel and quitting the profession on the other hand. That we’re seeing, at this point in the discussion, folks bringing out flick knives and knuckle dusters is thus pretty much inevitable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    For the defenders of this kind of science it appears that the choice is between bluster and bullying on the one hand, or throwing in the towel and quitting the profession on the other hand.
     
    twas ever thus, and thus 'twill ever be
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @CanSpeccy

    Lotsa rage around here today.
     
    Rage is about all you got when you're defending the claim that one point something percent of the variation in a questionable measure of intelligence is accounted for by imperceptible (without artistic enhancement) variation in dendrite density — assuming, that is, that the relation between some type of head scan and dendrite density in rats and ferrets is valid for humans, and ignoring the fact that in some parts of the brain the relationship is positive and in other parts it is negative.

    For the defenders of this kind of science it appears that the choice is between bluster and bullying on the one hand, or throwing in the towel and quitting the profession on the other hand. That we're seeing, at this point in the discussion, folks bringing out flick knives and knuckle dusters is thus pretty much inevitable.

    For the defenders of this kind of science it appears that the choice is between bluster and bullying on the one hand, or throwing in the towel and quitting the profession on the other hand.

    twas ever thus, and thus ’twill ever be

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. res says:
    @manorchurch

    Are you implying the questions we discuss here are resolvable in such a simplistic black and white (or would that be blue and green?) fashion?
     
    No, I am stating that an assertion of fact leaves the burden of proof on he who asserts. Read it again, if you are having comprehension issues with simple English sentences.

    In other words, are the answers obvious by inspection? Who decides?
     
    Non sequitur, and don't bullshit just to bullshit.

    There is no requirement on anyone to present evidence here, but I do think people who live in glass houses should refrain from stone throwing.
     
    Requirement? Who said there was a requirement? Something stated as fact is NOT fact without supporting verifiable evidence. You may, per the usual, choose to just bullshit and let fly.

    I find your argument most frequently used as a cop out by hypocrites who want a different standard applied to themselves than they apply to others (cf. isolated demands for rigor). I have little patience with that.
     
    I find your failure to present neither argument, refutation, nor evidence merely typical. Your flaring irritation at being called on it is also typical. Personally, I am tres patient with that, too, boy. :-)

    boy

    When you have nothing else it is time for the insults.

    Or as I used to like to say here:

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    Ad hominems – best way ever to say to someone arguing with you – “you win.”
     
    Oh, dear, terror strikes. Will I ever sleep soundly again?

    You called me "hypocrite"; I called you "boy". Lest you lead yourself to believe that I see any necessity for avoiding ad hominems, go fuck yourself. Got it now?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. FKA Max says:
    @res

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?
     
    1. You are comparing within group differences to between group differences.
    2. Different rates of maturation for different groups.

    1. You are comparing within group differences to between group differences.
    2. Different rates of maturation for different groups.

    res,

    I am not quite sure how this is relevant to refuting the point “that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.” http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2334148 or “Except that IQ is already stable and highly heritable by mid puberty, never mind 25.” – http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483 ? Maybe, if you could, go into the details of this argument I would appreciate, because it doesn’t necessarily make sense to me that different maturation rates can make this big of a difference in widening IQ test score differentials with increasing age. I think the explanation is much more likely environmental/cultural, etc.

    The differing maturation rates and stages between the races don’t explain this widening IQ gap with age, in my opinion. They are too minuscule — but I could be wrong about this — to be a significant factor/influence. Shouldn’t the gap stay pretty stable and not continue widening with age or is this some sort of compound growth/maturation?

    I mean it is not like blacks are fully grown by age 16 and whites continue to develop till age 24 or something like that, and East Asians take even longer till age 30. According to Rushton and his hypothesis blacks are 1-2 years ahead of whites and presumably 3-4 years ahead in maturation compared to East Asians:

    One study of over 17,000 American girls in the 1997 issue of Pediatrics found that puberty begins a year earlier for Black girls than for White girls. By age eight, 48% of the Black girls (but only 15% of the White girls) had some breast development, pubic hair, or both. For Whites this did not happen until ten years. The age when girls began to menstruate was between 11 and 12 for Black girls. White girls began a year later.

    Sexual maturity in boys also differs by race. By age 11, 60% of Black boys have reached the stage of puberty marked by fast penis growth. Two percent have already had sex. White boys tend not to reach this stage for another 1.5 years. Orientals lag one to two years behind Whites in both sexual development and the start of sexual interest.

    – p. 14 http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm Archived link: http://archive.is/tEoA3

    To illustrate the point look at the following figure from the paper, the head size gap does not widen with increasing age, it stays pretty much stable as one would expect throughout development:

    Source: p. 11 http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm

    But maybe I am missing something…

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    I wasn't trying to refute "that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school." I happen to agree with that, although I do think my comment about which group is used to norm the age progression is relevant.

    Regarding the changing B/W gap with age, small differences matter because the gap changes are on the order of 3-5 IQ points (0.2 - 0.33 SD) between ages around 5, 10, and 14.

    From pages 358-359 of The g Factor (numbers are in SDs, please excuse the formatting):

    Age Variation. Black infants score higher than white infants on developmental scales that depend mainly on sensorimotor abilities. Scores on these infant scales have near-zero correlation with IQ at school age, because the IQ predominantly reflects cognitive rather than sensorimotor development. Between ages three and five years, which is before children normally enter school, the mean W-B IQ difference steadily increases. By five to six years of age, the mean difference is about 0.70c (eleven IQ points), then approaches about l a during the elementary school years, remaining fairly constant until puberty, when it increases slightly and stabilizes at about 1.2a. The latest (1986) Stanford-Binet IV norms show a W-B difference in prepubescent children that is almost five IQ points smaller than the W-B difference in postpubescent children.
    (The W-B difference is 0.80a for ages 2 through 11 as compared with 1.10a for ages 12 through 23.) This could constitute evidence that the mean W-B difference in the population is decreasing. Or it could simply be that the W-B difference increases from early to later childhood. The interpretation of this age effect on the size of the W-B mean difference remains uncertain in this instance, as it is based entirely on cross-sectional rather than longitudinal data. Both kinds of data are needed to settle the issue. The cause of variation in the mean IQ of different age groups all tested within the same year (a cross-sectional study) may not be the same as the cause of variation (if any) in mean IQ of the same group of individuals when tested at different ages (a longitudinal study).

     

    Note Jensen's point about the need for longitudinal studies. This is more in the line of evidence for a widening gap rather than proof of it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @res

    boy
     
    When you have nothing else it is time for the insults.

    https://slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/graham.png

    Or as I used to like to say here:

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

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

    Oh, dear, terror strikes. Will I ever sleep soundly again?

    You called me “hypocrite”; I called you “boy”. Lest you lead yourself to believe that I see any necessity for avoiding ad hominems, go fuck yourself. Got it now?

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Hypocrite is descriptive of you and accurate. Boy is neither for me. Notice the difference.

    Got it now?
     
    Got it. You are not worth interacting with. Thank you for making that clear.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. MarkinLA says:
    @utu

    Interesting thought. I would be interested in hearing what someone well versed in test design and scoring thinks about that.
     
    In the realm of IQ tests and scales they are de facto the same as tests are normalized and scaled separately for each age group to have the same mean and variance so then a correlation of 1 implies equality.

    how much the idea of improving IQ through intentional environmental change has been oversold relative to actual results.
     
    The IQists are not too interested and environmentalist are disgusted with IQists so they do not even talk in these terms because they do not want to give even one inch. Then there are fantasists who will dream of genetical modification of IQ to 1,500 level. In the US the issue is mixed with and also chiefly driven by racial issues which guarantees that the issue can't be approached rationally. Nevertheless if heritability results are to be believed then it means that 25%-50% of variance in principle could be shrunk by modification of environment. These changes in environment should be identified and studied.

    If Steve Hsu ever achieved predictor function close to twin based heritability then residuals would show environmental factors. You could plot them against the polygenic score and in narrow intervals where polygenic score changes little you would have many residuals going up and down within upper and lower envelopes. All subjects in this group with right environmental adjustment in principle could be moved to the upper envelope if the interventions were don at the right time in their lives. The upper envelope does not define the absolute environmental upper limit but the limit of the current environment. Frankly, however I have more and more doubts whether Hsu's dream of finding the predictor function will be realized. The progress is way too slow indicating that there is a real problem there.

    Anyway, the environmental intervention/improvement is a very interesting issue but the fact that it is not talked about it tells a lot about the real motives and attitudes of people who are into the IQism. They are not interest in intelligence. They are interested in genetic intelligence part only. This is not surprising as this field was started by a bunch of racists. If however younger researchers begin to emphasize the environmental part of intelligence they could improve the image and reputation of this field.

    Nevertheless if heritability results are to be believed then it means that 25%-50% of variance in principle could be shrunk by modification of environment. These changes in environment should be identified and studied.

    Just for fun, what if those environmental factors had to do with race, like say willingness to spend long hours studying instead of balling or willingness of parents to try and teach their kids to read or add by 3? How far do you think your discussion of environment would go? The problem is that environment isn’t just living in a house with a coat of lead paint safely under 10 coats of non-lead paint and pretending the lead paint is the culprit and if we just removed it the gap would close as the environmentalists assert.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @FKA Max

    "Brain maturation is associated with a sharp increase of synapse number, followed by a massive activity-dependent synaptic pruning that reduces synaptic density by half, thereby enabling the establishment of typical mature cortical microarchitecture. Maturation-associated synaptic pruning is not only an event of early childhood, but proceeds at a rapid rate at least until the end of the second decade of life. Most importantly, the mechanisms of synaptic growth and pruning during maturation overlap with those of learning in the mature brain."

    Psychologist and psychology professor Robert McGivern from San Diego University confirmed the conclusions from the SUNY team. His study showed that at the onset of puberty, males and females take significantly longer to perform a simple matching activity than their pre- and post-puberty peers. However, McGivern and his associates attribute the longer time to an excess of synopses, or connections, in the brain that are waiting to be pruned. As a neglected tree, the connections in the brain also grow wild and need to be pruned for optimum potential. Puberty is the season for such pruning and organization that often makes it difficult for adolescents to process information.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/genetics-of-racial-differences-in-intelligence-updated/#comment-1897268

    Until recently, most scientists believed the brain stopped changing after early childhood. There was little evidence to support or refute this until new, non-invasive brain imaging technology emerged, allowing scientists to record detailed images of the developing human brain.

    Brain imaging has revealed that certain areas, in particular the prefrontal cortex, continue to develop well into the teens and even into the twenties. Whether prefrontal cortex development underlies teenage angst and rebellion and other adolescent traits is a hot topic.
     

    - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/3323232/Why-the-teens-are-a-difficult-time.html

    The conclusion I draw from this is that IQ tests should probably not be administered before the age of 25, maybe, to ensure that complete or satisfactory pruning/development has been reached, in order to achieve the most accurate readings and results.

    The following - participants in the study who are below the age of 25 - could therefore be a major flaw or shortcoming of the study's design, in my opinion, with age being/becoming a confounding factor, due to younger participants not having completed full brain development/pruning, yet:


    Methods

    Participants in the S259 sample

    Two hundred fifty-nine participants (138 males) between 18 and 40 years of age (M = 24.31, SD = 4.41) took part in the study.
     

    This is probably a better and more reliable cohort (S498), since mean age is 5 years (29.16) older/higher than in sample S259 (24.31):


    Participants in the S498 sample

    Thus, all of the reported analyses were performed on data from 498 participants (202 males) between 22 and 36 years of age (M = 29.16, SD = 3.48).
     

    Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04268-8

    Do you even read the stuff you clip and paste? I think not. And clipping and pasting your old comments what’s up with that?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu
    It was just my first thought after reading about Sarah Braasch which was her were poor and rural origins. John Derbyshire captures this in his today's note about Wolfe:

    The class angle. Modern U.S. society is addled with class snobbery. Poor and rural Americans are coarse-looking, ill-dressed, speak in dialect, and have lousy dietary habits. Rich suburban and high-urban Americans would much rather have nothing to do with them. When confrontations do occur, the rustics are insecure but defensive, the rich patronizing but impatient, with a frisson of guilt. Again, these are things known to everyone, but we are not supposed to notice them. Wolfe does notice them, and draws them to a “t.”
     

    You’re right about rural. But Charlottes family was poor only in comparison to the very rich kids she met at Duke

    And her family was supportive and living and normal, not religious fanatics

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    What are you arguing with my impressions?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @FKA Max
    Also a reply to comment #31: http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483

    How do you explain these findings then:


    Met allele carriers’ scores improved markedly with increasing yrs ed, whereas the scores of Val/Val individuals were only marginally influenced by yrs ed. There was a crossover of effects at 11–12 yrs ed: in the less educated group, Met allele carriers actually performed worse than Val/Val individuals perhaps because of emotional vulnerability to educational adversity, but in the better educated group, Met allele carriers excelled.
    [...]
    In 1972, at the age of 4, there was a 10 point IQ difference between blacks and whites on average in the United States. In 2002, the gap had narrowed by 5 points, but there was still a 5 point difference at age 4. By the age of 24, the gap widened to a 17 point difference. This is better than the 22 point difference found in 1972 for age 24, but it’s still quite alarming.
     
    -

    How does this IQ score gap widening with age square with IQ supposedly being stable/fixed by age 6 or 7?

    Black-White difference in 1972

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -10 -12.4 -14.8 -17.2 -19.6 -22.0

    Black-White difference in 2002

    Age 4 8 12 16 20 24

    -5 -7.5 -9.8 -12.2 -14.6 -17
     
    - https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight

    I bet you didn’t even read your clip
    And paste. Go argue with some one else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    This is you, Alden, right? Here a cut-and-paste just for you from yours truly hahahaha

    Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    April 17, 2018 at 4:31 pm GMT • 100 Words
    [...]
    Senator Feinstein is old now but was a drop dead beauty back in the day. She never photographed well I know. She had white white skin shiny black hair grayish hazel eyes and perfect features.
    In fact she closely resembles the Friends actress Courtney Cox.
     
    - https://www.unz.com/article/can-we-judge-people-by-what-they-look-like-in-fact-yes/#comment-2292418

    Alden says:
    September 10, 2017 at 4:38 am GMT • 200 Words
    [...]
    Senator Dianne Feinstein is a democrat married to a multi billionaire liberal. I saw her a lot when I lived near her in San Francisco when she was young.
    Drop dead beautiful, much prettier than she photographed.
     
    - https://www.unz.com/article/the-fat-heather-heyer-hoax/#comment-2000472

    Please, go cyber harass/stalk someone else and be grumpy somewhere else. Thank you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @hyperbola
    Psychology is a religious/racist fraud that was never meant to be a science.

    Sigmund Freud, Psychoanalysis, and the War on the West
    “We are bringing them the plague.”—Sigmund Freud, on his way to America in 1909[1]
    https://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/24/sigmund-freud-psychoanalysis-and-the-war-on-the-west/

    ...Jewish psychologists played a big role in bringing about this cultural warfare. “Under Jewish influence, American psychology became Talmudic as well….it was seen as a weapon against Christian culture.”[5]

    Freud was on a Jewish mission. Jewish professor of psychiatry Thomas Szasz of New York University writes that “one of Freud’s most powerful motives in life was…to inflict vengeance on Christianity.”[10]

    Other Jewish scholars such as Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter noted the same thing, adding that....

    ....Freud in fact had a secret library in which he housed books on the Kabbala, and a copy of the Zohar,[16] which is “the most important document in Jewish mysticism,” and which, among other things, “taught the Jews to sacrifice Christian virgins for God’s pleasure.”[17]

    In addition, Freud took part in the B’nai B’rith lodge in Vienna, and “among his recreations was his weekly game of taroc, a popular card game based on Kabbala.”[18]

    As we shall see, Freud used scientific pretensions to unleash a venom—psychoanalysis—upon the Western world, but psychoanalysis has close to nothing to do with science....

    Thanks, I know all about dr Fraud. He axtually set back advances in mental health about 130 years. Drs always thought there would be some chemical way to cure or alleviate symptoms.

    They now have Zoloft Prozac and numerous drugs that actually alleviate symptoms enough that’s it’s realky a cure.

    But for about 120 years it was talk talk talk therapy and the scientific research just stopped.
    You should look up his patient Dora. Her father wanted her to sleep with his business partner. She was 14 and refused. So Jewish papa sent her to Fraud to be cured of her frigidity.

    That theory of fridgity was total curse on women for about 7o years When some intellectual creep was turned down he would launch into a discussion that the woman was frigid and her health demanded that she have sex with el creep0

    The only reason his fraud became popular was that it was based on sex. So the idiot intellectuals could get a little frisson while discussing the latest psych theory

    Fraud also claimed little girls wanted to play with daddy’s penis because it’s siniliar to a doll.

    Truly sick mofa

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @CanSpeccy

    IQ does not develop uniformly within the group, but the variations are statistically small so it appears roughly stable with age.
     
    From someone who accuses me of failing to provide evidence in support of my assertion of fact, that is a fine piece of wiffle waffle without any supporting data.

    I am assuming you mean “Different rates of maturation for different groups.”
     
    No, I was referring to Anon's bald and certainly false statement that:

    Every kindergarten to 8 teacher has noticed that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.
     
    For one thing, what the Hell do K to 8 teachers know about the stability of student's IQ's, do they test them every week or what? And what does Anon know about the opinion of "every Kindergarten to 8 teacher"? F all, obviously.

    The fact is children do not develop in lockstep. Some boys need to shave at the age of ten, others have but a whisp of fuzz at the age of 18. Same sort of variation is obvious in other areas of physical development. Why then would the development of the brain be any different?

    I am right because I am always right therefore I am always right forever and ever amen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. res says:
    @FKA Max

    1. You are comparing within group differences to between group differences.
    2. Different rates of maturation for different groups.
     
    res,

    I am not quite sure how this is relevant to refuting the point "that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school." http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2334148 or "Except that IQ is already stable and highly heritable by mid puberty, never mind 25." - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-well-tempered-clavichord/#comment-2333483 ? Maybe, if you could, go into the details of this argument I would appreciate, because it doesn't necessarily make sense to me that different maturation rates can make this big of a difference in widening IQ test score differentials with increasing age. I think the explanation is much more likely environmental/cultural, etc.

    The differing maturation rates and stages between the races don't explain this widening IQ gap with age, in my opinion. They are too minuscule -- but I could be wrong about this -- to be a significant factor/influence. Shouldn't the gap stay pretty stable and not continue widening with age or is this some sort of compound growth/maturation?

    I mean it is not like blacks are fully grown by age 16 and whites continue to develop till age 24 or something like that, and East Asians take even longer till age 30. According to Rushton and his hypothesis blacks are 1-2 years ahead of whites and presumably 3-4 years ahead in maturation compared to East Asians:


    One study of over 17,000 American girls in the 1997 issue of Pediatrics found that puberty begins a year earlier for Black girls than for White girls. By age eight, 48% of the Black girls (but only 15% of the White girls) had some breast development, pubic hair, or both. For Whites this did not happen until ten years. The age when girls began to menstruate was between 11 and 12 for Black girls. White girls began a year later.

    Sexual maturity in boys also differs by race. By age 11, 60% of Black boys have reached the stage of puberty marked by fast penis growth. Two percent have already had sex. White boys tend not to reach this stage for another 1.5 years. Orientals lag one to two years behind Whites in both sexual development and the start of sexual interest.
     

    - p. 14 http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm Archived link: http://archive.is/tEoA3

    To illustrate the point look at the following figure from the paper, the head size gap does not widen with increasing age, it stays pretty much stable as one would expect throughout development:

    http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Chart_02.jpg

    Source: p. 11 http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm

    But maybe I am missing something...

    I wasn’t trying to refute “that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school.” I happen to agree with that, although I do think my comment about which group is used to norm the age progression is relevant.

    Regarding the changing B/W gap with age, small differences matter because the gap changes are on the order of 3-5 IQ points (0.2 – 0.33 SD) between ages around 5, 10, and 14.

    From pages 358-359 of The g Factor (numbers are in SDs, please excuse the formatting):

    Age Variation. Black infants score higher than white infants on developmental scales that depend mainly on sensorimotor abilities. Scores on these infant scales have near-zero correlation with IQ at school age, because the IQ predominantly reflects cognitive rather than sensorimotor development. Between ages three and five years, which is before children normally enter school, the mean W-B IQ difference steadily increases. By five to six years of age, the mean difference is about 0.70c (eleven IQ points), then approaches about l a during the elementary school years, remaining fairly constant until puberty, when it increases slightly and stabilizes at about 1.2a. The latest (1986) Stanford-Binet IV norms show a W-B difference in prepubescent children that is almost five IQ points smaller than the W-B difference in postpubescent children.
    (The W-B difference is 0.80a for ages 2 through 11 as compared with 1.10a for ages 12 through 23.) This could constitute evidence that the mean W-B difference in the population is decreasing. Or it could simply be that the W-B difference increases from early to later childhood. The interpretation of this age effect on the size of the W-B mean difference remains uncertain in this instance, as it is based entirely on cross-sectional rather than longitudinal data. Both kinds of data are needed to settle the issue. The cause of variation in the mean IQ of different age groups all tested within the same year (a cross-sectional study) may not be the same as the cause of variation (if any) in mean IQ of the same group of individuals when tested at different ages (a longitudinal study).

    Note Jensen’s point about the need for longitudinal studies. This is more in the line of evidence for a widening gap rather than proof of it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max


    [...] The interpretation of this age effect on the size of the W-B mean difference remains uncertain in this instance, as it is based entirely on cross-sectional rather than longitudinal data. Both kinds of data are needed to settle the issue. The cause of variation in the mean IQ of different age groups all tested within the same year (a cross-sectional study) may not be the same as the cause of variation (if any) in mean IQ of the same group of individuals when tested at different ages (a longitudinal study).
     
    Note Jensen’s point about the need for longitudinal studies. This is more in the line of evidence for a widening gap rather than proof of it.
     
    Thank you very much, res. This is great information.

    This actually strengthens my conviction that the widening is likelier due to environmental/cultural than genetic factors, i.e. educational attainment and attendance rates and length, etc.:

    Across 142 effect sizes from 42 data sets involving over 600,000 participants, we found consistent evidence for beneficial effects of education on cognitive abilities, of approximately 1 to 5 IQ points for an additional year of education.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/americas-cultural-revolution-the-obsession-with-self-esteem/#comment-2294222

    Everyone knows that public school officials in the American South violated the Supreme Court's separate-but-equal decision. But did the violations matter? Yes, enforcement of separate-but-equal would have narrowed racial differences in school attendance in the early twentieth century South. But separate-but-equal was not enough. Black children still would have attended school less often than white children because black parents were poorer and less literate than white parents.
     
    - https://www.jstor.org/stable/1935961

    https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/cffe1b6/2147483647/resize/970x/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.beam.usnews.com%2F25%2F82%2F75b76cc6444a934b3fa1391ce4a7%2F150106dataparentedu-graphic.png

    Source: https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/01/28/us-education-still-separate-and-unequal

    I don't know if you saw this comment of mine, yet, probably not:


    High Test Scores At A Nationally Lauded Charter Network, But At What Cost?

    https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/06/24/477345746/high-test-scores-at-a-nationally-lauded-charter-network-but-at-what-cost

    [Today there are 13 Rocketship schools, with 6,000 students, in the San Francisco Bay Area, Nashville, Tenn., and Milwaukee, with one scheduled to open in Washington, D.C., this fall. The students, largely low-income and Hispanic, outperform their peers on state tests.]
    [...]
    [Independent research commissioned by Rocketship also shows students' test score gains persisting after leaving the schools, into middle school.]
    [...]
    However, several of the current and former staffers said, and one provided internal emails indicating, that teachers habitually had students retake portions of standardized tests — especially the NWEA tests. Borja and other staffers suggested this was done in an attempt to raise scores tied to teacher bonuses.

    Retaking can inflate scores on certain tests “a massive amount,” says Andrew Ho, a student measurement expert at Harvard’s Graduate School of Education. Of course, there are computer glitches and other mitigating circumstances where a do-over is fair game. But in general, he added, “it should be painfully obvious that whenever there is an incentive for teachers and administrators to increase scores … retests should be recorded, monitored and tracked.”
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-meet-the-renegades-of-the-intellectual-dark-web/#comment-2324975
    , @FKA Max
    Typo: ... if you could, go into the details of this argument I would appreciate *it*, ...

    res,

    I found a very interesting longitudinal study, which could offer some new interesting insights and shed some light on the reasons for the widening B-W IQ score gap with age, which appear to be environmental, as I suspected. The urban cohort/population is 84% non-white and the sub-urban cohort/population is is 5.5% non-white.:

    Stability and Change in Children's Intelligence Quotient Scores: A Comparison of Two Socioeconomically Disparate Communities


    The authors estimated the influence of familial factors and community disadvantage on changes in children's intelligence quotient (IQ) scores from age 6 years to age 11 years. Data were obtained from a longitudinal study of the neuropsychiatric sequelae of low birth weight in two socioeconomically disparate, geographically defined communities in the Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area. Representative samples of low birth weight and normal birth weight children from the City of Detroit (urban) and nearby middle-class suburbs (suburban) were assessed at age 6 years (in 1990–1992) and age 11 years (in 1995–1997) (n = 717).
    [...]
    The IQs of urban children, regardless of birth weight, declined from age 6 years to age 11 years. The downward shift increased by 50% the proportion of urban children scoring 1 standard deviation below the standardized IQ mean of 100. A negligible change was observed in suburban children. Maternal IQ, education, and marital status and low birth weight predicted IQ at age 6 years but were unrelated to IQ change. Growing up in a racially segregated and disadvantaged community, more than individual and familial factors, may contribute to a decline in IQ score in the early school years.
     
    - https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/8/711/131324 Archived link: http://archive.is/7EYmD

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Thomas_Matte/publication/11759924/figure/fig1/AS:[email protected]/Empirical-cumulative-distributions-of-intelligence-quotient-IQ-scores-at-ages-6-and-11.png

    And I believe the same or a very similar study and cohort/population continued/tracked until age 17:

    Low birthweight and social disadvantage: Tracking their relationship with children's IQ during the period of school attendance


    Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the relation of low birthweight, an indicator of adverse perinatal events, and social disadvantage to IQ changes during the period of school attendance. Data are from a longitudinal study of low birthweight and normal birthweight children in two disparate communities, an inner-city and near-by suburbs in southeast Michigan (n = 773). Wechsler intelligence tests were administered at ages 6, 11 and 17. Low birthweight-related deficits (vs. normal birthweight) detected at the start of schooling were about 5 IQ points and these remained constant up to age 17. Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11, but no further by age 17. These trends were independent of one another: The low birthweight deficit was constant across social environments; the social disadvantage deficit was uniform across birthweight groups. The finding that the urban–suburban gap did not continue to widen after age 11 probably resulted from an atypical IQ decline of suburban children. The causes of this unexpected finding are unclear.
     
    - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605001091

    Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0160289605001091-gr1.gif

    but no further by age 17.

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0160289605001091-gr2.gif

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. res says:
    @manorchurch

    Ad hominems – best way ever to say to someone arguing with you – “you win.”
     
    Oh, dear, terror strikes. Will I ever sleep soundly again?

    You called me "hypocrite"; I called you "boy". Lest you lead yourself to believe that I see any necessity for avoiding ad hominems, go fuck yourself. Got it now?

    Hypocrite is descriptive of you and accurate. Boy is neither for me. Notice the difference.

    Got it now?

    Got it. You are not worth interacting with. Thank you for making that clear.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Anon
    Hasn’t lead paint been banned fitvsbout 75 years? Low IQ is rampant in 2 demographics in California despite the fact that most houses in California were built after the lead paint ban.

    Lead paint was banned in the late 1970s in the US. Lead petrol/gasoline fallout is still a problem in many areas. Youth should be much less affected, and youth convictions for serious crimes have dropped considerably. Perhaps it is time for a new longitudinal study of youth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. FKA Max says:
    @Anon
    I bet you didn’t even read your clip
    And paste. Go argue with some one else.

    This is you, Alden, right? Here a cut-and-paste just for you from yours truly hahahaha

    Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    April 17, 2018 at 4:31 pm GMT • 100 Words
    [...]
    Senator Feinstein is old now but was a drop dead beauty back in the day. She never photographed well I know. She had white white skin shiny black hair grayish hazel eyes and perfect features.
    In fact she closely resembles the Friends actress Courtney Cox.

    https://www.unz.com/article/can-we-judge-people-by-what-they-look-like-in-fact-yes/#comment-2292418

    Alden says:
    September 10, 2017 at 4:38 am GMT • 200 Words
    [...]
    Senator Dianne Feinstein is a democrat married to a multi billionaire liberal. I saw her a lot when I lived near her in San Francisco when she was young.
    Drop dead beautiful, much prettier than she photographed.

    https://www.unz.com/article/the-fat-heather-heyer-hoax/#comment-2000472

    Please, go cyber harass/stalk someone else and be grumpy somewhere else. Thank you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. FKA Max says:
    @res
    I wasn't trying to refute "that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school." I happen to agree with that, although I do think my comment about which group is used to norm the age progression is relevant.

    Regarding the changing B/W gap with age, small differences matter because the gap changes are on the order of 3-5 IQ points (0.2 - 0.33 SD) between ages around 5, 10, and 14.

    From pages 358-359 of The g Factor (numbers are in SDs, please excuse the formatting):

    Age Variation. Black infants score higher than white infants on developmental scales that depend mainly on sensorimotor abilities. Scores on these infant scales have near-zero correlation with IQ at school age, because the IQ predominantly reflects cognitive rather than sensorimotor development. Between ages three and five years, which is before children normally enter school, the mean W-B IQ difference steadily increases. By five to six years of age, the mean difference is about 0.70c (eleven IQ points), then approaches about l a during the elementary school years, remaining fairly constant until puberty, when it increases slightly and stabilizes at about 1.2a. The latest (1986) Stanford-Binet IV norms show a W-B difference in prepubescent children that is almost five IQ points smaller than the W-B difference in postpubescent children.
    (The W-B difference is 0.80a for ages 2 through 11 as compared with 1.10a for ages 12 through 23.) This could constitute evidence that the mean W-B difference in the population is decreasing. Or it could simply be that the W-B difference increases from early to later childhood. The interpretation of this age effect on the size of the W-B mean difference remains uncertain in this instance, as it is based entirely on cross-sectional rather than longitudinal data. Both kinds of data are needed to settle the issue. The cause of variation in the mean IQ of different age groups all tested within the same year (a cross-sectional study) may not be the same as the cause of variation (if any) in mean IQ of the same group of individuals when tested at different ages (a longitudinal study).

     

    Note Jensen's point about the need for longitudinal studies. This is more in the line of evidence for a widening gap rather than proof of it.

    [...] The interpretation of this age effect on the size of the W-B mean difference remains uncertain in this instance, as it is based entirely on cross-sectional rather than longitudinal data. Both kinds of data are needed to settle the issue. The cause of variation in the mean IQ of different age groups all tested within the same year (a cross-sectional study) may not be the same as the cause of variation (if any) in mean IQ of the same group of individuals when tested at different ages (a longitudinal study).

    Note Jensen’s point about the need for longitudinal studies. This is more in the line of evidence for a widening gap rather than proof of it.

    Thank you very much, res. This is great information.

    This actually strengthens my conviction that the widening is likelier due to environmental/cultural than genetic factors, i.e. educational attainment and attendance rates and length, etc.:

    Across 142 effect sizes from 42 data sets involving over 600,000 participants, we found consistent evidence for beneficial effects of education on cognitive abilities, of approximately 1 to 5 IQ points for an additional year of education.

    http://www.unz.com/article/americas-cultural-revolution-the-obsession-with-self-esteem/#comment-2294222

    Everyone knows that public school officials in the American South violated the Supreme Court’s separate-but-equal decision. But did the violations matter? Yes, enforcement of separate-but-equal would have narrowed racial differences in school attendance in the early twentieth century South. But separate-but-equal was not enough. Black children still would have attended school less often than white children because black parents were poorer and less literate than white parents.

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/1935961

    Source: https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/01/28/us-education-still-separate-and-unequal

    I don’t know if you saw this comment of mine, yet, probably not:

    High Test Scores At A Nationally Lauded Charter Network, But At What Cost?

    https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/06/24/477345746/high-test-scores-at-a-nationally-lauded-charter-network-but-at-what-cost

    [Today there are 13 Rocketship schools, with 6,000 students, in the San Francisco Bay Area, Nashville, Tenn., and Milwaukee, with one scheduled to open in Washington, D.C., this fall. The students, largely low-income and Hispanic, outperform their peers on state tests.]
    [...]
    [Independent research commissioned by Rocketship also shows students' test score gains persisting after leaving the schools, into middle school.]
    [...]
    However, several of the current and former staffers said, and one provided internal emails indicating, that teachers habitually had students retake portions of standardized tests — especially the NWEA tests. Borja and other staffers suggested this was done in an attempt to raise scores tied to teacher bonuses.

    Retaking can inflate scores on certain tests “a massive amount,” says Andrew Ho, a student measurement expert at Harvard’s Graduate School of Education. Of course, there are computer glitches and other mitigating circumstances where a do-over is fair game. But in general, he added, “it should be painfully obvious that whenever there is an incentive for teachers and administrators to increase scores … retests should be recorded, monitored and tracked.”

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-meet-the-renegades-of-the-intellectual-dark-web/#comment-2324975

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    The powerful psychopaths are successful at diluting the academic standards by inserting the useful friends (however dirty) and useful idiots (however unqualified) on the important academic positions.
    Here are two spectacular cases in point when a scoundrel and an ignoramus received important academic appointments in the UK:
    1. Stefan Halper, "a long-time CIA operative with extensive links to the Bush family who was responsible for a dirty and likely illegal spying operation in the 1980 presidential election" has been teaching in Cambridge (whoa!) https://theintercept.com/2018/05/19/the-fbi-informant-who-monitored-the-trump-campaign-stefan-halper-oversaw-a-cia-spying-operation-in-the-1980-presidential-election/
    2. Elliot Higgins who "had no formal intelligence training, could not speak or read Arabic, had never set foot in the Middle East" and who had never studied engineering and chemistry, is nevertheless considered as an important expert in all the above (intelligence, Middle East, engineering, and chemistry) by the "thinkers" at the Department of War Studies at King’s College London: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/warstudies/people/visiting/higgins.aspx https://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/principal/Indexnew.aspx
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. utu says:
    @Anon
    You’re right about rural. But Charlottes family was poor only in comparison to the very rich kids she met at Duke

    And her family was supportive and living and normal, not religious fanatics

    What are you arguing with my impressions?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @CanSpeccy

    Penrose speculates that quantum mechanics may solve the free will puzzle.
     
    Whatever merit the Penrose Hameroff model of the mind may have, it will not provide an account of free will since free will is an illusion. To quote myself:

    If Cain willed to kill Abel, how could he have acted otherwise than to go ahead and kill him? Could he, at the same time, have willed not to will to kill Abel? But if so, what if the will to kill Abel were stronger? Could he then have willed to will not to kill Abel more strongly? This leads to an infinite regress.

    The conclusion seems to be that we will what we will and that's that for good or ill. And if sometimes our actions are theoretically unpredictable due to classical or quantum indeterminism, our actions are nevertheless driven either by chance or necessity, which is rather different from the idea that most people have of free will.
     

    The concept of free will is nevertheless important in judging questions of legal responsibility. To quote myself further:

    To many, the notion that Cain could do no other than kill his brother means that he was not morally responsible for his actions and therefore should not have been held accountable or punished. But "moral responsibility" is not synonymous with "legal responsibility." Under the law of sane and civilized society, Cain would be held responsible for killing Abel, for the simple reason that he did indeed kill Abel.

    Furthermore, under the law of any sane and civilized society, Cain would be punished for killing Abel, not because of his moral culpability but to deter others who might otherwise emulate his crime.
     

    Maybe you have the time and intellectual stamina to do us all a favour by reading, explaining and reviewing “The Mind Matters’ by David Hodgson.

    I read an article in Quadrant Magazine by him on free will (at least that was the part that interested me) and corresponded with him. He referred to his book. We aimed to meet after he retired from the New South Wales Court of Appeal bench which I had assumed would be at 70. In NSW it was 72 and he died within months after retiring so I never got round to finishing the reading for my tutorial.

    After topping New South Wales in mathematics before a university law degree he went as a Rhodes Scholar to Oxford where the professor supervising his PhD said he was the most intelligent student he had ever had. For the purpose of “The Mind Matters” he taught himself Quantum Mechanics while he was a judge… Maybe we’ll need to call on our host Ron to grade it for us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    Re: “The Mind Matters’ by David Hodgson

    Sounds interesting. I've ordered a used copy in "very good" condition from Amazon for $6.95. If I understand any of it, I'll get back to you.
    Cheers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @James Thompson
    Brain wiring probably all under genetic control, bar presence of neurological contaminants like lead.
    Your self-report of problem-solving is a covariate of your intellectual level. Currently there is no way to discern exactly how the subjects solve the problems presented to them, but the films taken of brain activity as people solve intelligence test items in a scanner suggest that the task is broken down into elements which are dealt with by different regions swapping partial solutions till the final result is integrated.

    Allow me a return visit to both Divergent (cp. Convergent) thinking and also to pruning.

    Is there a connection? My hypothesis is that divergent/original thinkers/creative minds may have been subjected to less pruning? Does that make sense to you?

    If true it would be interesting to know about the trade offs. And specifically it would be interesting to know what training, or other characteristics, might allow some high IQ convergent thinkers to perform without appreciable handicap despite a profusion of unregimented thoughts which count as original thinking.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James Thompson
    Creativity turns out to be closely related to ability. That is, creativity which is recognised as changing a field considerably, rather than just throwing stuff together to make an impression which quickly fades.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Wizard of Oz
    Maybe you have the time and intellectual stamina to do us all a favour by reading, explaining and reviewing "The Mind Matters' by David Hodgson.

    I read an article in Quadrant Magazine by him on free will (at least that was the part that interested me) and corresponded with him. He referred to his book. We aimed to meet after he retired from the New South Wales Court of Appeal bench which I had assumed would be at 70. In NSW it was 72 and he died within months after retiring so I never got round to finishing the reading for my tutorial.

    After topping New South Wales in mathematics before a university law degree he went as a Rhodes Scholar to Oxford where the professor supervising his PhD said he was the most intelligent student he had ever had. For the purpose of "The Mind Matters" he taught himself Quantum Mechanics while he was a judge... Maybe we'll need to call on our host Ron to grade it for us.

    Re: “The Mind Matters’ by David Hodgson

    Sounds interesting. I’ve ordered a used copy in “very good” condition from Amazon for $6.95. If I understand any of it, I’ll get back to you.
    Cheers.

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

    I wonder if it has anything to do with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Very interesting and leading on to a lot of other stimulating links.

    But maybe Braess's paradox is to be distinguished because there it is presumed that the paradoxical result arises from individual decisions made about the use of the changed structure.

    Aha. I went back to find another little point of distinction that occurred to me and then it struck me. Of course you are referring to the other side of Braess's coin. Knock out a rat-runner's route, or just one respectable choice of route and you may speed things up. An example was given of the loss of one of three bridges which resulted in many trips not being undertaken at all. There's the pruning analogy which I suppose you were referring to???? The trouble is that it does look as though something could be lost. There is no reason to assume that all the trips given up were of little value.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @Wizard of Oz
    Allow me a return visit to both Divergent (cp. Convergent) thinking and also to pruning.

    Is there a connection? My hypothesis is that divergent/original thinkers/creative minds may have been subjected to less pruning? Does that make sense to you?

    If true it would be interesting to know about the trade offs. And specifically it would be interesting to know what training, or other characteristics, might allow some high IQ convergent thinkers to perform without appreciable handicap despite a profusion of unregimented thoughts which count as original thinking.

    Creativity turns out to be closely related to ability. That is, creativity which is recognised as changing a field considerably, rather than just throwing stuff together to make an impression which quickly fades.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @Sean
    I wonder if it has anything to do with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braess%27s_paradox

    Very interesting and leading on to a lot of other stimulating links.

    But maybe Braess’s paradox is to be distinguished because there it is presumed that the paradoxical result arises from individual decisions made about the use of the changed structure.

    Aha. I went back to find another little point of distinction that occurred to me and then it struck me. Of course you are referring to the other side of Braess’s coin. Knock out a rat-runner’s route, or just one respectable choice of route and you may speed things up. An example was given of the loss of one of three bridges which resulted in many trips not being undertaken at all. There’s the pruning analogy which I suppose you were referring to???? The trouble is that it does look as though something could be lost. There is no reason to assume that all the trips given up were of little value.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Braess's paradox which is really interesting cannot occur in any network of natural flows of electricity or liquids, I think. Possibly in case of nonlinearities like turbulences somebody could envision something like the paradox, but I doubt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Greeny1 says:
    @manorchurch
    If one questions the purported validity and/or accuracy and/or applicability of "evidence" presented by someone else, in what way is one obligated to present evidence at all?

    If you were to say "The sky is green", I might be inclined to observe that "It looks blue to me.", but there is no requirement on my part to do anything other than demand you justify your statement. If you assert the sky is green, the burden is on you to prove it so, not on me to prove it not so.

    > ‘”If you were to say “The sky is green”’

    In Biblical times green covered a range of colors.

    https://www.haaretz.com/.premium-word-of-the-day-yarok-1.5329433 “yarok … the modern Hebrew word for green, but as we will see – in years of yore it was also the word for yellow and every color in between. ”

    > ‘”I might be inclined to observe that “It looks blue to me.” ‘

    What? You Bible revisionist, believing in something not supported by the Bible. You did not read the bible in detail, boy. Welcome to the dark-side.

    https://www.haaretz.com/word-of-the-day-kakhol-1.5331764 “You may be surprised to find out that such a prevalent color appearing in sea and sky goes unnamed in the Hebrew Bible, nor is it mentioned in the Mishnah and Talmud. … What about tekhelet, you ask? Well, while tekhlet in modern Hebrew means “light blue” (like the Russian word goluboy) – in Biblical times it referred to a dye made of a liquid extracted from a kind of sea urchin, which was purple.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    > ‘”If you were to say “The sky is green”’

    In Biblical times green covered a range of colors.
     
    Oh, of course. If you were to say "The sky is green", you really mean to say "The sky is many colors." And you would be right, as the sky is many colors.

    I am not concerned in the slightest with what points you miss.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. FKA Max says:
    @res
    I wasn't trying to refute "that IQ is pretty stable by the time kids start school." I happen to agree with that, although I do think my comment about which group is used to norm the age progression is relevant.

    Regarding the changing B/W gap with age, small differences matter because the gap changes are on the order of 3-5 IQ points (0.2 - 0.33 SD) between ages around 5, 10, and 14.

    From pages 358-359 of The g Factor (numbers are in SDs, please excuse the formatting):

    Age Variation. Black infants score higher than white infants on developmental scales that depend mainly on sensorimotor abilities. Scores on these infant scales have near-zero correlation with IQ at school age, because the IQ predominantly reflects cognitive rather than sensorimotor development. Between ages three and five years, which is before children normally enter school, the mean W-B IQ difference steadily increases. By five to six years of age, the mean difference is about 0.70c (eleven IQ points), then approaches about l a during the elementary school years, remaining fairly constant until puberty, when it increases slightly and stabilizes at about 1.2a. The latest (1986) Stanford-Binet IV norms show a W-B difference in prepubescent children that is almost five IQ points smaller than the W-B difference in postpubescent children.
    (The W-B difference is 0.80a for ages 2 through 11 as compared with 1.10a for ages 12 through 23.) This could constitute evidence that the mean W-B difference in the population is decreasing. Or it could simply be that the W-B difference increases from early to later childhood. The interpretation of this age effect on the size of the W-B mean difference remains uncertain in this instance, as it is based entirely on cross-sectional rather than longitudinal data. Both kinds of data are needed to settle the issue. The cause of variation in the mean IQ of different age groups all tested within the same year (a cross-sectional study) may not be the same as the cause of variation (if any) in mean IQ of the same group of individuals when tested at different ages (a longitudinal study).

     

    Note Jensen's point about the need for longitudinal studies. This is more in the line of evidence for a widening gap rather than proof of it.

    Typo: … if you could, go into the details of this argument I would appreciate *it*, …

    res,

    I found a very interesting longitudinal study, which could offer some new interesting insights and shed some light on the reasons for the widening B-W IQ score gap with age, which appear to be environmental, as I suspected. The urban cohort/population is 84% non-white and the sub-urban cohort/population is is 5.5% non-white.:

    Stability and Change in Children’s Intelligence Quotient Scores: A Comparison of Two Socioeconomically Disparate Communities

    The authors estimated the influence of familial factors and community disadvantage on changes in children’s intelligence quotient (IQ) scores from age 6 years to age 11 years. Data were obtained from a longitudinal study of the neuropsychiatric sequelae of low birth weight in two socioeconomically disparate, geographically defined communities in the Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area. Representative samples of low birth weight and normal birth weight children from the City of Detroit (urban) and nearby middle-class suburbs (suburban) were assessed at age 6 years (in 1990–1992) and age 11 years (in 1995–1997) (n = 717).
    [...]
    The IQs of urban children, regardless of birth weight, declined from age 6 years to age 11 years. The downward shift increased by 50% the proportion of urban children scoring 1 standard deviation below the standardized IQ mean of 100. A negligible change was observed in suburban children. Maternal IQ, education, and marital status and low birth weight predicted IQ at age 6 years but were unrelated to IQ change. Growing up in a racially segregated and disadvantaged community, more than individual and familial factors, may contribute to a decline in IQ score in the early school years.

    https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/8/711/131324 Archived link: http://archive.is/7EYmD

    And I believe the same or a very similar study and cohort/population continued/tracked until age 17:

    Low birthweight and social disadvantage: Tracking their relationship with children’s IQ during the period of school attendance

    Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the relation of low birthweight, an indicator of adverse perinatal events, and social disadvantage to IQ changes during the period of school attendance. Data are from a longitudinal study of low birthweight and normal birthweight children in two disparate communities, an inner-city and near-by suburbs in southeast Michigan (n = 773). Wechsler intelligence tests were administered at ages 6, 11 and 17. Low birthweight-related deficits (vs. normal birthweight) detected at the start of schooling were about 5 IQ points and these remained constant up to age 17. Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11, but no further by age 17. These trends were independent of one another: The low birthweight deficit was constant across social environments; the social disadvantage deficit was uniform across birthweight groups. The finding that the urban–suburban gap did not continue to widen after age 11 probably resulted from an atypical IQ decline of suburban children. The causes of this unexpected finding are unclear.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605001091

    Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11

    but no further by age 17.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Two thoughts.

    1. I think it is good to distinguish between studies looking at "normal" conditions and those looking at abnormal (e.g. low birth weight) conditions. The "normal" case usually has much more potential for explaining variance in the larger population. The abnormal condition studies may expose good opportunities for intervention though.

    2. I am very leery of studies which claim to prove nurture is more important of nature. They very rarely even allow for the possibility that there are genetic racial differences. And often they don't even allow for systematic racial phenotypic differences (e.g. not controlling for race as a variable).

    Also:

    The IQs of urban children, regardless of birth weight, declined from age 6 years to age 11 years.
     
    This is exactly what I would expect if Blacks have different developmental trajectories and they are taking IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory (and yes, I mean averages). Though the limited change from 11 to 17 does not accord with my reading of the Jensen excerpt.
    , @FKA Max
    Typo: One *is* too many, corrected version: The urban cohort/population is 84% non-white and the sub-urban cohort/population [] is 5.5% non-white.


    A description of the urban and suburban samples with respect to sociodemographic and neonatal characteristics is presented in table 1. Compared with the suburban sample, the City of Detroit sample had markedly higher percentages of minority children (84.2 percent vs. 5.5 percent), children born to single mothers (58.1 percent vs. 9.7 percent), and mothers with less than a high school education (26.7 percent vs. 6.7 percent). With few exceptions, minority children were Black, reflecting the racial-ethnic composition of the Detroit area.
     
    TABLE 1. https://academic.oup.com/view-large/1015495
    Sociodemographic and neonatal characteristics (%) of urban and suburban children (n = 717) in a study of changes in intelligence quotient (IQ) scores, Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area, 1990–1992 and 1995–1997


    Mean values and standard deviations for descriptive data, including full-scale, verbal, and performance IQ scores by age, low birth weight versus normal birth weight, and urban versus suburban community, appear in table 2. We focus here on full-scale IQ. Analyses of verbal and performance IQ data yielded similar results (available from the authors). These data suggest a decline in IQ between ages 6 and 11 years in urban children but not in suburban children.
     
    TABLE 2. https://academic.oup.com/view-large/1015504
    Mean scores on the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children–Revised at ages 6 and 11 years, by type of community and birth weight status (n = 717), Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area, 1990–1992 and 1995–1997

    Source: https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/8/711/131324
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. utu says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    Very interesting and leading on to a lot of other stimulating links.

    But maybe Braess's paradox is to be distinguished because there it is presumed that the paradoxical result arises from individual decisions made about the use of the changed structure.

    Aha. I went back to find another little point of distinction that occurred to me and then it struck me. Of course you are referring to the other side of Braess's coin. Knock out a rat-runner's route, or just one respectable choice of route and you may speed things up. An example was given of the loss of one of three bridges which resulted in many trips not being undertaken at all. There's the pruning analogy which I suppose you were referring to???? The trouble is that it does look as though something could be lost. There is no reason to assume that all the trips given up were of little value.

    Braess’s paradox which is really interesting cannot occur in any network of natural flows of electricity or liquids, I think. Possibly in case of nonlinearities like turbulences somebody could envision something like the paradox, but I doubt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    I think.
     
    That was a wise qualification.

    Physical proof of the occurrence of the Braess Paradox in electrical circuits
    http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/115/28004/meta

    The Braess Paradox and Its Impact on Natural-Gas-Network Performance
    https://www.onepetro.org/journal-paper/SPE-160142-PA
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. res says:
    @FKA Max
    Typo: ... if you could, go into the details of this argument I would appreciate *it*, ...

    res,

    I found a very interesting longitudinal study, which could offer some new interesting insights and shed some light on the reasons for the widening B-W IQ score gap with age, which appear to be environmental, as I suspected. The urban cohort/population is 84% non-white and the sub-urban cohort/population is is 5.5% non-white.:

    Stability and Change in Children's Intelligence Quotient Scores: A Comparison of Two Socioeconomically Disparate Communities


    The authors estimated the influence of familial factors and community disadvantage on changes in children's intelligence quotient (IQ) scores from age 6 years to age 11 years. Data were obtained from a longitudinal study of the neuropsychiatric sequelae of low birth weight in two socioeconomically disparate, geographically defined communities in the Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area. Representative samples of low birth weight and normal birth weight children from the City of Detroit (urban) and nearby middle-class suburbs (suburban) were assessed at age 6 years (in 1990–1992) and age 11 years (in 1995–1997) (n = 717).
    [...]
    The IQs of urban children, regardless of birth weight, declined from age 6 years to age 11 years. The downward shift increased by 50% the proportion of urban children scoring 1 standard deviation below the standardized IQ mean of 100. A negligible change was observed in suburban children. Maternal IQ, education, and marital status and low birth weight predicted IQ at age 6 years but were unrelated to IQ change. Growing up in a racially segregated and disadvantaged community, more than individual and familial factors, may contribute to a decline in IQ score in the early school years.
     
    - https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/8/711/131324 Archived link: http://archive.is/7EYmD

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Thomas_Matte/publication/11759924/figure/fig1/AS:[email protected]/Empirical-cumulative-distributions-of-intelligence-quotient-IQ-scores-at-ages-6-and-11.png

    And I believe the same or a very similar study and cohort/population continued/tracked until age 17:

    Low birthweight and social disadvantage: Tracking their relationship with children's IQ during the period of school attendance


    Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the relation of low birthweight, an indicator of adverse perinatal events, and social disadvantage to IQ changes during the period of school attendance. Data are from a longitudinal study of low birthweight and normal birthweight children in two disparate communities, an inner-city and near-by suburbs in southeast Michigan (n = 773). Wechsler intelligence tests were administered at ages 6, 11 and 17. Low birthweight-related deficits (vs. normal birthweight) detected at the start of schooling were about 5 IQ points and these remained constant up to age 17. Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11, but no further by age 17. These trends were independent of one another: The low birthweight deficit was constant across social environments; the social disadvantage deficit was uniform across birthweight groups. The finding that the urban–suburban gap did not continue to widen after age 11 probably resulted from an atypical IQ decline of suburban children. The causes of this unexpected finding are unclear.
     
    - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605001091

    Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0160289605001091-gr1.gif

    but no further by age 17.

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0160289605001091-gr2.gif

    Two thoughts.

    1. I think it is good to distinguish between studies looking at “normal” conditions and those looking at abnormal (e.g. low birth weight) conditions. The “normal” case usually has much more potential for explaining variance in the larger population. The abnormal condition studies may expose good opportunities for intervention though.

    2. I am very leery of studies which claim to prove nurture is more important of nature. They very rarely even allow for the possibility that there are genetic racial differences. And often they don’t even allow for systematic racial phenotypic differences (e.g. not controlling for race as a variable).

    Also:

    The IQs of urban children, regardless of birth weight, declined from age 6 years to age 11 years.

    This is exactly what I would expect if Blacks have different developmental trajectories and they are taking IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory (and yes, I mean averages). Though the limited change from 11 to 17 does not accord with my reading of the Jensen excerpt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max

    This is exactly what I would expect if Blacks have different developmental trajectories and they are taking IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory...
     
    What do you attribute it to? The earlier onset of puberty?

    What I would expect if it were a genetically caused widening, is that the black IQ test scores stay stable and the whites ones would increase, not for the black IQ test scores to drop and the white ones to stay stable, but I guess it is just a matter of perspective and definition, as you said, you suspect this phenomenon is due to "IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory", but it is just difficult for me to imagine, since it feels so counter-intuitive, that someone's IQ test score is dropping/decreasing while their brain is growing and their knowledge is expanding.

    You have probably seen this comprehensive post already, which favors a stable B-W IQ test score gap explanation, but I am just going to share it here in case other readers and commenters would like to explore this topic more in depth. Mr. Thompson actually commented on that post:


    Dr James Thompson

    June 4, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    Excellent detailed work, and very useful. Thanks for all the hours this must have taken.
     

    - https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/#comment-244

    The Onset and Development of B-W Ability Differences: Early Infancy to Age 3 (Part 1)

    https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/ Archived link: http://archive.is/7eukb

    Farkas & Beron (2004) used longitudinal data from the CNLSY to track children’s scores on the PPVT from early childhood through junior highschool. They showed that PPVT gaps were at least 1 SD at age 3, and do not continue to grow after children enter kindergarten, or as they progress through school (Figure II).

    Figure II: Stable IQ gap from ages 3 to 13 in the CNLSY

    https://humanvarietiesdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/figure-21.png

    This post adds evidence relevant to these interrelated issues by confirming for the first time that a gap of 1 full standard deviation is already apparent on IQ tests at 36 months of age, and that there has been no obvious convergence in this early performance difference over time.

    If there is a 1 SD gap at age 3, this precludes an IQ gap that has room to grow much wider during school, unless A) the B-W school age gap is larger than we previously thought, or B) the IQ gap actually shrinks between ages 4-6, and then grows wider again later on. Neither of these theories is particularly compelling.

    This also form the post:


    Much like Fryer & Levitt (2004), Dickens & Flynn (2006a) argue that performance gaps have dramatically narrowed among young children since the 1980s, and that gaps grow much wider after children enter school. Extrapolating from recent standardizations of the Stanford-Binet and Wechsler intelligence tests, Dickens and Flynn argue that the IQ gap among black and white four year olds since the year 2000 is only 4.6 points (.31σ). They even boldly state that “no recent data pose a serious challenge” to this estimate. (Dickens & Flynn, 2006b, p. 924)
     
    I actually agree with Flynn (the gap might be a little wider than 4.6 points though, maybe 7-8 points) and I believe later widening of the gap can be attributed to environmental/cultural factors, as elaborated on up-thread.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. FKA Max says:
    @FKA Max
    Typo: ... if you could, go into the details of this argument I would appreciate *it*, ...

    res,

    I found a very interesting longitudinal study, which could offer some new interesting insights and shed some light on the reasons for the widening B-W IQ score gap with age, which appear to be environmental, as I suspected. The urban cohort/population is 84% non-white and the sub-urban cohort/population is is 5.5% non-white.:

    Stability and Change in Children's Intelligence Quotient Scores: A Comparison of Two Socioeconomically Disparate Communities


    The authors estimated the influence of familial factors and community disadvantage on changes in children's intelligence quotient (IQ) scores from age 6 years to age 11 years. Data were obtained from a longitudinal study of the neuropsychiatric sequelae of low birth weight in two socioeconomically disparate, geographically defined communities in the Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area. Representative samples of low birth weight and normal birth weight children from the City of Detroit (urban) and nearby middle-class suburbs (suburban) were assessed at age 6 years (in 1990–1992) and age 11 years (in 1995–1997) (n = 717).
    [...]
    The IQs of urban children, regardless of birth weight, declined from age 6 years to age 11 years. The downward shift increased by 50% the proportion of urban children scoring 1 standard deviation below the standardized IQ mean of 100. A negligible change was observed in suburban children. Maternal IQ, education, and marital status and low birth weight predicted IQ at age 6 years but were unrelated to IQ change. Growing up in a racially segregated and disadvantaged community, more than individual and familial factors, may contribute to a decline in IQ score in the early school years.
     
    - https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/8/711/131324 Archived link: http://archive.is/7EYmD

    https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Thomas_Matte/publication/11759924/figure/fig1/AS:[email protected]/Empirical-cumulative-distributions-of-intelligence-quotient-IQ-scores-at-ages-6-and-11.png

    And I believe the same or a very similar study and cohort/population continued/tracked until age 17:

    Low birthweight and social disadvantage: Tracking their relationship with children's IQ during the period of school attendance


    Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the relation of low birthweight, an indicator of adverse perinatal events, and social disadvantage to IQ changes during the period of school attendance. Data are from a longitudinal study of low birthweight and normal birthweight children in two disparate communities, an inner-city and near-by suburbs in southeast Michigan (n = 773). Wechsler intelligence tests were administered at ages 6, 11 and 17. Low birthweight-related deficits (vs. normal birthweight) detected at the start of schooling were about 5 IQ points and these remained constant up to age 17. Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11, but no further by age 17. These trends were independent of one another: The low birthweight deficit was constant across social environments; the social disadvantage deficit was uniform across birthweight groups. The finding that the urban–suburban gap did not continue to widen after age 11 probably resulted from an atypical IQ decline of suburban children. The causes of this unexpected finding are unclear.
     
    - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289605001091

    Initial IQ deficits associated with urban environment (vs. suburban) increased significantly from age 6 to 11

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0160289605001091-gr1.gif

    but no further by age 17.

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0160289605001091-gr2.gif

    Typo: One *is* too many, corrected version: The urban cohort/population is 84% non-white and the sub-urban cohort/population [] is 5.5% non-white.

    A description of the urban and suburban samples with respect to sociodemographic and neonatal characteristics is presented in table 1. Compared with the suburban sample, the City of Detroit sample had markedly higher percentages of minority children (84.2 percent vs. 5.5 percent), children born to single mothers (58.1 percent vs. 9.7 percent), and mothers with less than a high school education (26.7 percent vs. 6.7 percent). With few exceptions, minority children were Black, reflecting the racial-ethnic composition of the Detroit area.

    TABLE 1. https://academic.oup.com/view-large/1015495
    Sociodemographic and neonatal characteristics (%) of urban and suburban children (n = 717) in a study of changes in intelligence quotient (IQ) scores, Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area, 1990–1992 and 1995–1997

    Mean values and standard deviations for descriptive data, including full-scale, verbal, and performance IQ scores by age, low birth weight versus normal birth weight, and urban versus suburban community, appear in table 2. We focus here on full-scale IQ. Analyses of verbal and performance IQ data yielded similar results (available from the authors). These data suggest a decline in IQ between ages 6 and 11 years in urban children but not in suburban children.

    TABLE 2. https://academic.oup.com/view-large/1015504
    Mean scores on the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children–Revised at ages 6 and 11 years, by type of community and birth weight status (n = 717), Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area, 1990–1992 and 1995–1997

    Source: https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/154/8/711/131324

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Greeny1
    > '"If you were to say “The sky is green”'

    In Biblical times green covered a range of colors.

    https://www.haaretz.com/.premium-word-of-the-day-yarok-1.5329433 "yarok ... the modern Hebrew word for green, but as we will see – in years of yore it was also the word for yellow and every color in between. "

    > '"I might be inclined to observe that “It looks blue to me.” '

    What? You Bible revisionist, believing in something not supported by the Bible. You did not read the bible in detail, boy. Welcome to the dark-side.

    https://www.haaretz.com/word-of-the-day-kakhol-1.5331764 "You may be surprised to find out that such a prevalent color appearing in sea and sky goes unnamed in the Hebrew Bible, nor is it mentioned in the Mishnah and Talmud. ... What about tekhelet, you ask? Well, while tekhlet in modern Hebrew means "light blue" (like the Russian word goluboy) - in Biblical times it referred to a dye made of a liquid extracted from a kind of sea urchin, which was purple."

    > ‘”If you were to say “The sky is green”’

    In Biblical times green covered a range of colors.

    Oh, of course. If you were to say “The sky is green”, you really mean to say “The sky is many colors.” And you would be right, as the sky is many colors.

    I am not concerned in the slightest with what points you miss.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. The forum furors over IQ, sliced and diced, cubed and chopped, leave me with an absolute sense of wonder at the focused myopia (how’s that for metaphor?) of obsessive preoccupation with trivia.

    Perhaps you all could come up with a method of attaching GPS coordinates to IQ scores, as some sort of midpoint intersection of global points of genetic origin. You know, put some real meaning into it! Real information! Useful information! Location!!

    Then you can all sit around the campfire and fart green plumes, since you ain’t gonna do jack-shit about IQ scores, now are you? Not a goddamned thing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  144. res says:
    @utu
    Braess's paradox which is really interesting cannot occur in any network of natural flows of electricity or liquids, I think. Possibly in case of nonlinearities like turbulences somebody could envision something like the paradox, but I doubt.

    I think.

    That was a wise qualification.

    Physical proof of the occurrence of the Braess Paradox in electrical circuits

    http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/115/28004/meta

    The Braess Paradox and Its Impact on Natural-Gas-Network Performance

    https://www.onepetro.org/journal-paper/SPE-160142-PA

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    http://lab.rockefeller.edu/cohenje/assets/file/185CohenHorowitzNature1991.pdf
    http://www.personal.psu.edu/sab51/braess_paradox.pdf
    https://supernet.isenberg.umass.edu/visuals/Nagurney-Nagurney-BP-Euro-Poznan.pdf

    Now I do not know what to think. Is it perhaps trivial?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. FKA Max says:
    @res
    Two thoughts.

    1. I think it is good to distinguish between studies looking at "normal" conditions and those looking at abnormal (e.g. low birth weight) conditions. The "normal" case usually has much more potential for explaining variance in the larger population. The abnormal condition studies may expose good opportunities for intervention though.

    2. I am very leery of studies which claim to prove nurture is more important of nature. They very rarely even allow for the possibility that there are genetic racial differences. And often they don't even allow for systematic racial phenotypic differences (e.g. not controlling for race as a variable).

    Also:

    The IQs of urban children, regardless of birth weight, declined from age 6 years to age 11 years.
     
    This is exactly what I would expect if Blacks have different developmental trajectories and they are taking IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory (and yes, I mean averages). Though the limited change from 11 to 17 does not accord with my reading of the Jensen excerpt.

    This is exactly what I would expect if Blacks have different developmental trajectories and they are taking IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory…

    What do you attribute it to? The earlier onset of puberty?

    What I would expect if it were a genetically caused widening, is that the black IQ test scores stay stable and the whites ones would increase, not for the black IQ test scores to drop and the white ones to stay stable, but I guess it is just a matter of perspective and definition, as you said, you suspect this phenomenon is due to “IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory”, but it is just difficult for me to imagine, since it feels so counter-intuitive, that someone’s IQ test score is dropping/decreasing while their brain is growing and their knowledge is expanding.

    You have probably seen this comprehensive post already, which favors a stable B-W IQ test score gap explanation, but I am just going to share it here in case other readers and commenters would like to explore this topic more in depth. Mr. Thompson actually commented on that post:

    Dr James Thompson

    June 4, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    Excellent detailed work, and very useful. Thanks for all the hours this must have taken.

    https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/#comment-244

    The Onset and Development of B-W Ability Differences: Early Infancy to Age 3 (Part 1)

    https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/ Archived link: http://archive.is/7eukb

    Farkas & Beron (2004) used longitudinal data from the CNLSY to track children’s scores on the PPVT from early childhood through junior highschool. They showed that PPVT gaps were at least 1 SD at age 3, and do not continue to grow after children enter kindergarten, or as they progress through school (Figure II).

    Figure II: Stable IQ gap from ages 3 to 13 in the CNLSY

    This post adds evidence relevant to these interrelated issues by confirming for the first time that a gap of 1 full standard deviation is already apparent on IQ tests at 36 months of age, and that there has been no obvious convergence in this early performance difference over time.

    If there is a 1 SD gap at age 3, this precludes an IQ gap that has room to grow much wider during school, unless A) the B-W school age gap is larger than we previously thought, or B) the IQ gap actually shrinks between ages 4-6, and then grows wider again later on. Neither of these theories is particularly compelling.

    This also form the post:

    Much like Fryer & Levitt (2004), Dickens & Flynn (2006a) argue that performance gaps have dramatically narrowed among young children since the 1980s, and that gaps grow much wider after children enter school. Extrapolating from recent standardizations of the Stanford-Binet and Wechsler intelligence tests, Dickens and Flynn argue that the IQ gap among black and white four year olds since the year 2000 is only 4.6 points (.31σ). They even boldly state that “no recent data pose a serious challenge” to this estimate. (Dickens & Flynn, 2006b, p. 924)

    I actually agree with Flynn (the gap might be a little wider than 4.6 points though, maybe 7-8 points) and I believe later widening of the gap can be attributed to environmental/cultural factors, as elaborated on up-thread.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johan Meyer
    I suspect that if you were to take another old urban centre, but one with a larger white population, and you were to consider the white urban population separately from the black population, both would show IQ decreases with age, but the black population would show greater IQ decreases (genetically variable sensitivity to environment, hence heritability in twin studies; particularly greater uptake of Pb due to weak or missing bronze age), with smaller to absent IQ losses with age in younger (built post paint and petrol/gasoline Pb phase-out) neighborhoods.

    Sporadic poisoning makes any one measure of blood lead be unrepresentative of cumulative dose; biological half-life is 35 days in blood. Continuous dose, which would yield dose-representative blood lead is absent. Instead one gets hyperbolic (inverse-proportional) distribution of blood lead e.g. per CDC lead surveillance. Dose-representative blood lead would have a Gaussian distribution under continuous poisoning, and a near-uniform (flat) distribution under sporadic poisoning.

    , @FKA Max
    Here is the excerpt which makes me believe that under ideal/equal conditions the B-W IQ test score gap is about a 7 to 8 IQ points difference:

    Results

    I applied Flynn Effect adjustments to the data when possible, but the specific administration dates and test norms are not always reported. The weighted average IQ for the 14 disadvantaged black samples is 84.9, the average for the 16 normal samples is 86.5, and the average for the 5 privileged black samples is 99.4. The average IQ of all 35 samples is 86.7.
    [...]
    The 4 middle class white samples averaged an IQ of 106.6. This gives us a gap of 7.2 (.48σ) for the privileged samples. Similarly, the Early Head Start Project, the only sample with both disadvantaged blacks and whites, gives us an IQ gap of 7.8 (.52σ).
     

    - https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. utu says:
    @res

    I think.
     
    That was a wise qualification.

    Physical proof of the occurrence of the Braess Paradox in electrical circuits
    http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/115/28004/meta

    The Braess Paradox and Its Impact on Natural-Gas-Network Performance
    https://www.onepetro.org/journal-paper/SPE-160142-PA
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. @FKA Max

    This is exactly what I would expect if Blacks have different developmental trajectories and they are taking IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory...
     
    What do you attribute it to? The earlier onset of puberty?

    What I would expect if it were a genetically caused widening, is that the black IQ test scores stay stable and the whites ones would increase, not for the black IQ test scores to drop and the white ones to stay stable, but I guess it is just a matter of perspective and definition, as you said, you suspect this phenomenon is due to "IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory", but it is just difficult for me to imagine, since it feels so counter-intuitive, that someone's IQ test score is dropping/decreasing while their brain is growing and their knowledge is expanding.

    You have probably seen this comprehensive post already, which favors a stable B-W IQ test score gap explanation, but I am just going to share it here in case other readers and commenters would like to explore this topic more in depth. Mr. Thompson actually commented on that post:


    Dr James Thompson

    June 4, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    Excellent detailed work, and very useful. Thanks for all the hours this must have taken.
     

    - https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/#comment-244

    The Onset and Development of B-W Ability Differences: Early Infancy to Age 3 (Part 1)

    https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/ Archived link: http://archive.is/7eukb

    Farkas & Beron (2004) used longitudinal data from the CNLSY to track children’s scores on the PPVT from early childhood through junior highschool. They showed that PPVT gaps were at least 1 SD at age 3, and do not continue to grow after children enter kindergarten, or as they progress through school (Figure II).

    Figure II: Stable IQ gap from ages 3 to 13 in the CNLSY

    https://humanvarietiesdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/figure-21.png

    This post adds evidence relevant to these interrelated issues by confirming for the first time that a gap of 1 full standard deviation is already apparent on IQ tests at 36 months of age, and that there has been no obvious convergence in this early performance difference over time.

    If there is a 1 SD gap at age 3, this precludes an IQ gap that has room to grow much wider during school, unless A) the B-W school age gap is larger than we previously thought, or B) the IQ gap actually shrinks between ages 4-6, and then grows wider again later on. Neither of these theories is particularly compelling.

    This also form the post:


    Much like Fryer & Levitt (2004), Dickens & Flynn (2006a) argue that performance gaps have dramatically narrowed among young children since the 1980s, and that gaps grow much wider after children enter school. Extrapolating from recent standardizations of the Stanford-Binet and Wechsler intelligence tests, Dickens and Flynn argue that the IQ gap among black and white four year olds since the year 2000 is only 4.6 points (.31σ). They even boldly state that “no recent data pose a serious challenge” to this estimate. (Dickens & Flynn, 2006b, p. 924)
     
    I actually agree with Flynn (the gap might be a little wider than 4.6 points though, maybe 7-8 points) and I believe later widening of the gap can be attributed to environmental/cultural factors, as elaborated on up-thread.

    I suspect that if you were to take another old urban centre, but one with a larger white population, and you were to consider the white urban population separately from the black population, both would show IQ decreases with age, but the black population would show greater IQ decreases (genetically variable sensitivity to environment, hence heritability in twin studies; particularly greater uptake of Pb due to weak or missing bronze age), with smaller to absent IQ losses with age in younger (built post paint and petrol/gasoline Pb phase-out) neighborhoods.

    Sporadic poisoning makes any one measure of blood lead be unrepresentative of cumulative dose; biological half-life is 35 days in blood. Continuous dose, which would yield dose-representative blood lead is absent. Instead one gets hyperbolic (inverse-proportional) distribution of blood lead e.g. per CDC lead surveillance. Dose-representative blood lead would have a Gaussian distribution under continuous poisoning, and a near-uniform (flat) distribution under sporadic poisoning.

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

    Visually, at first blush, it looks like the pathways are open and running well in the brighter minds, because some part of intelligence is making or having the right connections with our available information, so no need to forge new links for the hi-Q types, where in the thicker set, those connections aren’t made — or there is inadequate energy, or perhaps blockage, even inflammation or other biochemical disorders or imbalances — and you can’t get here from there.

    And so there would seem to be ongoing but apparently futile attempts to make the right connections in the low-Q set, and we see these reflected in the bushy arborizations and branches, like many roads going nowhere.

    Ergo vs. Duh

    —————-

    nb: an celebratory session

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    The fake picture these manipulative fuckers

    Erhan Genç, Christoph Fraenz, Caroline Schlüter, Patrick Friedrich, Rüdiger Hossiep, Manuel C. Voelkle, Josef M. Ling, Onur Güntürkün & Rex E. Jung

    published is hard to shake off. This fuckers succeed with planting this suggestive meme in my mind. This meme is fake.

    It is really amazing that such fakery can be so successful. If they just succeeded fucking up the goner brain of res I would not mind even though I feel empathy for mono-neural creatures like res. But they succeeded with me and that makes me really upset. Just like salesmen in used car commercial. The same ethical level. But I do not care about cars. So these fuckers

    Erhan Genç, Christoph Fraenz, Caroline Schlüter, Patrick Friedrich, Rüdiger Hossiep, Manuel C. Voelkle, Josef M. Ling, Onur Güntürkün & Rex E. Jung

    will be remembered.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. annamaria says:
    @FKA Max


    [...] The interpretation of this age effect on the size of the W-B mean difference remains uncertain in this instance, as it is based entirely on cross-sectional rather than longitudinal data. Both kinds of data are needed to settle the issue. The cause of variation in the mean IQ of different age groups all tested within the same year (a cross-sectional study) may not be the same as the cause of variation (if any) in mean IQ of the same group of individuals when tested at different ages (a longitudinal study).
     
    Note Jensen’s point about the need for longitudinal studies. This is more in the line of evidence for a widening gap rather than proof of it.
     
    Thank you very much, res. This is great information.

    This actually strengthens my conviction that the widening is likelier due to environmental/cultural than genetic factors, i.e. educational attainment and attendance rates and length, etc.:

    Across 142 effect sizes from 42 data sets involving over 600,000 participants, we found consistent evidence for beneficial effects of education on cognitive abilities, of approximately 1 to 5 IQ points for an additional year of education.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/americas-cultural-revolution-the-obsession-with-self-esteem/#comment-2294222

    Everyone knows that public school officials in the American South violated the Supreme Court's separate-but-equal decision. But did the violations matter? Yes, enforcement of separate-but-equal would have narrowed racial differences in school attendance in the early twentieth century South. But separate-but-equal was not enough. Black children still would have attended school less often than white children because black parents were poorer and less literate than white parents.
     
    - https://www.jstor.org/stable/1935961

    https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/cffe1b6/2147483647/resize/970x/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.beam.usnews.com%2F25%2F82%2F75b76cc6444a934b3fa1391ce4a7%2F150106dataparentedu-graphic.png

    Source: https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/01/28/us-education-still-separate-and-unequal

    I don't know if you saw this comment of mine, yet, probably not:


    High Test Scores At A Nationally Lauded Charter Network, But At What Cost?

    https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/06/24/477345746/high-test-scores-at-a-nationally-lauded-charter-network-but-at-what-cost

    [Today there are 13 Rocketship schools, with 6,000 students, in the San Francisco Bay Area, Nashville, Tenn., and Milwaukee, with one scheduled to open in Washington, D.C., this fall. The students, largely low-income and Hispanic, outperform their peers on state tests.]
    [...]
    [Independent research commissioned by Rocketship also shows students' test score gains persisting after leaving the schools, into middle school.]
    [...]
    However, several of the current and former staffers said, and one provided internal emails indicating, that teachers habitually had students retake portions of standardized tests — especially the NWEA tests. Borja and other staffers suggested this was done in an attempt to raise scores tied to teacher bonuses.

    Retaking can inflate scores on certain tests “a massive amount,” says Andrew Ho, a student measurement expert at Harvard’s Graduate School of Education. Of course, there are computer glitches and other mitigating circumstances where a do-over is fair game. But in general, he added, “it should be painfully obvious that whenever there is an incentive for teachers and administrators to increase scores … retests should be recorded, monitored and tracked.”
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-meet-the-renegades-of-the-intellectual-dark-web/#comment-2324975

    The powerful psychopaths are successful at diluting the academic standards by inserting the useful friends (however dirty) and useful idiots (however unqualified) on the important academic positions.
    Here are two spectacular cases in point when a scoundrel and an ignoramus received important academic appointments in the UK:
    1. Stefan Halper, “a long-time CIA operative with extensive links to the Bush family who was responsible for a dirty and likely illegal spying operation in the 1980 presidential election” has been teaching in Cambridge (whoa!) https://theintercept.com/2018/05/19/the-fbi-informant-who-monitored-the-trump-campaign-stefan-halper-oversaw-a-cia-spying-operation-in-the-1980-presidential-election/
    2. Elliot Higgins who “had no formal intelligence training, could not speak or read Arabic, had never set foot in the Middle East” and who had never studied engineering and chemistry, is nevertheless considered as an important expert in all the above (intelligence, Middle East, engineering, and chemistry) by the “thinkers” at the Department of War Studies at King’s College London: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/warstudies/people/visiting/higgins.aspx https://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/principal/Indexnew.aspx

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    1. Stefan Halper, “a long-time CIA operative with extensive links to the Bush family who was responsible for a dirty and likely illegal spying operation in the 1980 presidential election” has been teaching in Cambridge (whoa!)
     
    And he' still there,

    And if the CIA has spies at Cambridge, they will surely have them at Oxford, a much more political university than Cambridge. So who are the Oxford spies and agents? Theresa May? She's an Oxford grad, like that scoundrel Blair.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. utu says:
    @Sparkon
    Visually, at first blush, it looks like the pathways are open and running well in the brighter minds, because some part of intelligence is making or having the right connections with our available information, so no need to forge new links for the hi-Q types, where in the thicker set, those connections aren't made -- or there is inadequate energy, or perhaps blockage, even inflammation or other biochemical disorders or imbalances -- and you can't get here from there.

    And so there would seem to be ongoing but apparently futile attempts to make the right connections in the low-Q set, and we see these reflected in the bushy arborizations and branches, like many roads going nowhere.

    Ergo vs. Duh


    ----------------

    nb: an celebratory session

    The fake picture these manipulative fuckers

    Erhan Genç, Christoph Fraenz, Caroline Schlüter, Patrick Friedrich, Rüdiger Hossiep, Manuel C. Voelkle, Josef M. Ling, Onur Güntürkün & Rex E. Jung

    published is hard to shake off. This fuckers succeed with planting this suggestive meme in my mind. This meme is fake.

    It is really amazing that such fakery can be so successful. If they just succeeded fucking up the goner brain of res I would not mind even though I feel empathy for mono-neural creatures like res. But they succeeded with me and that makes me really upset. Just like salesmen in used car commercial. The same ethical level. But I do not care about cars. So these fuckers

    Erhan Genç, Christoph Fraenz, Caroline Schlüter, Patrick Friedrich, Rüdiger Hossiep, Manuel C. Voelkle, Josef M. Ling, Onur Güntürkün & Rex E. Jung

    will be remembered.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    Re: "will be remembered."

    Most of those guys are probably just hypnotized victims.

    The guy Jung is really something, though: take a look at his cv. . Millions for brain scans from the Templeton Foundation, Darpa, Department of Defense, National Institute of Mental Health, etc., etc.

    Amazing. Next, he'll likely be running a hedge fund.

    And don't forget the Editor of Nature. Nature a commercial enterprise, will publish anything that'll turn heads. And they rarely if ever publish rebuttals.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. FKA Max says:
    @FKA Max

    This is exactly what I would expect if Blacks have different developmental trajectories and they are taking IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory...
     
    What do you attribute it to? The earlier onset of puberty?

    What I would expect if it were a genetically caused widening, is that the black IQ test scores stay stable and the whites ones would increase, not for the black IQ test scores to drop and the white ones to stay stable, but I guess it is just a matter of perspective and definition, as you said, you suspect this phenomenon is due to "IQ tests normed for a white developmental trajectory", but it is just difficult for me to imagine, since it feels so counter-intuitive, that someone's IQ test score is dropping/decreasing while their brain is growing and their knowledge is expanding.

    You have probably seen this comprehensive post already, which favors a stable B-W IQ test score gap explanation, but I am just going to share it here in case other readers and commenters would like to explore this topic more in depth. Mr. Thompson actually commented on that post:


    Dr James Thompson

    June 4, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    Excellent detailed work, and very useful. Thanks for all the hours this must have taken.
     

    - https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/#comment-244

    The Onset and Development of B-W Ability Differences: Early Infancy to Age 3 (Part 1)

    https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/ Archived link: http://archive.is/7eukb

    Farkas & Beron (2004) used longitudinal data from the CNLSY to track children’s scores on the PPVT from early childhood through junior highschool. They showed that PPVT gaps were at least 1 SD at age 3, and do not continue to grow after children enter kindergarten, or as they progress through school (Figure II).

    Figure II: Stable IQ gap from ages 3 to 13 in the CNLSY

    https://humanvarietiesdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/figure-21.png

    This post adds evidence relevant to these interrelated issues by confirming for the first time that a gap of 1 full standard deviation is already apparent on IQ tests at 36 months of age, and that there has been no obvious convergence in this early performance difference over time.

    If there is a 1 SD gap at age 3, this precludes an IQ gap that has room to grow much wider during school, unless A) the B-W school age gap is larger than we previously thought, or B) the IQ gap actually shrinks between ages 4-6, and then grows wider again later on. Neither of these theories is particularly compelling.

    This also form the post:


    Much like Fryer & Levitt (2004), Dickens & Flynn (2006a) argue that performance gaps have dramatically narrowed among young children since the 1980s, and that gaps grow much wider after children enter school. Extrapolating from recent standardizations of the Stanford-Binet and Wechsler intelligence tests, Dickens and Flynn argue that the IQ gap among black and white four year olds since the year 2000 is only 4.6 points (.31σ). They even boldly state that “no recent data pose a serious challenge” to this estimate. (Dickens & Flynn, 2006b, p. 924)
     
    I actually agree with Flynn (the gap might be a little wider than 4.6 points though, maybe 7-8 points) and I believe later widening of the gap can be attributed to environmental/cultural factors, as elaborated on up-thread.

    Here is the excerpt which makes me believe that under ideal/equal conditions the B-W IQ test score gap is about a 7 to 8 IQ points difference:

    Results

    I applied Flynn Effect adjustments to the data when possible, but the specific administration dates and test norms are not always reported. The weighted average IQ for the 14 disadvantaged black samples is 84.9, the average for the 16 normal samples is 86.5, and the average for the 5 privileged black samples is 99.4. The average IQ of all 35 samples is 86.7.
    [...]
    The 4 middle class white samples averaged an IQ of 106.6. This gives us a gap of 7.2 (.48σ) for the privileged samples. Similarly, the Early Head Start Project, the only sample with both disadvantaged blacks and whites, gives us an IQ gap of 7.8 (.52σ).

    https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu
    The fake picture these manipulative fuckers

    Erhan Genç, Christoph Fraenz, Caroline Schlüter, Patrick Friedrich, Rüdiger Hossiep, Manuel C. Voelkle, Josef M. Ling, Onur Güntürkün & Rex E. Jung

    published is hard to shake off. This fuckers succeed with planting this suggestive meme in my mind. This meme is fake.

    It is really amazing that such fakery can be so successful. If they just succeeded fucking up the goner brain of res I would not mind even though I feel empathy for mono-neural creatures like res. But they succeeded with me and that makes me really upset. Just like salesmen in used car commercial. The same ethical level. But I do not care about cars. So these fuckers

    Erhan Genç, Christoph Fraenz, Caroline Schlüter, Patrick Friedrich, Rüdiger Hossiep, Manuel C. Voelkle, Josef M. Ling, Onur Güntürkün & Rex E. Jung

    will be remembered.

    Re: “will be remembered.”

    Most of those guys are probably just hypnotized victims.

    The guy Jung is really something, though: take a look at his cv. . Millions for brain scans from the Templeton Foundation, Darpa, Department of Defense, National Institute of Mental Health, etc., etc.

    Amazing. Next, he’ll likely be running a hedge fund.

    And don’t forget the Editor of Nature. Nature a commercial enterprise, will publish anything that’ll turn heads. And they rarely if ever publish rebuttals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @annamaria
    The powerful psychopaths are successful at diluting the academic standards by inserting the useful friends (however dirty) and useful idiots (however unqualified) on the important academic positions.
    Here are two spectacular cases in point when a scoundrel and an ignoramus received important academic appointments in the UK:
    1. Stefan Halper, "a long-time CIA operative with extensive links to the Bush family who was responsible for a dirty and likely illegal spying operation in the 1980 presidential election" has been teaching in Cambridge (whoa!) https://theintercept.com/2018/05/19/the-fbi-informant-who-monitored-the-trump-campaign-stefan-halper-oversaw-a-cia-spying-operation-in-the-1980-presidential-election/
    2. Elliot Higgins who "had no formal intelligence training, could not speak or read Arabic, had never set foot in the Middle East" and who had never studied engineering and chemistry, is nevertheless considered as an important expert in all the above (intelligence, Middle East, engineering, and chemistry) by the "thinkers" at the Department of War Studies at King’s College London: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/warstudies/people/visiting/higgins.aspx https://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/principal/Indexnew.aspx

    1. Stefan Halper, “a long-time CIA operative with extensive links to the Bush family who was responsible for a dirty and likely illegal spying operation in the 1980 presidential election” has been teaching in Cambridge (whoa!)

    And he’ still there,

    And if the CIA has spies at Cambridge, they will surely have them at Oxford, a much more political university than Cambridge. So who are the Oxford spies and agents? Theresa May? She’s an Oxford grad, like that scoundrel Blair.

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

Leave a Reply -


 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