The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Peter Frost ArchiveBlogview
No, Blacks Aren't All Alike. Who Said They Were?
In 1915, Paul Robeson became the third African American ever enrolled at Rutgers College, being one of four students selected for its Cap and Skull honor society. His father was of Igbo descent .  Credit: Wikimedia Commons
In 1915, Paul Robeson became the third African American ever enrolled at Rutgers College, being one of four students selected for its Cap and Skull honor society. His father was of Igbo descent . Credit: Wikimedia Commons
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Chanda Chisala has written another piece on IQ and African immigrants to the UK:

One of the biggest problems I had with the commenters were readers who apparently were only exposed to the statistical concept of Regression to the Mean from outside the IQ debate. [...]. The problem is not that the black immigrant children were not regressing to the point of equaling their source population mean IQ (that’s also not what hereditarians predict either), but that they were clearly not even moving (or being pulled) towards that extremely low IQ, as hereditarians predict.

The correct term is not “regression to the mean.” It’s “non-inheritance of acquired characteristics.” In other words, each person has a single genotype and a range of possible phenotypes. A culture can push its members to either limit of this range, thus creating a phenotype unlike that of other people with the same genetic endowment. But this phenotype has to be recreated with each succeeding generation. For instance, there used to be a Chinese custom of binding a girl’s foot to make it four inches long and of limited use for walking. When the custom was outlawed, the next generation of women had normal feet. The phenotype bounced back to its initial form, so to speak, much like an elastic band when you stop stretching it (see note 1).

Regression to the mean is something else. It happens because ofgenetic change. For instance, a man with above-average IQ will likely marry a woman with above-average IQ. But only part of their above-averageness is genetic. The rest is due to favorable circumstances. Or simply luck. So their children’s IQ will likely be a bit closer to the mean of the overall population. That second generation will in turn marry people with similar IQs. And their children will likewise be closer still to the population mean. Eventually, several generations later, the descendants of that original couple will have a mean IQ that matches the population mean.

That’s regression to the mean. It’s a multigenerational genetic change. It’s not what happens when genes stay constant and culture changes.

Chanda is really talking about what happens when a culture stops pushing people to excel. The phenotype reverts to its usual state and the pressure to excel comes only from within. This is a legitimate argument, and it may have great explanatory value. When people from certain cultures move to Western countries, the second and third generations do a lot worse than the first generation over many indicators—academic achievement, crime rates, family stability, etc. This is a frequent outcome when people move from an environment where behavior is tightly controlled by family and community to one where behavior is much more self-controlled.

Such social atomization is less toxic for people of Northwest European descent because they have adapted to it over a longer time. For at least the past millennium, they have had weaker kinship ties and stronger tendencies toward individualism than any other human population. This cultural environment has favored individuals who rely less on external means of behavior control and more on internal means, specifically guilt proneness and affective empathy (Frost, 2014).

But that isn’t Chanda’s argument. That’s the argument he attributes to something called “the HBD position.” In reality, there are at least three HBD positions:

1. African immigrants to the UK perform better than whites academically because they are a select group, either because they have elite backgrounds or because they tend to be more motivated than the people who stay behind.

2. African immigrants perform better than whites academically, but this academic performance is weakly linked to the heritable component of IQ, especially in modern Britain. Teachers tend to “over-reward” black students who satisfy basic requirements (regular attendance, assignments turned in on time, non-disruptive behavior, etc.). African parents also invest in private tutoring to improve exam results.

3. Most African immigrants perform worse than whites academically. Only certain African groups excel, notably the Igbo of Nigeria. Igbo excellence is due to their specific evolutionary history and cannot be generalized to all sub-Saharan Africans.

Are African immigrants better than the Africans left behind?

Chanda attacks the first argument, saying that the average African immigrant is very average:

I actually know that the average African immigrants to the UK from any nation or tribe are not from the African elite class, economically or intellectually (even if there is a small segment from the super-professional class)

He also points to the example of African American families. The children of middle-class and even upper-class African Americans do worse on IQ tests than the children of lower-class Euro-American families. So even if you select from the black elite, the next generation will still underperform whites.

One could counter that the African American middle class largely works for the government. In Africa, the middle class is more likely to be self-made men and women. Also, a selection effect may exist despite the averageness of most African immigrants to the UK. Even if most are average, it may be that fewer are below-average. Below a certain level of ability, many Africans may not bother to emigrate.

Fuerst (2014) has studied this question and found that black immigrants to the U.S. have a mean IQ that is one third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries. So there is a selection effect. But it seems too weak to explain the difference in IQ—more than one standard deviation and possibly two—between African immigrants to the UK and Africans back home, unless one assumes that migration to the UK is a lot more selective than migration to the US.

What does the GCSE actually measure?

We now come to the second explanation. It is assumed in this debate that the GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) is a good proxy for IQ, which in turn is a proxy for the heritable component of intelligence. Is this true? Or does the GCSE largely measure something that is culturally acquired rather than heritable? Perhaps something as simple as showing up for class, doing one’s assignments, or having a private tutor. This point is raised by one commenter:

[...] black Africans in London, even if poor and living in social housing, hire private tutors for their children. White British do not, especially the working class. This much better explains the GCSE results, a very tuition friendly test [...]

Furthermore, many African immigrants may be targeting those exams they can do best on and avoiding those they are less sure about:

[...] one needs to know how many children from each racial group take the exams. For example, the pass rate for Higher Mathematics is very high, not because the exams are easy, but because they are hard, and frighten off most applicants.

Interestingly, Chanda replies to this GCSE skepticism by pointing out that the same “Nigerians” (Igbos) who do well on the GCSE also do well in Nigeria:

For example, the subgroups within the Nigerian group that are the best in Nigeria or even in the US etc are also the best on the GCSEs. Also, the Traveller white (or whatever precise race) groups are placed by the GCSEs exactly where you would expect to find them.

The Igbo factor

This brings us to the third explanation. It’s the one I favor, although the other two probably play a role. African excellence in the UK seems largely driven by a single high-performing people: the Igbo of southeastern Nigeria. Let’s begin with the example of Harold Ekeh, whom Chanda describes in glowing terms:

Harold Ekeh showing off his acceptance letters to all 8 Ivy League Schools. He was born in Nigeria and migrated with his parents at age 8.

Ekeh is an Igbo name, and the Igbo (formerly known as Ibo) have a long history of academic success within Nigeria (Frost, 2015). Chanda himself referred to this success in his first article:

The superior Igbo achievement on GCSEs is not new and has been noted in studies that came before the recent media discovery of African performance. A 2007 report on “case study” model schools in Lambeth also included a rare disclosure of specified Igbo performance (recorded as Ibo in the table below) and it confirms that Igbos have been performing exceptionally well for a long time (5 + A*-C GCSEs); in fact, it is difficult to find a time when they ever performed below British whites. (Chisala, 2015a)

This superior achievement was widely known in Nigeria by the time of independence:

All over Nigeria, Ibos filled urban jobs at every level far out of proportion to their numbers, as laborers and domestic servants, as bureaucrats, corporate managers, and technicians. Two-thirds of the senior jobs in the Nigerian Railway Corporation were held by Ibos. Three-quarters of Nigeria’s diplomats came from the Eastern Region. So did almost half of the 4,500 students graduating from Nigerian universities in 1966. The Ibos became known as the “Jews of Africa,” despised—and envied—for their achievements and acquisitiveness. (Baker, 1980)

The term “Jews of Africa” recurs often in the literature. Henry Kissinger used it back in the 1960s:

The Ibos are the wandering Jews of West Africa — gifted, aggressive, Westernized; at best envied and resented, but mostly despised by the mass of their neighbors in the Federation.(Kissinger, 1969)

To what degree is African success Igbo success? If we go back to Chanda’s first article, we see that high African achievers are overwhelmingly “Nigerians” (Chisala, 2015a). This is evident in a chart that lists mean % difference from the mean English GCSE score in 2010-2011 by ethnicity:

Nigerian: +21.8

Ghanaian: +5.5
Sierra Leone: +1.4
Somali: -23.7
Congolese: -35.3

Clearly, high academic achievement is due to something that is very much present in Nigeria, a little bit in Ghana, and not at all in Somalia and Congo. Could this something be the Igbo? The Igbo make up 18% of Nigeria’s population and form a large diaspora elsewhere in West Africa and farther afield. In fact, they seem to be disproportionately represented in overseas Nigerian communities, making up most of the Nigerian community in Japan and a large portion of China’s Nigerian community (Wikipedia, 2015). Statistics are unfortunately lacking for the UK.

Conclusion

What happens when we remove Igbo students from the GCSE results? How well do the other Africans do? To some degree, Chanda answered that question in his first article. African excellence seems to be overwhelmingly Igbo excellence.

So why doesn’t he speak of Igbo excellence? Probably because he assumes that all sub-Saharan Africans are fundamentally the same. Or maybe he assumes that all humans are fundamentally the same. Both assumptions are wrong, and neither can be construed as an “HBD position.”

We are all genetically different, even within our own families. So why the surprise that different African peoples are … different? The Igbo have for a long time specialized in a trading lifestyle that favors a certain mental toolkit: future time orientation; numeracy, and abstract reasoning. This is gene-culture coevolution. When circumstances push people to excel in a certain way, there will be selection for people who can naturally excel in that way, without the prodding of circumstances. And it doesn’t take eons of time for such evolution to work.

Will we hear more about the Igbo in this debate? Probably not. There is a strong desire, especially in the United Kingdom, to show that blacks are converging toward white norms of behavior, including academic performance. There is indeed some convergence, but almost all of it can be traced to the growing numbers of high-performing “Nigerians” (Igbos) and the growing numbers of biracial children (the census now has a mixed-race category, but most biracial people still self-identify as “black”). In the UK, 55% of Black Caribbean men and 40% of Black Caribbean women have a partner from another ethnic background. It’s very likely that half of all “black” children in the UK are at least half-white by ancestry (Platt, 2009, p. 7).

Nor is it likely that we’ll hear more about the Igbo from Chanda. As he sees it, the debate should be over. The academic excellence of Igbo students proves that the black/white IQ gap in the U.S. cannot have a genetic basis:

[It is not] a function of global racial evolution (Sub-Saharan African genes versus European genes), as most hereditarians believe, especially those who identify with the Human Biodiversity or HBD intellectual movement (generally known as “scientific racism” in academic circles, but we are avoiding such unkind terms).

Thank you, Chanda, for avoiding unkind terms. Well, I know a bit about HBD. The term was coined by Steve Sailer in the late 1990s for an email discussion group that included myself and various academics who may or may not want their names disclosed. It’s hard to generalize but we were all influenced by findings that genetic evolution didn’t slow down as cultural evolution speeded up in our species. In fact, the two seemed to feed into each other. This is why genetic evolution accelerated over 100-fold about 10,000 years ago when humans began to abandon hunting and gathering for farming, which in turn led to ever more diverse societies. Our ancestors thus adapted much more to their cultural environments than to their natural environments. These findings were already circulating within our discussion group before being written up in a paper by Hawks et al. (2007) and later in a book by Greg Cochran and Henry Harpending (2009).

Yes, previously it was thought that genetic evolution slowed to a crawl with the advent of culture. Therefore, groups like the Igbo couldn’t possibly differ genetically from other sub-Saharan Africans, at least not for anything culture-related. But that kind of thinking wasn’t HBD or even racialist. It was simply the old anthropological narrative, and it’s still accepted by many anthropologists, most of whom aren’t “scientific racists.”

Oh sorry, I forgot we promised to avoid that term.

Note

(1) Of course, if the cultural pressure is maintained long enough, there may be selection for individuals who naturally produce the new phenotype—with no prodding and pushing. Let’s suppose that foot binding had never been outlawed in China. Through chance mutations, some Chinese women might be born with tiny feet, and their descendants would become more and more numerous because of their better life prospects. So what began as a new phenotype could end up becoming a new genotype. Culture pushes the limits of phenotypic plasticity, and then favors genotypes that don’t have to be pushed. That’s gene-culture coevolution.

References

Baker, P.H. (1980). Lurching toward unity, The Wilson Quarterly,4, 70-80
http://archive.wilsonquarterly.com/sites/default/files/articles/WQ_VOL4_W_1980_Article_01_2.pdf

Chisala, C. (2015b). Closing the Black-White IQ gap debate. Part I,The Unz Review, October 5
http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-i/

Chisala, C. (2015a). The IQ gap is no longer a black and white issue, The Unz Review, June 25
http://www.unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/

Cochran, G. and H. Harpending. (2009). The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilizations Accelerated Human Evolution, Basic Books, New York.

Frost, P. (2015). The Jews of West Africa? Evo and Proud, July 4
http://www.unz.com/pfrost/the-jews-of-west-africa/

Frost, P. (2014). How universal is empathy? Evo and Proud, June 28
http://www.unz.com/pfrost/how-universal-is-empathy/

Fuerst, J. (2014). Ethnic/race differences in aptitude by generation in the United States: An exploratory meta-analysis, June 29, Open Differential Psychology
http://openpsych.net/ODP/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/U.S.-Ethnic-Race-Differences-in-Aptitude-by-Generation-An-Exploratory-Meta-analysis-John-Fuerst-2014-07262014FINAL.pdf

Hawks, J., E.T. Wang, G.M. Cochran, H.C. Harpending, and R.K. Moyzis. (2007). Recent acceleration of human adaptive evolution,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 104, 20753-20758.
http://harpending.humanevo.utah.edu/Documents/accel_pnas_submit.pdf

Kissinger, H.A. (1969). Memorandum, January 28. U.S. Department of State Archive
http://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/frus/nixon/e5/55258.htm

Platt, L. (2009). Ethnicity and family. Relationships within and between ethnic groups: An analysis using the Labour Force Survey. Equality and Human Rights Commission.
http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/documents/raceinbritain/ethnicity_and_family_report.pdf

Wikipedia (2015). Igbo people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igbo_people

(Republished from Evo and Proud by permission of author or representative)
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Of Related Interest
Bronze vessel in the form of a snail shell, 9th century, Igbo-Ukwu. The Igbo developed metallurgy much earlier than the rest of West Africa. Credit: Wikimedia Commons
Justus Williams, a son of low-income Black immigrants, wins the prestigious US Junior Chess Open. Williams is more famous in chess circles for embarrassing world champion Magnus Carlsen in a friendly game (when Williams was 14 years old!)
Differential Racial and Gender Canalization Explains Group Intellectual Differences.
    []
  1. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Smarter or dumber, blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men.

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.

    THAT is the main reason why the West should oppose the arrival of more blacks.

    Suppose every African migrant to Europe had an IQ of 150. Would that be any better?

    No, the Negroes will gain not only physical but intellectual/economic power over whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Threecranes
    "blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men"

    Your favorite theme.

    And yet we white boys beat the negro's butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one's brain pounded into hash?
    , @Stephen R. Diamond

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.
     
    Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?
    , @Khan Bodin
    Hey, retard! Negroes will never have an average IQ of 90 let alone 150! Negroes are slightly physically stronger built due to thousands of years of breeding habbits (you see, Negroes have always had physical contests when determining who is going to mate with their women, unlike Caucasian and Asian women who have valued different vitues, i.e. the "sphere" of mind shall we say, when determining their mating partners; also, Africa is very hot place, and when you are exposed to extreme heat you tend not to have much fat; on the other hand, Caucasians and Asians inhabiting northern latitudes need to have some fat if they want to survive, so you see there are cultural and environmental aspects of the story). As for your liberal Western (especially Anglo) women, meh, you made whores out of them and they are doin g what they know best -- whoring themselves. It is also cultural aspect on the work here, you see. After all, you Werstern libtards have made yourselves that way. You weren't always so whorish, arrogant and stupid (an ideal environment for the Negro!). Sometime ago you were family oriented, god-fearing humans, nowadays, though, you are just scum. :)
    , @johans
    Did you watch any Glory or MMA lately?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/pfrost/no-blacks-arent-all-alike-who-said-they-were/#comment-1181051
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. He also points to the example of African American families. The children of middle-class and even upper-class African Americans do worse on IQ tests than the children of lower-class Euro-American families. So even if you select from the black elite, the next generation will still underperform whites.

    This claim is wrong, see my response to Chisala’s article:

    https://jasonbayz.wordpress.com/2015/10/05/response-to-closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-i-by-chanda-chisala/

    Read More
  3. I imagine most of us remember the students in school with the highest GPA or who ran for student body president etc. They were typically rewarded by gaining admission to better colleges but after that did they shine in the real world to the same degree? While they would have above average incomes and tend to have more prestigious positions these would be the residue of their academic
    credentials and conformist behavior not any superior talents or abilities. You go to Stanford or Dartmouth your degree lifts you a notch or two above where your actual skill set may get you. OTOH it won’t carry you to the top.

    Now I learn from Mr. Frost’s article that the Igbo ( known to me as Ibo from a nasty civil war ) are 18% of Nigeria’s population with a substantial diaspora in West Africa and beyond. This would indicate that they number in Nigeria alone more than 30 million people or about the population of Canada and 50% more than Taiwan. Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Insightful

    Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists...
     
    Nigerian Student Ufot Ekong Breaks 50 Year Record In Japan

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/06/08/nigerian-student-ufot-ekong-solves-30-year-old-maths-equation_n_7533358.html

    A Nigerian student has achieved the highest grades at a Japanese university for the past 50 years, while solving a mathematical equation which was unsolvable 30 years ago, in his first semester.
    Ufot Ekong achieved a first in electrical engineering at Tokai University in Tokyo, scoring the best marks since 1965, CCTV Africa reported.
    Ekong, from Lagos, also plays the saxophone, and runs a retail wears and accessories shop in Japan called Strictly African Japan.
    The Nigerian speaks English, French, Japanese and Yoruba, his country's native language, and paid his way through university himself.
    He currently works for Nissan and has already patented two products, as well as making an electric car which reaches up to 128 kmph.
    During his time at university, Ekong has won six awards for academic excellence.

    See more:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/06/08/nigerian-student-ufot-ekong-solves-30-year-old-maths-equation_n_7533358.html
    , @Irving
    Nobody said that the Igbo are as bright as the Swedes or the Han Chinese, so the fact that they've yet to create a "research in motion" is irrelevant.
    , @europeasant
    you made me laugh which is getting very difficult lately!
    , @Kat Grey
    Yes where are their Newtons and Galileos lurking?
  4. @unit472
    I imagine most of us remember the students in school with the highest GPA or who ran for student body president etc. They were typically rewarded by gaining admission to better colleges but after that did they shine in the real world to the same degree? While they would have above average incomes and tend to have more prestigious positions these would be the residue of their academic
    credentials and conformist behavior not any superior talents or abilities. You go to Stanford or Dartmouth your degree lifts you a notch or two above where your actual skill set may get you. OTOH it won't carry you to the top.

    Now I learn from Mr. Frost's article that the Igbo ( known to me as Ibo from a nasty civil war ) are 18% of Nigeria's population with a substantial diaspora in West Africa and beyond. This would indicate that they number in Nigeria alone more than 30 million people or about the population of Canada and 50% more than Taiwan. Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists…

    Nigerian Student Ufot Ekong Breaks 50 Year Record In Japan

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/06/08/nigerian-student-ufot-ekong-solves-30-year-old-maths-equation_n_7533358.html

    A Nigerian student has achieved the highest grades at a Japanese university for the past 50 years, while solving a mathematical equation which was unsolvable 30 years ago, in his first semester.
    Ufot Ekong achieved a first in electrical engineering at Tokai University in Tokyo, scoring the best marks since 1965, CCTV Africa reported.
    Ekong, from Lagos, also plays the saxophone, and runs a retail wears and accessories shop in Japan called Strictly African Japan.
    The Nigerian speaks English, French, Japanese and Yoruba, his country’s native language, and paid his way through university himself.
    He currently works for Nissan and has already patented two products, as well as making an electric car which reaches up to 128 kmph.
    During his time at university, Ekong has won six awards for academic excellence.

    See more:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/06/08/nigerian-student-ufot-ekong-solves-30-year-old-maths-equation_n_7533358.html

    Read More
  5. @unit472
    I imagine most of us remember the students in school with the highest GPA or who ran for student body president etc. They were typically rewarded by gaining admission to better colleges but after that did they shine in the real world to the same degree? While they would have above average incomes and tend to have more prestigious positions these would be the residue of their academic
    credentials and conformist behavior not any superior talents or abilities. You go to Stanford or Dartmouth your degree lifts you a notch or two above where your actual skill set may get you. OTOH it won't carry you to the top.

    Now I learn from Mr. Frost's article that the Igbo ( known to me as Ibo from a nasty civil war ) are 18% of Nigeria's population with a substantial diaspora in West Africa and beyond. This would indicate that they number in Nigeria alone more than 30 million people or about the population of Canada and 50% more than Taiwan. Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    Nobody said that the Igbo are as bright as the Swedes or the Han Chinese, so the fact that they’ve yet to create a “research in motion” is irrelevant.

    Read More
  6. So if we “took a number of black American elites to the UK as expatriate workers, selected only from those professionals who make 200,000 dollars a year in their homes” we should expect their children to score similar to White Britons,

    Very few African immigrants to the UK make 200,000 dollars a year. Very, very, very few. You need to get out and meet a few African immigrants. Most of them aren’t elite individuals, and many are dirt-poor.

    John Fuerst looked into this question and found a weak selection effect. African immigrants to the U.S. are about a third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries.

    Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    The Igbo live in a country that is run by non-Igbo. That’s why they wanted to separate and create their own country. It would be interesting to see how well Biafra would have turned out, but we will never know.

    As individuals, Igbo do very well, but they have to succeed in a society where corruption is the norm. It’s so normal that most Nigerians don’t consider it to be corruption. It’s just the sort of thing you’re supposed to do. For this reason, Igbo do a lot better in meritocratic societies like the United Kingdom than in Nigeria. It’s sad but true.

    For what it’s worth, there are Igbo of international renown. See:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Igbo_people#Science

    Read More
    • Replies: @Deduction

    Very few African immigrants to the UK make 200,000 dollars a year. Very, very, very few. You need to get out and meet a few African immigrants. Most of them aren’t elite individuals, and many are dirt-poor
     
    Quite a lot have parents who make more than 200,000 dollars a year.

    Considering that the only black students you meet at private boarding schools were born in Africa and that the schools cost 70,000 dollars a year, that fact is certain.

    It's true that since these individuals often end up living hybrid lifestyles where they probably have their home in Nigeria but jet to the UK for the careers and amenities they may not be classified as immigrants...

    John Fuerst looked into this question and found a weak selection effect. African immigrants to the U.S. are about a third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries.
     
    This is interesting but I can't believe it. Everyone seems to want to use a western definition of elite. A term that would be applied to the group I mention above.

    But in Africa living as a peasant in a village or in an urban slum is the numerical norm, the strong majority in fact.

    None of the Africans I have met come from that background. Surely escaping the slum or leaving the village has already exerted a very significant selection effect?

    After all, having an indoor toilet in Nigeria is as elite for Nigeria as going to private school in the UK is for us British...and none of the Nigerian immigrants to the UK had no electricity or indoor plumbing back home.

    About 70 percent of Nigerians live in villages without indoor plumbing and electricity. Women and children have to walk up to half a mile to draw drinking water from a water source.

    Roughly 10 percent of British children attend private fee paying high school equivalents. If you break down the urban population in Nigeria to two thirds slum and one third proper buildings then you reach that same percentage.

    In Nigeria having indoor plumbing means that you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth.

    Read more: http://www.everyculture.com/wc/Mauritania-to-Nigeria/Nigerians.html#ixzz3oFEZAG00
    , @Deduction

    As individuals, Igbo do very well, but they have to succeed in a society where corruption is the norm. It’s so normal that most Nigerians don’t consider it to be corruption. It’s just the sort of thing you’re supposed to do. For this reason, Igbo do a lot better in meritocratic societies like the United Kingdom than in Nigeria. It’s sad but true.
     
    A couple of guys I know identify so much with Jews in Europe that they actually offer up a comparison with the Ibo and claim a genuine group descent.
    , @Immigrant from former USSR
    Dear Dr. Frost:
    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD.
    However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Igbo_people#Science
    This “Science” section refers to 7 different persons.
    4 of them may be related to “hard sciences”. All info below is from Wikipedia, unless stated otherwise.

    Bisi Ezerioha (born January 6, 1972) a.k.a. Ndubisi Ezerioha, is a professional racing driver, engine builder, engineer, and industrialist. Dr. Emesia Ezerioha holds bachelor's degrees in Earth sciences and Geology from California State University, Los Angeles, Master's degrees in Earth Science and Economics and a doctorate in International Marketing.

    Chike Obi (April 17, 1921 – March 13, 2008) was a Nigerian politician, mathematician and professor.
    Obi was educated in various parts of Nigeria before reading mathematics as an external student of the University of London. Immediately after his first degree, he won a scholarship to do research study at Pembroke College, Cambridge, followed by doctoral studies at Massachusetts Institute of Technology[citation needed] in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States, becoming in 1950, the first Nigerian to receive a PhD in mathematics. In 1997, Obi claimed to have found an elementary proof to Fermat’s Last Theorem. This work was carried out at his Nanna Institute for Scientific Studies in Onitsha, Eastern Nigeria and published in Algebras, Groups and Geometries.[1][2][3] A review of this proof published in Mathematical Reviews that Obi's proof is a previously-known false proof.[4][5] Fermat’s Last Theorem had already been solved in 1994 by Andrew Wiles and Richard Taylor.

    Bartholomew Nnaji was born in 1956 in Enugu State, and earned a Bachelor of Science degree in physics at St John's University, and then proceeded to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University for post-graduate studies. He joined the faculty at University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1983 [IffU: apparently without getting Ph.D. degree.]

    Philip Emeagwali (born in 1954) is a Nigerian-born engineer, mathematician, computer scientist and geologist. He was the winner of the 1989 Gordon Bell Prize in the "price/performance" category, for his use of a Connection Machine supercomputer, and has a 190 IQ.[1][2]. Source:
    [1]: http://emeagwali.com/biography/for-kids/ten-smartest-scientists-of-all-times.pdf
    From there: T e n S m a r t e s t S c i e n t i s t s o f A l l T i m e s Page: 1 (21)
    Ten Smartest Scientists
    1. Gottfried Leibniz (IQ 205)
    2. Blaise Pascal (IQ 195)
    3. Philip Emeagwali (IQ 190)
    3. Sir Isaac Newton (IQ 190)
    3. Pierre Laplace (IQ 190)
    6. Rene Descartes (IQ 185)
    6. Galileo (IQ 185)
    8. Johannes Kepler (IQ 175)
    9. Charles Darwin (IQ 165)
    10. Albert Einstein (IQ 160)
    Back to Wikipedia:
    Emeagwali studied for a Ph.D. degree from the University of Michigan from 1987 through 1991. His thesis was not accepted by a committee of internal and external examiners and thus he was not awarded the degree. Emeagwali filed a court challenge, stating that the decision was a violation of his civil rights and that the university had discriminated against him in several ways because of his race. The court challenge was dismissed, as was an appeal to the Michigan state Court of Appeals.[7]
    Emeagwali received the 1989 Gordon Bell Prize for an application of the CM-2 massively-parallel computer.

    IffU: working for the last 21 years in an USA University, I can tell you that it a case absolutely unheard of: that a minority student was considered as not deserving a degree, for which he was studying. The more so that in the process (in 1989) he got a Prize from ACM: Association for Computing Machinery.
  7. Peter Frost said:
    Well, I know a bit about HBD. The term was coined by Steve Sailer in the late 1990s for an email discussion group that included myself and various academics who may or may not want their names disclosed.

    It was actually coined by the avowedly anti-hereditarian & anti-racialist Jonathan Marks. Steve Sailer appropriated it for the antithetical purpose.

    Read More
  8. I think of Ekeh as an Urhobo name. It might also be an Igbo name, too, but it could be Urhobo.

    I’m pretty sure that Ufot Ekong is an Efik or Annang or Ibibio name. from somewhere around Calabar.

    Of course, the last name will probably be the father’s name, and who knows the mother’s ethnicity except by inspection.

    Lagos is a predominantly Yoruba city, and thus Ufot Ekong might speak Yoruba.

    All in all a thought provoking article and an interesting discussion.

    The Yoruba were some of modern Nigeria’s first overachievers, for a variety of reasons.

    Probably 90% of Nigerians in the USA and UK are from Southern Nigeria, that is to say south of the Niger and Benue Rivers, and perhaps even from a smaller area, the old Western and Eastern Regions in the original three region federation of 1964 and previously

    Nigerians in the OECD countries are certainly not randomly drawn from Nigeria, anymore than Chinese people in Southeast Asia are randomly drawn from throughout China.

    Read More
  9. @Priss Factor
    Smarter or dumber, blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men.

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.

    THAT is the main reason why the West should oppose the arrival of more blacks.

    Suppose every African migrant to Europe had an IQ of 150. Would that be any better?

    No, the Negroes will gain not only physical but intellectual/economic power over whites.

    “blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men”

    Your favorite theme.

    And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one’s brain pounded into hash?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?"

    Best blacks go into football and basketball that are the prestige sports and get most girls, glory, and cheers. Also, they offer lots of money in the pros.

    Blacks don't bother with wrestling that no one pays attention to.

    Even so, there have been plenty of black wrestlers in the Olympics who won the gold.
    Surely you know of the Cubans. And Kenny Monday.

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

    So, blacks dominate in the most powerful positions in football, basketball, and excel in wrestling.
    , @Truth

    And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one’s brain pounded into hash?

     

    Funny you should ask...

    The greatest American wrestler of the last 30 years...and possibly ever;

    http://www.jordanburroughs.com/
  10. Continuing from your last post on this subject, I don’t readily see much new you’ve brought to the table about how the Igbo are significantly more intelligent than other Nigerian groups or that the Igbo’s history was especially conductive towards their intelligence. You don’t present any evidence that Nigerians in the UK are overwhelmingly Igbo, and the examples of Japan and China aren’t very good either. There are only about 5,000 Nigerians in Japan, and from what I’ve seen, Africans in China aren’t exactly a conductive, beneficial minority. They seem to inhabit the seedier parts of Guangzhou and have a reputation for being dysfunctional, and there have been riots between them and police. Most of them are from Nigeria and Mali, another place with a more extensive civilized history than Igboland.

    Read More
  11. Fuerst (2014) has studied this question and found that black immigrants to the U.S. have a mean IQ that is one third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries. So there is a selection effect. But it seems too weak to explain the difference in IQ—more than one standard deviation and possibly two—between African immigrants to the UK and Africans back home, unless one assumes that migration to the UK is a lot more selective than migration to the US.

    Fuerst found first generation blacks in the U.S. have IQs around 85 compared to 80 in their home countries. That’s why he claimed the selection effect was only a third of standard deviation.

    But of course there’s no way black Africans average 80 in their home countries. The actual average, at least in sub-Saharan Africa, is likely in the lower 60s:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/07/05/estimating-the-average-iq-of-sub-saharan-africa/

    Lynn was ridiculed for saying black Africa had an average IQ below 70, and other investigators found Lynn had dramatically underestimated Africa’s IQ, however my analysis finds Lynn probably overestimated. The problem is Rushton and Jensen are no longer alive to set the record straight so the anti-HBD narrative constantly prevails.

    Further, it’s absurd to think immigrants from such poor countries would be selected for only 5 IQ points, when the competition to come to the First World is fierce. Look at India which has an average IQ around 80, yet Indian Americans may have IQs around 110.

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2014/09/29/the-incredible-intelligence-of-indian-americans/

    There’s really no mystery here. The best and brightest from the third world migrate to the first world, and instead of regressing to the mean, their kids exceed them because of the huge nutrition boost of first world nations:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I think you've missed out on a bit of thinking and writing if not research which has moved beyond the common sense defying average IQs of 70 or less attributed by Lynn, Rushton et al.

    As Ron Unz showed with particular reference to rapid average IQ increases amongst the Irish and (from memory) Slovenians that clearly couldn't be explained by genetic change comparisons of IQs from pre modern rural backgrounds with those from modern urban backgrounds tells us nothing about the genetic potential and therefore of the possible performance of subsequent generations after migration. True it may say something about immigrant employability in the short term but that's a different point.

    And you need to consider the Flynn Effect which also demonstrates that there are limitations on genetic explanations of IQ scores as between groups. That is not to say that there are not large inherited group differences in average cognitive abilities. But one shouldn't be simple minded about the evidence.
    , @Chuck
    Dear pumpkinperson and Peter,

    As noted in my paper, I was mostly unable to disaggregate the scores of Black West Indian and African immigrants. As stated, I estimated an average origin IQ of 80 based on the weighted average of the region of origin countries:

    "The first generation Black- 3rd+ generation White differential is surprisingly
    small at 0.99 SD given the National IQs reported for Black majority countries. Rindermann (2013) reports an average Black African regional IQ of 75, while Lynn and Vanhanen’s (2012) estimates give a Caribbean regional IQ of approximately 82. (Presumably the average Black Caribbean IQ would be slightly lower as it is generally found that Black West Indians perform less well than non-Black ones (Lynn, 2008)). Taking into account the distribution of Black immigrants by region of origin, one would predict a first generation Black IQ of about 80 were regional IQ estimates accurate, were migrants representative with respect to region of origin aptitude, and were U.S. tests relatively psychometrically unbiased for first generation individuals of this group. Thus Black immigrants perform about 0.33 SD better than one would expect based on Lynn and Vanhanen’s (2012) and Rindermann’s (2013) estimates..."

    I also emphasized that the Black African origin immigrant mean is uncertain:

    "It has been suggested that the African migrant IQ might be on par with that of Whites; if so, the first and second generation Black /third+ generation White gaps would have to be driven by the underperformance of West Indian and other origin Blacks. This isn’t inherently statistically implausible since Black African immigrants, as shown below in Table 5, comprised only between 8 and 24% of the Black immigrant pool between 1980 and 2000, the immigrant cohorts which would have birthed most of the survey participants for the surveys analyzed. (Table 5 was based on the immigrant numbers presented in Capps et al. (2012); percentages were computed from immigrant numbers.) Of course, the conjecture becomes less and less plausible as time goes on — as Black Africans comprise a larger percent of the Black immigrant pool and as the Black immigrant performance fails to increase."

    Peter,

    I was under the impression that African Americans are largely of Igbo descent. If Igbo are the Jews of Africa, why are our substantially Igbo descent legacy African Americans not so apt?

    , @DIpwill
    I read your post, and 82 is still too low as a genetic average. The problem is also that Rushton was largely a charlatan when it came to race differences, and Jensen's credibility isn't as clear cut as it was (contrary to what his fans in academia and on the internet liked to claim) given that he embraced so much of Rushton's work uncritically, which is more apparent in face of how he signed on to a later Rushton paper that offhandedly claimed african-americans could have an IQ of 78 because somehow, researchers have for years and years overlooked an ultra-retarded subset in the deep inner cities.

    You've also gone on record as detailing on you used to speak with Rushton extensively on the phone and called him the Darwin of the 21st century, one of various other sterling bits of autism on Rushton's credibility (such as Lynn calling it worthy of the nobel prize, Taylor saying it's a guide to understanding the world as is etc.) However, Rushton did claim that around 70 was their genetic average, going by university students in SA, (with no regard to the fact university standards have dramatically declined since the apartheid era, baseless claims about the selection of universities throughout africa etc.) so it's better than him atleast.

    You also seem to genuinely consider the idea that Victorians had an IQ dramatically higher than now, which is also absurd.
  12. @Priss Factor
    Smarter or dumber, blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men.

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.

    THAT is the main reason why the West should oppose the arrival of more blacks.

    Suppose every African migrant to Europe had an IQ of 150. Would that be any better?

    No, the Negroes will gain not only physical but intellectual/economic power over whites.

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.

    Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?"

    Don't you see the reality all around you?

    You must accept the truth and begin on that premise.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tch1CuMV9M
    , @Deduction
    He's a troll but he's not sophisticated.
    , @helena
    Viewpoints/physiology (based on averages)

    Afro men bigger than Euro, and different lean tissue/fat ratio
    Afro men more likely to body-build
    Afro men more territorial*
    Afro men better at short-twitch sports
    Euro men better at endurance sport (trunk/leg proportions)
    Afro men more assertive in mating rituals
    Euro women mis-perceive mating attention as long-term commitment

    It's called a discussion!

    People calling each other trolls is tedious.

    *I know a few recently arrived Africans. It seems that when one of them answers the door, they then go and get the person who the caller is calling to see, before the person at the door is invited in.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Perhaps she's calling for a White Knight?
    , @iffen
    Sophisticated?

    No.
  13. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Threecranes
    "blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men"

    Your favorite theme.

    And yet we white boys beat the negro's butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one's brain pounded into hash?

    “And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?”

    Best blacks go into football and basketball that are the prestige sports and get most girls, glory, and cheers. Also, they offer lots of money in the pros.

    Blacks don’t bother with wrestling that no one pays attention to.

    Even so, there have been plenty of black wrestlers in the Olympics who won the gold.
    Surely you know of the Cubans. And Kenny Monday.

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

    So, blacks dominate in the most powerful positions in football, basketball, and excel in wrestling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mark
    For every black athlete that becomes rich as a pro, there's a thousand others who fail to do so. Inner city high schools are half filled with black kids who don't study because they think they are going to become something like the next Lebron James. The other half are black kids who don't study because they think they'll get rich as a rapper or drug dealer.
  14. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.
     
    Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?

    “Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?”

    Don’t you see the reality all around you?

    You must accept the truth and begin on that premise.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    But your message is self-undermining. If you want to protect the status of white males, why broadcast their inferiority? To propose a policy of segretation predicated on the greater sexual desirability of the negro is to propose affirmative action in mating. This wouldn't have any greater real benefit for the esteem in which white males are held than affirmative action produced for negroes.

    And what about white women? Do they count for nothing? If she really prefers the negro, isn't the moral presumption that she should have him?
  15. That is the issue of white imperialist attempts (and it worked wonderfully in the past!) per the retort “any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?” which is ludacrus(t) on the face of said mindset. That is not an issue of non European peoples and the quest to invade other lands while exhorting the Bible, freedom and choice while raping the lands and peoples in their behaviours then claiming the resource are for taking, if they can be took!

    Groups in their own right excel because of, and in spite of their circumstances. It is no accident that a Colin Powell or a Susan Rice but because of being ‘different’, family values or lack thereof and opportunity.

    I would say that the 3 HBD positions also pertains to the Europeans who came to USA but in these cases, they needed the pretense of Rule of Law within the US Constitution to illegally assert their position and employ priviledge piggbacked as natural inclination when none existed but it worked well. Now these same white peoples have come to imagine their propped up status should revert back to the pre-1950s era for them to attept to asser a false hegemony. But they show themselves with the rush to own guns as if they are and will be prepared for their version of the Whiskey Rebellion, as it were.

    Read More
  16. @Peter Frost
    So if we “took a number of black American elites to the UK as expatriate workers, selected only from those professionals who make 200,000 dollars a year in their homes” we should expect their children to score similar to White Britons,

    Very few African immigrants to the UK make 200,000 dollars a year. Very, very, very few. You need to get out and meet a few African immigrants. Most of them aren't elite individuals, and many are dirt-poor.

    John Fuerst looked into this question and found a weak selection effect. African immigrants to the U.S. are about a third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries.

    Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    The Igbo live in a country that is run by non-Igbo. That's why they wanted to separate and create their own country. It would be interesting to see how well Biafra would have turned out, but we will never know.

    As individuals, Igbo do very well, but they have to succeed in a society where corruption is the norm. It's so normal that most Nigerians don't consider it to be corruption. It's just the sort of thing you're supposed to do. For this reason, Igbo do a lot better in meritocratic societies like the United Kingdom than in Nigeria. It's sad but true.

    For what it's worth, there are Igbo of international renown. See:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Igbo_people#Science

    Very few African immigrants to the UK make 200,000 dollars a year. Very, very, very few. You need to get out and meet a few African immigrants. Most of them aren’t elite individuals, and many are dirt-poor

    Quite a lot have parents who make more than 200,000 dollars a year.

    Considering that the only black students you meet at private boarding schools were born in Africa and that the schools cost 70,000 dollars a year, that fact is certain.

    It’s true that since these individuals often end up living hybrid lifestyles where they probably have their home in Nigeria but jet to the UK for the careers and amenities they may not be classified as immigrants…

    John Fuerst looked into this question and found a weak selection effect. African immigrants to the U.S. are about a third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries.

    This is interesting but I can’t believe it. Everyone seems to want to use a western definition of elite. A term that would be applied to the group I mention above.

    But in Africa living as a peasant in a village or in an urban slum is the numerical norm, the strong majority in fact.

    None of the Africans I have met come from that background. Surely escaping the slum or leaving the village has already exerted a very significant selection effect?

    After all, having an indoor toilet in Nigeria is as elite for Nigeria as going to private school in the UK is for us British…and none of the Nigerian immigrants to the UK had no electricity or indoor plumbing back home.

    About 70 percent of Nigerians live in villages without indoor plumbing and electricity. Women and children have to walk up to half a mile to draw drinking water from a water source.

    Roughly 10 percent of British children attend private fee paying high school equivalents. If you break down the urban population in Nigeria to two thirds slum and one third proper buildings then you reach that same percentage.

    In Nigeria having indoor plumbing means that you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth.

    Read more: http://www.everyculture.com/wc/Mauritania-to-Nigeria/Nigerians.html#ixzz3oFEZAG00

    Read More
  17. @Peter Frost
    So if we “took a number of black American elites to the UK as expatriate workers, selected only from those professionals who make 200,000 dollars a year in their homes” we should expect their children to score similar to White Britons,

    Very few African immigrants to the UK make 200,000 dollars a year. Very, very, very few. You need to get out and meet a few African immigrants. Most of them aren't elite individuals, and many are dirt-poor.

    John Fuerst looked into this question and found a weak selection effect. African immigrants to the U.S. are about a third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries.

    Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    The Igbo live in a country that is run by non-Igbo. That's why they wanted to separate and create their own country. It would be interesting to see how well Biafra would have turned out, but we will never know.

    As individuals, Igbo do very well, but they have to succeed in a society where corruption is the norm. It's so normal that most Nigerians don't consider it to be corruption. It's just the sort of thing you're supposed to do. For this reason, Igbo do a lot better in meritocratic societies like the United Kingdom than in Nigeria. It's sad but true.

    For what it's worth, there are Igbo of international renown. See:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Igbo_people#Science

    As individuals, Igbo do very well, but they have to succeed in a society where corruption is the norm. It’s so normal that most Nigerians don’t consider it to be corruption. It’s just the sort of thing you’re supposed to do. For this reason, Igbo do a lot better in meritocratic societies like the United Kingdom than in Nigeria. It’s sad but true.

    A couple of guys I know identify so much with Jews in Europe that they actually offer up a comparison with the Ibo and claim a genuine group descent.

    Read More
  18. @Stephen R. Diamond

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.
     
    Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?

    He’s a troll but he’s not sophisticated.

    Read More
  19. […] Edit 10/11/15: No, Blacks Aren’t All Alike. Who Said They Were? […]

    Read More
  20. @pumpkinperson
    Fuerst (2014) has studied this question and found that black immigrants to the U.S. have a mean IQ that is one third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries. So there is a selection effect. But it seems too weak to explain the difference in IQ—more than one standard deviation and possibly two—between African immigrants to the UK and Africans back home, unless one assumes that migration to the UK is a lot more selective than migration to the US.


    Fuerst found first generation blacks in the U.S. have IQs around 85 compared to 80 in their home countries. That's why he claimed the selection effect was only a third of standard deviation.

    But of course there's no way black Africans average 80 in their home countries. The actual average, at least in sub-Saharan Africa, is likely in the lower 60s:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/07/05/estimating-the-average-iq-of-sub-saharan-africa/

    Lynn was ridiculed for saying black Africa had an average IQ below 70, and other investigators found Lynn had dramatically underestimated Africa's IQ, however my analysis finds Lynn probably overestimated. The problem is Rushton and Jensen are no longer alive to set the record straight so the anti-HBD narrative constantly prevails.

    Further, it's absurd to think immigrants from such poor countries would be selected for only 5 IQ points, when the competition to come to the First World is fierce. Look at India which has an average IQ around 80, yet Indian Americans may have IQs around 110.

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2014/09/29/the-incredible-intelligence-of-indian-americans/

    There's really no mystery here. The best and brightest from the third world migrate to the first world, and instead of regressing to the mean, their kids exceed them because of the huge nutrition boost of first world nations:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    I think you’ve missed out on a bit of thinking and writing if not research which has moved beyond the common sense defying average IQs of 70 or less attributed by Lynn, Rushton et al.

    As Ron Unz showed with particular reference to rapid average IQ increases amongst the Irish and (from memory) Slovenians that clearly couldn’t be explained by genetic change comparisons of IQs from pre modern rural backgrounds with those from modern urban backgrounds tells us nothing about the genetic potential and therefore of the possible performance of subsequent generations after migration. True it may say something about immigrant employability in the short term but that’s a different point.

    And you need to consider the Flynn Effect which also demonstrates that there are limitations on genetic explanations of IQ scores as between groups. That is not to say that there are not large inherited group differences in average cognitive abilities. But one shouldn’t be simple minded about the evidence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    People start from the assumption that all cognitive tests that are applied worldwide are technically perfect and universally standardized.

    And based on the assumption that cognitive tests can explain exponential changes in behavior and intelligence in a short time.

    Ireland before the economic boom, had a continuous high emigration rate for English-speaking countries, low urbanization rates, educational level, likely not to be the best in Europe, bad social system and economic, cultural conformism for catholicism. Not to mention what I have spoken many times in hbdsphere where I emphasize as possible and plausible limitations of cognitive tests on their ability to draft \ express perfectly the idea of ​​intelligence.

    Another possibility open.

    Storage \ social and economic organization that is objective and emphatic can make the difference between many nations, based on the idea that a nation is like a wild horse that needs guidance by a knight and that most people are like 'little horses' 'that make up the body of this social organism.

    an intelligent and energetic elite, can produce the wealth cycle, improving meritocratic communication, that is, being more efficient, objective and agile in the selection of the fittest for certain professions, producing a collective sense of harmony and ' developmental continuity ' ', that is, improving the quality of life and optimism of the people. From the moment in which you can ensure developmental continuity with the most basic (and important) areas to maintain a superstructure, then you can create a room for improvement in all other areas, including population biology.

    Without guidelines, the majority of ordinary people who are conformists will conform.
  21. @Stephen R. Diamond

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.
     
    Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?

    Viewpoints/physiology (based on averages)

    Afro men bigger than Euro, and different lean tissue/fat ratio
    Afro men more likely to body-build
    Afro men more territorial*
    Afro men better at short-twitch sports
    Euro men better at endurance sport (trunk/leg proportions)
    Afro men more assertive in mating rituals
    Euro women mis-perceive mating attention as long-term commitment

    It’s called a discussion!

    People calling each other trolls is tedious.

    *I know a few recently arrived Africans. It seems that when one of them answers the door, they then go and get the person who the caller is calling to see, before the person at the door is invited in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Khan Bodin
    Hello Anglo whore. I am sorry, I don't mean to offend you. You see, I love to state the facts, and the facts say you Western women are whores, since you on average have sexual reltionship with many a man (north of ten on average, possible even mid 20s, I'd say; what do you think? There ought to be some independent inquiry or study on the matter though; the results would be most interesting). Also, that makes you Westerners sons and daughters of whores, does it not? SOBs. You see the literal meaning that childish insult contains actually?! :)


    But what I was wondering, is true that you Westerners are so envious of our women's beauty that you breed with African negroes in order to recreate it in your offsprings? I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Moghaddam#/media/File:Nina-Moghaddam.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29#/media/File:Ceca_koncert_ljubljana_2009.jpeg

    Aren't they beautiful, hm? And they are so virtrous... so morally superior to your western Caucasian stock that I think it must awake envious feelings in you, hm? I can understand how it does, and that is why you breed with negroes, but unfortunatelly the only thing you get in your half-breed offsprings is some unhealthy, ghoulish, zombish skin color. Tough luck. It seems the Lord does not look kindly at your behavior. ehehehehe :)

  22. I remember reading somewhere that there was a caste system within the Igbo which would, as in India, preserve significant genotype differences between upper and lower caste families. Anything known?

    Read More
  23. @Stephen R. Diamond

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.
     
    Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?

    Perhaps she’s calling for a White Knight?

    Read More
  24. Another factor may be that the white working class of Britain have been completely demoralized by rampant Cultural Marxism. And a welfare state encouraging the worse behavior and breeding from it.

    Read More
  25. @Stephen R. Diamond

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.
     
    Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?

    Sophisticated?

    No.

    Read More
  26. there’s no way black Africans average 80 in their home countries. The actual average, at least in sub-Saharan Africa, is likely in the lower 60s

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82:

    On the basis of several reviews of the literature, Lynn [Lynn, R., (2006). Race differences in intelligence: An evolutionary analysis. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.] and Lynn and Vanhanen [Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T., (2006). IQ and global inequality. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.] concluded that the average IQ of the Black population of sub-Saharan Africa lies below 70. In this paper, the authors systematically review published empirical data on the performance of Africans on the following IQ tests: Draw-A-Man (DAM) test, Kaufman-Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), the Wechsler scales (WAIS & WISC), and several other IQ tests (but not the Raven’s tests). Inclusion and exclusion criteria are explicitly discussed. Results show that average IQ of Africans on these tests is approximately 82 when compared to UK norms. We provide estimates of the average IQ per country and estimates on the basis of alternative inclusion criteria. Our estimate of average IQ converges with the finding that national IQs of sub-Saharan African countries as predicted from several international studies of student achievement are around 82.

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609000634

    Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75:

    In the past different researchers have come to diverging cognitive ability estimates for people in Africa and of African descent. The paper tries to check the validity of past results by comparing them with outcomes of two new psychometric test studies from East and South Africa; with results from student assessment studies; with predictions based on those variables which, outside Africa, correlate most strongly with intelligence; and by comparing them with further indicators of cognitive ability (descriptions of everyday life and human accomplishment). Integrating these cognitive ability measures with the application of several corrections (due to the higher age of students in Africa, lower African school enrollment, selectivity of samples and higher African secular IQ rise), the best guess for an African average is IQ 75.

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741

    But let’s suppose you’re right: sub-Saharan Africans have a mean IQ in the low 60s. In that case, even a very strong selection effect among African immigrants couldn’t possibly explain the relatively high IQ of Igbo immigrants to the UK (which must be at least 100).

    Another thing. How could a mean sub-Saharan IQ of 60-65 square with a mean African American IQ of 80-85? African Americans are about 80% African by ancestry. I suppose one could argue that Africans in Africa are malnourished, but malnutrition isn’t a problem in all African countries, and the IQ literature suggests that malnutrition isn’t a serious constraint on IQ (re: the famine in the Netherlands during WWII)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    I'm surprised you'd still make over the admixture factor like this. I have found time and time and time again, nobody considers the factor of assortative mating. White admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites. There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I've heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    On the other hand, why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn't that big of a factor? If it's properly treated in early childhood, the ill effects of it can be easily avoided. There's a wealth of evidence showing malnutrition lowers IQ.
    , @pumpkinperson
    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82...Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75

    I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong. Only the most elite Africans...those in schools in urban areas...tend to be the one's who get tested. Psychologists do not seek out a truly random sample of sub-Saharan Africa which would involve testing AIDs orphans who don't attend school at all because they are busy taking care of their younger siblings. They don't go deep into the jungles and isolated rural areas and test children who have been ripped out of school and forced into armies since early childhood and can't even hold a pencil, let alone read or write. Now you could argue correctly that most tests would be biased against such people, but you have to report the IQ as it is, and then adjust for bias later because otherwise you're getting a selective sample.

    Richard Lynn, despite his occasional sloppy reporting, is the most underrated IQ researcher on the planet, and he devoted his life to studying this issue, and he put the African IQ at 67. But even that was likely an overestimate because the single best study of African IQ found psychology undergrads had an IQ of 79 (U.S. white norms, adjusted for obsolete norms)

    Being a psychology undergrad in sub-Saharan Africa (at the time of Rushton's study) was almost as selective as being a PhD is in white countries, so how could the average IQ be 75-82 when their academic elite averages 79. Makes no sense.


    But let’s suppose you’re right: sub-Saharan Africans have a mean IQ in the low 60s. In that case, even a very strong selection effect among African immigrants couldn’t possibly explain the relatively high IQ of Igbo immigrants to the UK (which must be at least 100).

    I haven't looked at Igbo immigrants specifically so I can't comment. If the children really do score 100+, it might imply that they are indeed genetically above most sub-Saharans (just as bushmen and pygmies are probably genetically below most sub-Saharans)

    On the other hand, if the children of Indian immigrants to the U.S. can score 110 despite India having a mean IQ around 80, then there might be a simpler explanation (on the other hand the Indian immigrants might be to India what you claim the Igbos are to sub-Sahara)


    Another thing. How could a mean sub-Saharan IQ of 60-65 square with a mean African American IQ of 80-85? African Americans are about 80% African by ancestry.

    The average African American has the opportunity to finish high school while the average sub-Saharan has only about an 8th grade education. It is known that dropping out of high school drops 8 points from your IQ (though not your real intelligence):

    https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/does-dropping-out-of-high-school-lower-your-iq/

    Adding these 8 points brings black Africans from 60-65 to 68-73.

    Next, as Steve Sailer first noted, and I later documented, black Africans are shorter than African Americans. I estimate they are about 0.8 SD shorter:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    Height is even more heritable than IQ is so if sub-optimum nutrition is powerful enough to deduct 0.8 SD from their height, then common sense says it deducted 0.8 SD from their IQ (12 IQ points)

    Adding these 12 points brings them from 68-73 to 80-85.

    It's very analogous to the Flynn effect. The same combination of factors that caused white IQ to rise from 70 to 100 over the 20th century, also explain contemporaneous differences between African Americans and blacks in Africa


    I suppose one could argue that Africans in Africa are malnourished, but malnutrition isn’t a problem in all African countries

    I prefer the term sub-optimum nutrition because it needn't imply people are stunted, wasted, and starving, but it does imply that all over Africa, and most of the World, people are slightly shorter than they would be if born and raised in the West (this even applies to the elites btw)

    Indeed even the U.S. had widespread sub-optimum nutrition as recently as the 1980s.

    and the IQ literature suggests that malnutrition isn’t a serious constraint on IQ (re: the famine in the Netherlands during WWII)

    Was the famine powerful enough to stunt height? If not, it's not analogous. Lynn has cited excellent research showing the effect of nutrition on IQ:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

  27. @Threecranes
    "blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men"

    Your favorite theme.

    And yet we white boys beat the negro's butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one's brain pounded into hash?

    And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one’s brain pounded into hash?

    Funny you should ask…

    The greatest American wrestler of the last 30 years…and possibly ever;

    http://www.jordanburroughs.com/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wyrd
    "Funny you should ask…"

    I keep apologizing, Truth, for killing your 30th level fighter/assassin half-orc Sir Black Alot back in the day when I was Dungeon-Master for you in High School. Get over it, yo!
    , @EriK
    This guy wasn't bad
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cael_Sanderson#2004_Olympics
  28. Guys, is it that hard to keep the comments on the topic? Just ignore Priss Factory and others purposely trying to drive the discussion off the point. Keep it on Chanda, regression, GCSE, etc.

    >Perhaps something as simple as showing up for class, doing one’s assignments, or having a private tutor.

    I remember Steve Hsu pointed to a study showing that the effects of “preparation” on SAT scores are minimal/nonexistant. I imagine the GCSE is similar but not sure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    SAT and GCSE are quite different and coaching for GCSE works.
    , @EvolutionistX
    I've watched a lot of kids take practice SATs, learn a few SAT-taking tips, and then re-take the SAT. They consistently scored better on the second try, and better again if they spent a few weeks cramming vocabulary. I wouldn't expect long-term results this way, though.
  29. And, his claim that African immigrants outperform native whites in UK schools is patently untrue. The tables he gave just showed that more black Africans pass five GSCE exams than white British. This is not by any respectable measure academic achievement. GCSEs are pathetically easy and ANYONE who tries REMOTELY hard can pass them. All the tables show is that black Africans try harder than the white English working class, who generally speaking do not give a flying fuck about even turning up to exams. Now, why doesn’t Chanda show us the stats about the ethnic groups who obtain straight As/A*s.

    Let’s compare people who actually try hard and look at elite achievement, not who gets above the baseline. There’s a world of difference between obtaining 12 A*s at GSCE and 5 Cs. Blacks are woefully underrepresented in the hard sciences and at elite universities.

    FWIW, speaking for myself, I think the jury’s out on whether blacks are dumber. Very hard to disentangle IQ from retarded cultures that discourage critical thinking. Now, the burden of all that physical power and lack of impulse control is another matter…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Deduction

    And, his claim that African immigrants outperform native whites in UK schools is patently untrue. The tables he gave just showed that more black Africans pass five GSCE exams than white British. This is not by any respectable measure academic achievement
     
    Yes, he seems to see it as an elite marker when in fact failing to achieve this is akin to not graduating from high school.
  30. “The Igbo have for a long time specialized in a trading lifestyle that favors a certain mental toolkit: future time orientation; numeracy, and abstract reasoning.”

    The ancient Hebrews described in Genesis, a West Semitic people, had a similar lifestyle, which they presumably led in ancient Mesopotamia over many centuries:

    “Before that time, i.e., before the introduction of the camel around 1200 B.C., which made long-distance travel possible, the nomads, who rode on asses and practiced sheep-rearing, were much more restricted in their movements than the Bedouins of today and could not wander far beyond the limits of the grassy steppe which extends between the Tigris and Euphrates and at the foot of the Zagros, the Taurus and the Lebanon. There they were in close and constant touch with the agricultural populations which bought their sheep and supplied them with grain, dates, tools, weapons, and other utilitarian objects and amenities. . . . In general the two groups met regularly in villages or in market-places outside the gates of the cities, and exchanged goods, together, no doubt, with a number of ideas. Then the nomads returned to the steppe, perhaps only a few miles away. Occasionally, individuals left the tribe as Lot did in Sodom to Find work in the towns as mercenaries, craftsmen, or merchants. Sometimes a family, a clan, or a whole tribe would acquire (or be granted) land and devote itself partly to agriculture, partly to sheep-breeding. Not infrequently the local governments exercised some control over the nomads, using them in particular as auxiliary troops whenever required.” George Roux, Ancient Iraq

    Might this account for the genius of the covenant between God and the ancient Hebrews we find described in the book of Genesis?

    “Be thou whole-hearted [tamim]. And I will make my covenant between me and thee. . . .” (Genesis 17:1-2).

    ‘’. . . do righteousness and justice [zedeq] to the end that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken. . . . “ (Genesis 18:19).

    Originally, the Hebrew word tamim meant and zedeq meant “hard”, “straight”, “rigid”.(5) From very early on, and throughout the Bible, we find these two words used to describe the proper conditions of the weights and balances that were used in ancient commerce to measure commodities. A proper weight was tamim — i.e. whole, complete, not lacking; a proper balance beam was zedek i.e., straight, true, rigid. (See, for example, Deuteronomy 25:13-15, Leviticus 19:36, Micah 6:11, Amos 8:5. and elsewhere.) The reason for the tamim of the weights is, of course obvious; the use of short weights would be tantamount to cheating the party with whom one was dealing. As for the zedek of the balance beam, the following technical observation is perhaps in order:

    “[F]or the justness of an equal armed balance it is requisite. . . . [t]hat the two points of suspension of the pans from the beam be in exactly the same line as the center of motion of the fulcrum on which the beam turns when set in motion. The line joining these three points is the axis of the beam.” Bruno Kish, Scales and Weights: An Historical Outline, (Yale University Press, 1965), p.32.

    So, by metaphorical extension — or is it literal interpretation? — the terms of the covenant can be reduced to fair dealing. Abraham and his descendants are to treat honestly and fairly with those whom they encounter in the promised land if they are to find there a new home for themselves in which to live out their lives in peace and prosperity.

    Read More
  31. This is interesting but I can’t believe it.

    If you have a problem with John Fuerst’s study, tell me what’s wrong with it. Argument is not contradiction.

    Man – Well, an argument’s not the same as contradiction.
    Mr Vibrating – It can be.
    Man – No it can’t. An argument is a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition.
    Mr Vibrating – No it isn’t.
    Man – Yes it is. It isn’t just contradiction.
    Mr Vibrating – Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
    Man – But it isn’t just saying ‘No it isn’t’.
    Mr Vibrating – Yes it is.
    Man – No it isn’t, Argument is an intellectual process … contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.
    Mr Vibrating – No it isn’t.

    http://www.ibras.dk/montypython/episode29.htm#11

    Read More
  32. @pumpkinperson
    Fuerst (2014) has studied this question and found that black immigrants to the U.S. have a mean IQ that is one third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries. So there is a selection effect. But it seems too weak to explain the difference in IQ—more than one standard deviation and possibly two—between African immigrants to the UK and Africans back home, unless one assumes that migration to the UK is a lot more selective than migration to the US.


    Fuerst found first generation blacks in the U.S. have IQs around 85 compared to 80 in their home countries. That's why he claimed the selection effect was only a third of standard deviation.

    But of course there's no way black Africans average 80 in their home countries. The actual average, at least in sub-Saharan Africa, is likely in the lower 60s:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/07/05/estimating-the-average-iq-of-sub-saharan-africa/

    Lynn was ridiculed for saying black Africa had an average IQ below 70, and other investigators found Lynn had dramatically underestimated Africa's IQ, however my analysis finds Lynn probably overestimated. The problem is Rushton and Jensen are no longer alive to set the record straight so the anti-HBD narrative constantly prevails.

    Further, it's absurd to think immigrants from such poor countries would be selected for only 5 IQ points, when the competition to come to the First World is fierce. Look at India which has an average IQ around 80, yet Indian Americans may have IQs around 110.

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2014/09/29/the-incredible-intelligence-of-indian-americans/

    There's really no mystery here. The best and brightest from the third world migrate to the first world, and instead of regressing to the mean, their kids exceed them because of the huge nutrition boost of first world nations:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    Dear pumpkinperson and Peter,

    As noted in my paper, I was mostly unable to disaggregate the scores of Black West Indian and African immigrants. As stated, I estimated an average origin IQ of 80 based on the weighted average of the region of origin countries:

    “The first generation Black- 3rd+ generation White differential is surprisingly
    small at 0.99 SD given the National IQs reported for Black majority countries. Rindermann (2013) reports an average Black African regional IQ of 75, while Lynn and Vanhanen’s (2012) estimates give a Caribbean regional IQ of approximately 82. (Presumably the average Black Caribbean IQ would be slightly lower as it is generally found that Black West Indians perform less well than non-Black ones (Lynn, 2008)). Taking into account the distribution of Black immigrants by region of origin, one would predict a first generation Black IQ of about 80 were regional IQ estimates accurate, were migrants representative with respect to region of origin aptitude, and were U.S. tests relatively psychometrically unbiased for first generation individuals of this group. Thus Black immigrants perform about 0.33 SD better than one would expect based on Lynn and Vanhanen’s (2012) and Rindermann’s (2013) estimates…”

    I also emphasized that the Black African origin immigrant mean is uncertain:

    “It has been suggested that the African migrant IQ might be on par with that of Whites; if so, the first and second generation Black /third+ generation White gaps would have to be driven by the underperformance of West Indian and other origin Blacks. This isn’t inherently statistically implausible since Black African immigrants, as shown below in Table 5, comprised only between 8 and 24% of the Black immigrant pool between 1980 and 2000, the immigrant cohorts which would have birthed most of the survey participants for the surveys analyzed. (Table 5 was based on the immigrant numbers presented in Capps et al. (2012); percentages were computed from immigrant numbers.) Of course, the conjecture becomes less and less plausible as time goes on — as Black Africans comprise a larger percent of the Black immigrant pool and as the Black immigrant performance fails to increase.”

    Peter,

    I was under the impression that African Americans are largely of Igbo descent. If Igbo are the Jews of Africa, why are our substantially Igbo descent legacy African Americans not so apt?

    Read More
  33. @pumpkinperson
    Fuerst (2014) has studied this question and found that black immigrants to the U.S. have a mean IQ that is one third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries. So there is a selection effect. But it seems too weak to explain the difference in IQ—more than one standard deviation and possibly two—between African immigrants to the UK and Africans back home, unless one assumes that migration to the UK is a lot more selective than migration to the US.


    Fuerst found first generation blacks in the U.S. have IQs around 85 compared to 80 in their home countries. That's why he claimed the selection effect was only a third of standard deviation.

    But of course there's no way black Africans average 80 in their home countries. The actual average, at least in sub-Saharan Africa, is likely in the lower 60s:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/07/05/estimating-the-average-iq-of-sub-saharan-africa/

    Lynn was ridiculed for saying black Africa had an average IQ below 70, and other investigators found Lynn had dramatically underestimated Africa's IQ, however my analysis finds Lynn probably overestimated. The problem is Rushton and Jensen are no longer alive to set the record straight so the anti-HBD narrative constantly prevails.

    Further, it's absurd to think immigrants from such poor countries would be selected for only 5 IQ points, when the competition to come to the First World is fierce. Look at India which has an average IQ around 80, yet Indian Americans may have IQs around 110.

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2014/09/29/the-incredible-intelligence-of-indian-americans/

    There's really no mystery here. The best and brightest from the third world migrate to the first world, and instead of regressing to the mean, their kids exceed them because of the huge nutrition boost of first world nations:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    I read your post, and 82 is still too low as a genetic average. The problem is also that Rushton was largely a charlatan when it came to race differences, and Jensen’s credibility isn’t as clear cut as it was (contrary to what his fans in academia and on the internet liked to claim) given that he embraced so much of Rushton’s work uncritically, which is more apparent in face of how he signed on to a later Rushton paper that offhandedly claimed african-americans could have an IQ of 78 because somehow, researchers have for years and years overlooked an ultra-retarded subset in the deep inner cities.

    You’ve also gone on record as detailing on you used to speak with Rushton extensively on the phone and called him the Darwin of the 21st century, one of various other sterling bits of autism on Rushton’s credibility (such as Lynn calling it worthy of the nobel prize, Taylor saying it’s a guide to understanding the world as is etc.) However, Rushton did claim that around 70 was their genetic average, going by university students in SA, (with no regard to the fact university standards have dramatically declined since the apartheid era, baseless claims about the selection of universities throughout africa etc.) so it’s better than him atleast.

    You also seem to genuinely consider the idea that Victorians had an IQ dramatically higher than now, which is also absurd.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Deduction

    You also seem to genuinely consider the idea that Victorians had an IQ dramatically higher than now, which is also absurd
     
    It strikes me as absurd that they wouldn't. It's pretty clear that the lowest achieving sections of British society have contributed the most to population growth over the last 150 years. Five generations of selection for poverty and fecklessness seems very likely to reduce average genetic IQ.
    , @pumpkinperson
    The problem is also that Rushton was largely a charlatan when it came to race differences, and Jensen’s credibility isn’t as clear cut as it was (contrary to what his fans in academia and on the internet liked to claim) given that he embraced so much of Rushton’s work uncritically,

    So because you disagree with Jensen's claim that Rushton's book was the most brilliant race scholarship he had seen in the Worldwide literature, I should believe you over a scholar as eminent and influential as Jensen?


    which is more apparent in face of how he signed on to a later Rushton paper that offhandedly claimed african-americans could have an IQ of 78 because somehow, researchers have for years and years overlooked an ultra-retarded subset in the deep inner cities.

    I personally disagree with that hypothesis but it was perfectly well reasoned speculation and they cited evidence to back it up.

    You’ve also gone on record as detailing on you used to speak with Rushton extensively on the phone and called him the Darwin of the 21st century,

    Absolutely! That Rushton was able to synthesize so many different behavioral, physiological and sexual traits into a theory that simple and elegant was a rare and stunning achievement.

    one of various other sterling bits of autism on Rushton’s credibility (such as Lynn calling it worthy of the nobel prize, Taylor saying it’s a guide to understanding the world as is etc.)

    They're both 100% correct. I'm sorry you feel the need to call those you disagree with autistic, which reduces a serious mental condition to a schoolyard taunt.


    However, Rushton did claim that around 70 was their genetic average, going by university students in SA, (with no regard to the fact university standards have dramatically declined since the apartheid era, baseless claims about the selection of universities throughout africa etc.) so it’s better than him atleast.

    Rushton claimed it was the average. When did Rushton ever claim 70 was the GENETIC average?

    You also seem to genuinely consider the idea that Victorians had an IQ dramatically higher than now, which is also absurd.

    I never said they had higher IQs. I consistently blogged that they have much lower IQs, but I was open to the idea they might have higher GENETIC IQs but I agree it's an extreme idea, and I've found no strong evidence in support of it.
  34. @Peter Frost
    there’s no way black Africans average 80 in their home countries. The actual average, at least in sub-Saharan Africa, is likely in the lower 60s

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82:

    On the basis of several reviews of the literature, Lynn [Lynn, R., (2006). Race differences in intelligence: An evolutionary analysis. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.] and Lynn and Vanhanen [Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T., (2006). IQ and global inequality. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.] concluded that the average IQ of the Black population of sub-Saharan Africa lies below 70. In this paper, the authors systematically review published empirical data on the performance of Africans on the following IQ tests: Draw-A-Man (DAM) test, Kaufman-Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), the Wechsler scales (WAIS & WISC), and several other IQ tests (but not the Raven's tests). Inclusion and exclusion criteria are explicitly discussed. Results show that average IQ of Africans on these tests is approximately 82 when compared to UK norms. We provide estimates of the average IQ per country and estimates on the basis of alternative inclusion criteria. Our estimate of average IQ converges with the finding that national IQs of sub-Saharan African countries as predicted from several international studies of student achievement are around 82.

     

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609000634

    Rindermann (2013) comes up with a "best guess" of 75:

    In the past different researchers have come to diverging cognitive ability estimates for people in Africa and of African descent. The paper tries to check the validity of past results by comparing them with outcomes of two new psychometric test studies from East and South Africa; with results from student assessment studies; with predictions based on those variables which, outside Africa, correlate most strongly with intelligence; and by comparing them with further indicators of cognitive ability (descriptions of everyday life and human accomplishment). Integrating these cognitive ability measures with the application of several corrections (due to the higher age of students in Africa, lower African school enrollment, selectivity of samples and higher African secular IQ rise), the best guess for an African average is IQ 75.

     

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741

    But let's suppose you're right: sub-Saharan Africans have a mean IQ in the low 60s. In that case, even a very strong selection effect among African immigrants couldn't possibly explain the relatively high IQ of Igbo immigrants to the UK (which must be at least 100).

    Another thing. How could a mean sub-Saharan IQ of 60-65 square with a mean African American IQ of 80-85? African Americans are about 80% African by ancestry. I suppose one could argue that Africans in Africa are malnourished, but malnutrition isn't a problem in all African countries, and the IQ literature suggests that malnutrition isn't a serious constraint on IQ (re: the famine in the Netherlands during WWII)

    I’m surprised you’d still make over the admixture factor like this. I have found time and time and time again, nobody considers the factor of assortative mating. White admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites. There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I’ve heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    On the other hand, why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn’t that big of a factor? If it’s properly treated in early childhood, the ill effects of it can be easily avoided. There’s a wealth of evidence showing malnutrition lowers IQ.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WowJustWow

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry.
     
    Of course you can always find some; that's the wonder of variability. On the other hand: http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/2012/02/black-history-month.html
    , @iffen

    admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites.
     
    Where are your facts that support this contention?

    One can look at the 1870 censuses in the southern states and see mulattoes by the thousands with the same last names as the largest slaveholders in their area.
    , @Khan Bodin
    [It's much better to combine several short comments into one or two longer and more comprehensive ones. Also, it's not good to have long comments that are just filled with pure insults and profanity without much substantive content.]

    Ehehehe... My God, stupidity of Muricants is really stunning! Tell me something Murican Dip-o-will, how is it possible that your fellow Negro Muricunt Carlson can be "only 20% white" as you stated referring to your corporate media sources, hm? You do understand that 20% is 1/5 of something? You do understand that 1/5 is an odd number, not divisible by 2, hm? So how did your fellow Murican become then? Apparently he didn't have both parents... well according to you that is. That's really, really dumb. But I am not surprised that you stupid Muricants are not able to spot something that logically impossible. After all, logic is not youir "stronger point," right? Lying, deceiving and thieving is. :)
  35. Fuerst’s study makes virtually no mention of the national origin of the immigrants, so it’s really hard to say what value it has. What if they were heavily south sudanese or somalian? It’s like that digit-span study people like referencing.

    Read More
  36. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7977734.stm

    Among the Igbo people of eastern Nigeria the Osu are outcasts, the equivalent of being an “untouchable”. Years ago he and his family would be shunned by society, banished from communal land, banned from village life and refused the right to marry anyone not from an Osu family. Nowadays the only trouble the Osu encounter is when they try to get married.
    But the fear of social stigma is still strong – to the point that most would never admit to being an Osu. They fear the consequences for their families in generations to come or at the hands of people who still believe in the old ways.It took the BBC a long time track down an Osu willing to talk, Igbo journalists, human rights advocates, academics and politicians could suggest no-one.[...]“They were banned from all forms of civil society; they had no land, lived in the shrine of the gods, and if they could, would farm the land next to the road.” [...]
    “If someone lives in Lagos these days, the only time a person may come into contact with it is when they are planning to get married. They go home to tell their families, their parents turn around and say, ‘No you can’t marry because they’re Osu.’” [...] Other Osu have been able to use the ostracism to their advantage, says Mr Obumselu. Unable to make a way in village life, some Osu embraced “Western” education and became Nigeria’s first doctors and lawyers, he says. Consequently many of modern Igboland’s prominent families are Osu. [...] “After all, if in 1800 there might only be a handful of Osu in any place, in 2000 it may be a third of the village!”

    Endogamy and selection of Osu through non-farming occupations such as trading may explain the intelligence of those claiming to be Igbo.

    Read More
  37. @Peter Frost
    there’s no way black Africans average 80 in their home countries. The actual average, at least in sub-Saharan Africa, is likely in the lower 60s

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82:

    On the basis of several reviews of the literature, Lynn [Lynn, R., (2006). Race differences in intelligence: An evolutionary analysis. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.] and Lynn and Vanhanen [Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T., (2006). IQ and global inequality. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.] concluded that the average IQ of the Black population of sub-Saharan Africa lies below 70. In this paper, the authors systematically review published empirical data on the performance of Africans on the following IQ tests: Draw-A-Man (DAM) test, Kaufman-Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), the Wechsler scales (WAIS & WISC), and several other IQ tests (but not the Raven's tests). Inclusion and exclusion criteria are explicitly discussed. Results show that average IQ of Africans on these tests is approximately 82 when compared to UK norms. We provide estimates of the average IQ per country and estimates on the basis of alternative inclusion criteria. Our estimate of average IQ converges with the finding that national IQs of sub-Saharan African countries as predicted from several international studies of student achievement are around 82.

     

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609000634

    Rindermann (2013) comes up with a "best guess" of 75:

    In the past different researchers have come to diverging cognitive ability estimates for people in Africa and of African descent. The paper tries to check the validity of past results by comparing them with outcomes of two new psychometric test studies from East and South Africa; with results from student assessment studies; with predictions based on those variables which, outside Africa, correlate most strongly with intelligence; and by comparing them with further indicators of cognitive ability (descriptions of everyday life and human accomplishment). Integrating these cognitive ability measures with the application of several corrections (due to the higher age of students in Africa, lower African school enrollment, selectivity of samples and higher African secular IQ rise), the best guess for an African average is IQ 75.

     

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741

    But let's suppose you're right: sub-Saharan Africans have a mean IQ in the low 60s. In that case, even a very strong selection effect among African immigrants couldn't possibly explain the relatively high IQ of Igbo immigrants to the UK (which must be at least 100).

    Another thing. How could a mean sub-Saharan IQ of 60-65 square with a mean African American IQ of 80-85? African Americans are about 80% African by ancestry. I suppose one could argue that Africans in Africa are malnourished, but malnutrition isn't a problem in all African countries, and the IQ literature suggests that malnutrition isn't a serious constraint on IQ (re: the famine in the Netherlands during WWII)

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82…Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75

    I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong. Only the most elite Africans…those in schools in urban areas…tend to be the one’s who get tested. Psychologists do not seek out a truly random sample of sub-Saharan Africa which would involve testing AIDs orphans who don’t attend school at all because they are busy taking care of their younger siblings. They don’t go deep into the jungles and isolated rural areas and test children who have been ripped out of school and forced into armies since early childhood and can’t even hold a pencil, let alone read or write. Now you could argue correctly that most tests would be biased against such people, but you have to report the IQ as it is, and then adjust for bias later because otherwise you’re getting a selective sample.

    Richard Lynn, despite his occasional sloppy reporting, is the most underrated IQ researcher on the planet, and he devoted his life to studying this issue, and he put the African IQ at 67. But even that was likely an overestimate because the single best study of African IQ found psychology undergrads had an IQ of 79 (U.S. white norms, adjusted for obsolete norms)

    Being a psychology undergrad in sub-Saharan Africa (at the time of Rushton’s study) was almost as selective as being a PhD is in white countries, so how could the average IQ be 75-82 when their academic elite averages 79. Makes no sense.

    But let’s suppose you’re right: sub-Saharan Africans have a mean IQ in the low 60s. In that case, even a very strong selection effect among African immigrants couldn’t possibly explain the relatively high IQ of Igbo immigrants to the UK (which must be at least 100).

    I haven’t looked at Igbo immigrants specifically so I can’t comment. If the children really do score 100+, it might imply that they are indeed genetically above most sub-Saharans (just as bushmen and pygmies are probably genetically below most sub-Saharans)

    On the other hand, if the children of Indian immigrants to the U.S. can score 110 despite India having a mean IQ around 80, then there might be a simpler explanation (on the other hand the Indian immigrants might be to India what you claim the Igbos are to sub-Sahara)

    Another thing. How could a mean sub-Saharan IQ of 60-65 square with a mean African American IQ of 80-85? African Americans are about 80% African by ancestry.

    The average African American has the opportunity to finish high school while the average sub-Saharan has only about an 8th grade education. It is known that dropping out of high school drops 8 points from your IQ (though not your real intelligence):

    https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/does-dropping-out-of-high-school-lower-your-iq/

    Adding these 8 points brings black Africans from 60-65 to 68-73.

    Next, as Steve Sailer first noted, and I later documented, black Africans are shorter than African Americans. I estimate they are about 0.8 SD shorter:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    Height is even more heritable than IQ is so if sub-optimum nutrition is powerful enough to deduct 0.8 SD from their height, then common sense says it deducted 0.8 SD from their IQ (12 IQ points)

    Adding these 12 points brings them from 68-73 to 80-85.

    It’s very analogous to the Flynn effect. The same combination of factors that caused white IQ to rise from 70 to 100 over the 20th century, also explain contemporaneous differences between African Americans and blacks in Africa

    I suppose one could argue that Africans in Africa are malnourished, but malnutrition isn’t a problem in all African countries

    I prefer the term sub-optimum nutrition because it needn’t imply people are stunted, wasted, and starving, but it does imply that all over Africa, and most of the World, people are slightly shorter than they would be if born and raised in the West (this even applies to the elites btw)

    Indeed even the U.S. had widespread sub-optimum nutrition as recently as the 1980s.

    and the IQ literature suggests that malnutrition isn’t a serious constraint on IQ (re: the famine in the Netherlands during WWII)

    Was the famine powerful enough to stunt height? If not, it’s not analogous. Lynn has cited excellent research showing the effect of nutrition on IQ:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    "Next, as Steve Sailer first noted, and I later documented, black Africans are shorter than African Americans."

    I suspect that during slavery the desire for strength led to selective breeding of the strong and tall by slave owners.
    , @foo

    On the other hand, if the children of Indian immigrants to the U.S. can score 110 despite India having a mean IQ around 80, then there might be a simpler explanation (on the other hand the Indian immigrants might be to India what you claim the Igbos are to sub-Sahara)

     

    LOL.

    By "Indian" do you mean Aryan, Dravidian, Adivasi (aboriginal) or Mongoloid/chinese ? All of those groups are entirely separate from each other and number in the hundreds of millions in India.
  38. @Priss Factor
    "And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?"

    Best blacks go into football and basketball that are the prestige sports and get most girls, glory, and cheers. Also, they offer lots of money in the pros.

    Blacks don't bother with wrestling that no one pays attention to.

    Even so, there have been plenty of black wrestlers in the Olympics who won the gold.
    Surely you know of the Cubans. And Kenny Monday.

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

    So, blacks dominate in the most powerful positions in football, basketball, and excel in wrestling.

    For every black athlete that becomes rich as a pro, there’s a thousand others who fail to do so. Inner city high schools are half filled with black kids who don’t study because they think they are going to become something like the next Lebron James. The other half are black kids who don’t study because they think they’ll get rich as a rapper or drug dealer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    Most blacks do not study because they can't read what they are supposed to study.
    , @Priss Factor
    "For every black athlete that becomes rich as a pro, there’s a thousand others who fail to do so. Inner city high schools are half filled with black kids who don’t study because they think they are going to become something like the next Lebron James."

    That's true, but while they're in high school and college, they bang a lot of girls, many of them white. Black guys may be dumb, but so are white bimbos who think every black athlete in high school or college is gonna be some star one day. Or they don't think about the future at all and only think about FUN NOW.

    Also, even if they don't make it into the pros, they can go to night clubs and have affairs with even well-educated white women. These women will likely not settle down with these negroes, but they'll have been familiarized with them.
  39. “Richard Lynn, despite his occasional sloppy reporting, is the most underrated IQ researcher on the planet, and he devoted his life to studying this issue, and he put the African IQ at 67.”

    Richard Lynn is an incredibly sloppy researcher, sorry. I’m surprised you’re repeating this given the fact you accepted Jason Malloy’s claims about his carelessness (who used to be a big fan of his work) here: http://humanvarieties.org/2014/07/16/hvgiq-thailand/comment-page-1/#comment-4244

    He isn’t underrated by any means, unless you’re talking about his lack of public acceptance or circles outside of HBD. In those though, he is tremendously popular and has been for sometime. I cannot count the number of people who’ve uncritically swallowed and repeated his figures for years, or will zealously defend almost anything he trots out. His errors go back to some of the earliest parts of his career (like when he in the 70′s claimed the Japanese have an IQ of 110, a figure that was quickly shot down and has never been supported again), and his most egregious error I’d have to say would be when he claimed Equatorial Guinea had an IQ of 59, the lowest score in the world.

    This turned out to be a score based on developmentally disabled white children in Spain. He apparently somehow got this confused with a test (with no scores given) on rural children in EG or something in the same book. This is an incredible error, and is the exact kind of stuff liberals have used to dismiss IQ testing for decades. His more recent work has included arguing Sicilians are as smart as Mexicans (and this couldn’t be due to anything other than mixing with arabs and africans), Balkan whites have lower IQ’s solely due to mixing with Turks, Albania having an IQ of 80, and Mizrahi jews (who have produced 4 nobelists in science, among other accomplishments) also being just as smart as mexicans/sicilians.

    Lynn may have devoted his entire life to IQ research, but making something your life’s work doesn’t make you a credible researcher. If anything, Lynn strikes me as being somewhat autistic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Thank you for making me feel guiltless about having left most of Lynn's stuff unread despite having no great problem with the general proposition that IQ matters and probably isn't evenly distributed amongst different races, classes and ethnic groups.

    He, and Phil Rushton with whom I raised my doubts, seemed to have forsaken common sense altogether when they cited average IQs of 60 or less.

  40. So why doesn’t he speak of Igbo excellence? Probably because he assumes that all sub-Saharan Africans are fundamentally the same. Or maybe he assumes that all humans are fundamentally the same.

    I expect the Ibo do not separate themselves from other Africans for the same reason that Jews hate being separated from whiteness: it would make them a target.

    White people are harangued as having all the best spots in life. They feel guilty and give up wealth and position to minorities. But what if whites found (as Unz reported regarding Harvard admissions, for example) that they really DONT have the best spots and positions? What if Jews and whites were tallied separately, and whites found out they were not at the top of the heap? That they were, in fact, UNDER-represented. What then?

    And by extension, what if UK blacks were separated out from Ibo, and generic UK blacks discovered that they were also doing worse than they thought (and Ibo were doing way, way better)?

    There is a reason that the Ibo wrap themselves in “blackness” and not “Iboness” all over the world. Throughout the West, the more dumb blacks there are, the more pressure there is to find the “best and brightest” Negros and promote them rapidly. And that means wonderful things will be showered on the Ibo.

    A couple decades ago, HLS Prof. Lani Guinier pointed out that Harvard met its black Affirmative Action quota by populating its incoming classes with 2/3 elite foreign blacks. If you were Ibo would you want that fact to get around to dumb-as-a-box-of-rocks domestic American blacks?

    Read More
  41. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Frost is confused about regression to the mean. Genetic regression to the mean occurs — cf. the breeder’s equation.

    Read More
  42. @Peter Frost
    So if we “took a number of black American elites to the UK as expatriate workers, selected only from those professionals who make 200,000 dollars a year in their homes” we should expect their children to score similar to White Britons,

    Very few African immigrants to the UK make 200,000 dollars a year. Very, very, very few. You need to get out and meet a few African immigrants. Most of them aren't elite individuals, and many are dirt-poor.

    John Fuerst looked into this question and found a weak selection effect. African immigrants to the U.S. are about a third of a standard deviation above the mean IQ of their home countries.

    Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    The Igbo live in a country that is run by non-Igbo. That's why they wanted to separate and create their own country. It would be interesting to see how well Biafra would have turned out, but we will never know.

    As individuals, Igbo do very well, but they have to succeed in a society where corruption is the norm. It's so normal that most Nigerians don't consider it to be corruption. It's just the sort of thing you're supposed to do. For this reason, Igbo do a lot better in meritocratic societies like the United Kingdom than in Nigeria. It's sad but true.

    For what it's worth, there are Igbo of international renown. See:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Igbo_people#Science

    Dear Dr. Frost:
    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD.
    However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Igbo_people#Science
    This “Science” section refers to 7 different persons.
    4 of them may be related to “hard sciences”. All info below is from Wikipedia, unless stated otherwise.

    Bisi Ezerioha (born January 6, 1972) a.k.a. Ndubisi Ezerioha, is a professional racing driver, engine builder, engineer, and industrialist. Dr. Emesia Ezerioha holds bachelor’s degrees in Earth sciences and Geology from California State University, Los Angeles, Master’s degrees in Earth Science and Economics and a doctorate in International Marketing.

    Chike Obi (April 17, 1921 – March 13, 2008) was a Nigerian politician, mathematician and professor.
    Obi was educated in various parts of Nigeria before reading mathematics as an external student of the University of London. Immediately after his first degree, he won a scholarship to do research study at Pembroke College, Cambridge, followed by doctoral studies at Massachusetts Institute of Technology[citation needed] in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States, becoming in 1950, the first Nigerian to receive a PhD in mathematics. In 1997, Obi claimed to have found an elementary proof to Fermat’s Last Theorem. This work was carried out at his Nanna Institute for Scientific Studies in Onitsha, Eastern Nigeria and published in Algebras, Groups and Geometries.[1][2][3] A review of this proof published in Mathematical Reviews that Obi’s proof is a previously-known false proof.[4][5] Fermat’s Last Theorem had already been solved in 1994 by Andrew Wiles and Richard Taylor.

    Bartholomew Nnaji was born in 1956 in Enugu State, and earned a Bachelor of Science degree in physics at St John’s University, and then proceeded to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University for post-graduate studies. He joined the faculty at University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1983 [IffU: apparently without getting Ph.D. degree.]

    Philip Emeagwali (born in 1954) is a Nigerian-born engineer, mathematician, computer scientist and geologist. He was the winner of the 1989 Gordon Bell Prize in the “price/performance” category, for his use of a Connection Machine supercomputer, and has a 190 IQ.[1][2]. Source:
    [1]: http://emeagwali.com/biography/for-kids/ten-smartest-scientists-of-all-times.pdf
    From there: T e n S m a r t e s t S c i e n t i s t s o f A l l T i m e s Page: 1 (21)
    Ten Smartest Scientists
    1. Gottfried Leibniz (IQ 205)
    2. Blaise Pascal (IQ 195)
    3. Philip Emeagwali (IQ 190)
    3. Sir Isaac Newton (IQ 190)
    3. Pierre Laplace (IQ 190)
    6. Rene Descartes (IQ 185)
    6. Galileo (IQ 185)
    8. Johannes Kepler (IQ 175)
    9. Charles Darwin (IQ 165)
    10. Albert Einstein (IQ 160)
    Back to Wikipedia:
    Emeagwali studied for a Ph.D. degree from the University of Michigan from 1987 through 1991. His thesis was not accepted by a committee of internal and external examiners and thus he was not awarded the degree. Emeagwali filed a court challenge, stating that the decision was a violation of his civil rights and that the university had discriminated against him in several ways because of his race. The court challenge was dismissed, as was an appeal to the Michigan state Court of Appeals.[7]
    Emeagwali received the 1989 Gordon Bell Prize for an application of the CM-2 massively-parallel computer.

    IffU: working for the last 21 years in an USA University, I can tell you that it a case absolutely unheard of: that a minority student was considered as not deserving a degree, for which he was studying. The more so that in the process (in 1989) he got a Prize from ACM: Association for Computing Machinery.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Khan Bodin
    I have read in some Stephen hawking book that he had been determined to have IQ of 250 (I think it was A Brief History of Time), and we in the Balkans have had our politican star with the IQ of 205. His name is Vojislav Seselj, the youngest PhD of former Yugoslavia and the man who single-handedly destroyed that NWO court in Hague (he had been on trial for 13 fucking years; I think that under the Rome Convention a trial must be concluded within 2 or 3 years, but we cannot expect from you Western trash to uphold to the norms and standards, even the ones you yoruself created, now can we?). Anyhow, if you believe in that Anglo sources of scientists' IQ, then you a reatard of the highest order. Typical retarded Murican I would say. ehehehehe


    hey, and Leibniz is not even amongst the first 10 scietists of all time. The most intelligent man who ever walked the Earth was Karl Friedrich Gauss. You can inform yourself about the his abilities even as 7 year old boy. I am sure that even 90% of today's students would not be able to solve the math problems, and in time, he was able to do. Even as a boy. And no Archimedes in that list of yours too... My god, you really are simple creatures... Murican simpletons. :)
  43. This sequence of articles presents little or no evidence of value. Get the data: administer IQ tests to representative samples of Igbos and other tribal groups. Then argue about genetic influences if the Igbo scores are significantly higher. Arguing about the sort of “evidence” presented in these articles is pointless. Genetically influenced differences in aptitude and personality profiles between, say, the San, the pygmies, the Inuit, the aboriginal people of Australia, etc., would surprise no one but the PC faithful.

    Read More
  44. Regression to the mean is something else. It happens because of genetic change. For instance, a man with above-average IQ will likely marry a woman with above-average IQ. But only part of their above-averageness is genetic. The rest is due to favorable circumstances. Or simply luck. So their children’s IQ will likely be a bit closer to the mean of the overall population. That second generation will in turn marry people with similar IQs. And their children will likewise be closer still to the population mean. Eventually, several generations later, the descendants of that original couple will have a mean IQ that matches the population mean

    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits.

    That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    The breeder’s equation | West Hunter

    Yes, regression is due to luck – or more precisely, luck going away. That includes non-additive genetic effects and developmental randomness. It doesn’t necessarily include most of the environmental factors most people think it does:

    Environmental Hereditarianism

    He also points to the example of African American families. The children of middle-class and even upper-class African Americans do worse on IQ tests than the children of lower-class Euro-American families. So even if you select from the black elite, the next generation will still underperform whites.

    Not necessarily. It depends on how tight your selection is. See my comment to Chisala

    We now come to the second explanation. It is assumed in this debate that the GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) is a good proxy for IQ, which in turn is a proxy for the heritable component of intelligence. Is this true? Or does the GCSE largely measure something that is culturally acquired rather than heritable? Perhaps something as simple as showing up for class, doing one’s assignments, or having a private tutor. This point is raised by one commenter:

    The GCSE has a pretty substantial shared environment component. That right there shows it’s not a pure measure of ability, but is open to parental manipulation. That also makes cross-group comparison of GCSE suspect.

    My thought on Chisala’s piece is that there is simply no there there. I didn’t bother much with it because it is clear that, quite frankly, he hasn’t the foggiest idea what he’s talking about. I was able to pick apart the key flaws with one comment, both to this piece and his previous. It’s not worth the attention being given to it.

    Yes, there is variation within sub-Saharan Africa. Yes, there is individual variation within any group. Yes, selective migration is a key factor to consider whenever people move across space. Yes, both behavioral genetics and the breeder’s equation do work, so the moral is that if you find something that purportedly invalidates them, Occam’s Razor says you likely screwed up somewhere.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Bayz
    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits.

    That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).


    Regression to the mean is only a one time effect if the population that is regressing to the mean continues "endogenous mating." An individual family would not, which is why is families regression to the mean would continue through multiple generations:

    https://jasonbayz.wordpress.com/2015/10/10/regression-to-the-mean/
    , @Anonymo1

    Yes, regression is due to luck – or more precisely, luck going away.
     
    Isn't it also regression if the kids do better than their below-average parents?
    , @Wizard of Oz
    I am interested in the GCSE - IQ question because a nephew of mine has just got 10 A*s at a selective private day school where they all work hard, get tutored in weak subjects, do the Mock exams a few months earlier and take part in a wide range of extra curricular activities. Apparently 68% of his 160+ cohorts results were A*s (more than 90% As) and 1 out of six got the coveted 10 straight A*s.

    I've done a bit of searching and find confusingly different assertions. E.g. that an IQ of 100 should be enough for an A at GCSE; but also a table which suggested that, with some laborious adjustments, an A meant an 80 per cent mark and A* 90 per cent. As the overall percentage of A*s amongst all candidates is about 6.2 per cent I would guess that even a single A* would suggest an IQ of >110 and three probably > 120 or so unless there were also four Cs and a couple if Ds as well.

    So how would 10A*s (including maths and a couple of languages) translate? I recall Eysenck's saying the 11 plus test was fine provided you coached and practice tested all candidates adequately. At a selective academic school with ambitious parents might one not expect to get something like the same form of accuracy? But maybe the results still have to be discounted a little as IQ proxies because most candidates nationwide would not have been as rigorously prepared.
  45. @Wizard of Oz
    I think you've missed out on a bit of thinking and writing if not research which has moved beyond the common sense defying average IQs of 70 or less attributed by Lynn, Rushton et al.

    As Ron Unz showed with particular reference to rapid average IQ increases amongst the Irish and (from memory) Slovenians that clearly couldn't be explained by genetic change comparisons of IQs from pre modern rural backgrounds with those from modern urban backgrounds tells us nothing about the genetic potential and therefore of the possible performance of subsequent generations after migration. True it may say something about immigrant employability in the short term but that's a different point.

    And you need to consider the Flynn Effect which also demonstrates that there are limitations on genetic explanations of IQ scores as between groups. That is not to say that there are not large inherited group differences in average cognitive abilities. But one shouldn't be simple minded about the evidence.

    People start from the assumption that all cognitive tests that are applied worldwide are technically perfect and universally standardized.

    And based on the assumption that cognitive tests can explain exponential changes in behavior and intelligence in a short time.

    Ireland before the economic boom, had a continuous high emigration rate for English-speaking countries, low urbanization rates, educational level, likely not to be the best in Europe, bad social system and economic, cultural conformism for catholicism. Not to mention what I have spoken many times in hbdsphere where I emphasize as possible and plausible limitations of cognitive tests on their ability to draft \ express perfectly the idea of ​​intelligence.

    Another possibility open.

    Storage \ social and economic organization that is objective and emphatic can make the difference between many nations, based on the idea that a nation is like a wild horse that needs guidance by a knight and that most people are like ‘little horses’ ‘that make up the body of this social organism.

    an intelligent and energetic elite, can produce the wealth cycle, improving meritocratic communication, that is, being more efficient, objective and agile in the selection of the fittest for certain professions, producing a collective sense of harmony and ‘ developmental continuity ‘ ‘, that is, improving the quality of life and optimism of the people. From the moment in which you can ensure developmental continuity with the most basic (and important) areas to maintain a superstructure, then you can create a room for improvement in all other areas, including population biology.

    Without guidelines, the majority of ordinary people who are conformists will conform.

    Read More
  46. @Mark
    For every black athlete that becomes rich as a pro, there's a thousand others who fail to do so. Inner city high schools are half filled with black kids who don't study because they think they are going to become something like the next Lebron James. The other half are black kids who don't study because they think they'll get rich as a rapper or drug dealer.

    Most blacks do not study because they can’t read what they are supposed to study.

    Read More
  47. @pumpkinperson
    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82...Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75

    I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong. Only the most elite Africans...those in schools in urban areas...tend to be the one's who get tested. Psychologists do not seek out a truly random sample of sub-Saharan Africa which would involve testing AIDs orphans who don't attend school at all because they are busy taking care of their younger siblings. They don't go deep into the jungles and isolated rural areas and test children who have been ripped out of school and forced into armies since early childhood and can't even hold a pencil, let alone read or write. Now you could argue correctly that most tests would be biased against such people, but you have to report the IQ as it is, and then adjust for bias later because otherwise you're getting a selective sample.

    Richard Lynn, despite his occasional sloppy reporting, is the most underrated IQ researcher on the planet, and he devoted his life to studying this issue, and he put the African IQ at 67. But even that was likely an overestimate because the single best study of African IQ found psychology undergrads had an IQ of 79 (U.S. white norms, adjusted for obsolete norms)

    Being a psychology undergrad in sub-Saharan Africa (at the time of Rushton's study) was almost as selective as being a PhD is in white countries, so how could the average IQ be 75-82 when their academic elite averages 79. Makes no sense.


    But let’s suppose you’re right: sub-Saharan Africans have a mean IQ in the low 60s. In that case, even a very strong selection effect among African immigrants couldn’t possibly explain the relatively high IQ of Igbo immigrants to the UK (which must be at least 100).

    I haven't looked at Igbo immigrants specifically so I can't comment. If the children really do score 100+, it might imply that they are indeed genetically above most sub-Saharans (just as bushmen and pygmies are probably genetically below most sub-Saharans)

    On the other hand, if the children of Indian immigrants to the U.S. can score 110 despite India having a mean IQ around 80, then there might be a simpler explanation (on the other hand the Indian immigrants might be to India what you claim the Igbos are to sub-Sahara)


    Another thing. How could a mean sub-Saharan IQ of 60-65 square with a mean African American IQ of 80-85? African Americans are about 80% African by ancestry.

    The average African American has the opportunity to finish high school while the average sub-Saharan has only about an 8th grade education. It is known that dropping out of high school drops 8 points from your IQ (though not your real intelligence):

    https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/does-dropping-out-of-high-school-lower-your-iq/

    Adding these 8 points brings black Africans from 60-65 to 68-73.

    Next, as Steve Sailer first noted, and I later documented, black Africans are shorter than African Americans. I estimate they are about 0.8 SD shorter:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    Height is even more heritable than IQ is so if sub-optimum nutrition is powerful enough to deduct 0.8 SD from their height, then common sense says it deducted 0.8 SD from their IQ (12 IQ points)

    Adding these 12 points brings them from 68-73 to 80-85.

    It's very analogous to the Flynn effect. The same combination of factors that caused white IQ to rise from 70 to 100 over the 20th century, also explain contemporaneous differences between African Americans and blacks in Africa


    I suppose one could argue that Africans in Africa are malnourished, but malnutrition isn’t a problem in all African countries

    I prefer the term sub-optimum nutrition because it needn't imply people are stunted, wasted, and starving, but it does imply that all over Africa, and most of the World, people are slightly shorter than they would be if born and raised in the West (this even applies to the elites btw)

    Indeed even the U.S. had widespread sub-optimum nutrition as recently as the 1980s.

    and the IQ literature suggests that malnutrition isn’t a serious constraint on IQ (re: the famine in the Netherlands during WWII)

    Was the famine powerful enough to stunt height? If not, it's not analogous. Lynn has cited excellent research showing the effect of nutrition on IQ:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

    “Next, as Steve Sailer first noted, and I later documented, black Africans are shorter than African Americans.”

    I suspect that during slavery the desire for strength led to selective breeding of the strong and tall by slave owners.

    Read More
  48. @Priss Factor
    "Is Priss Factory some kind of sophisticated troll?"

    Don't you see the reality all around you?

    You must accept the truth and begin on that premise.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tch1CuMV9M

    But your message is self-undermining. If you want to protect the status of white males, why broadcast their inferiority? To propose a policy of segretation predicated on the greater sexual desirability of the negro is to propose affirmative action in mating. This wouldn’t have any greater real benefit for the esteem in which white males are held than affirmative action produced for negroes.

    And what about white women? Do they count for nothing? If she really prefers the negro, isn’t the moral presumption that she should have him?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "But your message is self-undermining. If you want to protect the status of white males, why broadcast their inferiority? To propose a policy of segretation predicated on the greater sexual desirability of the negro is to propose affirmative action in mating. This wouldn’t have any greater real benefit for the esteem in which white males are held than affirmative action produced for negroes."

    You make a good point, but the cat is out of the bag. White women already know the negros are badderasser than white men or 'white boys' are.

    https://www.facebook.com/Atmjeff/videos/1109015979126843/

    This is why white guys should have been more honest about this problem long ago and effected total and permanent separation BEFORE white women came down with jungalo fever. It's too late now.

    So, white guys must be truthful and candid in confronting this problem. They must call for a safe zone for themselves and white women who still prefer white men to black men. Of course, even white women who have sex with black men may choose to finally settle with white men cuz blacks are so out of control.

    Also, despite the physical attraction, many white women still stay away from blacks due to fact that many black males fail economically and cuz black males tend to be more volatile and abusive.

    "And what about white women? Do they count for nothing? If she really prefers the negro, isn’t the moral presumption that she should have him?"

    Sure, she can leave the white nation and go live in Jamaica, Haiti, or black Africa. Let her get her fill of Negroes but away from white nations. No one is denying her the right of jungalo fever. But let her do in a black land. But she has no right to bring a negro to white land. How dare she reject white men but then demand that white men accept her and her negro mate? Her message to white men is 'you guys are not good enough for me', but she expects white men to honor her and pay taxes to take care of her, her negro mate, and their mulatto kids? What kind of crap is that? That is cucky.

    It's like eco-systems. For an eco-system to be viable, it needs to keep certain organisms while excluding others. For instance, introducing rats and pigs into Galapagos was disastrous as they ate up all the tortoise eggs.
    Releasing certain kinds of invasive species of frogs into another eco-system can disrupt stuff and wipe out existing organisms. It's like the arrival of red ants can wipe out black ants.

    Well, among humans, there are geno-systems. For a certain geno-system to be viable, its men must have access to its women, and its women must respect its men. When you introduce Negroes into a white geno-system, Negro males pussify white males, and then white females lose respect for white men. And then Negro males act wild and hump both white women and black women and produce all kinds of problems with mulattos and black kids running wild.

    So, the white geno-system must be preserved by keeping white males safe from black males. As for white females with jungalo fever, have them go live in Nigeria or Kenya.
  49. @JayMan

    Regression to the mean is something else. It happens because of genetic change. For instance, a man with above-average IQ will likely marry a woman with above-average IQ. But only part of their above-averageness is genetic. The rest is due to favorable circumstances. Or simply luck. So their children’s IQ will likely be a bit closer to the mean of the overall population. That second generation will in turn marry people with similar IQs. And their children will likewise be closer still to the population mean. Eventually, several generations later, the descendants of that original couple will have a mean IQ that matches the population mean
     
    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some "origin" mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits.

    That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    The breeder’s equation | West Hunter

    Yes, regression is due to luck – or more precisely, luck going away. That includes non-additive genetic effects and developmental randomness. It doesn't necessarily include most of the environmental factors most people think it does:

    Environmental Hereditarianism

    He also points to the example of African American families. The children of middle-class and even upper-class African Americans do worse on IQ tests than the children of lower-class Euro-American families. So even if you select from the black elite, the next generation will still underperform whites.
     
    Not necessarily. It depends on how tight your selection is. See my comment to Chisala

    We now come to the second explanation. It is assumed in this debate that the GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) is a good proxy for IQ, which in turn is a proxy for the heritable component of intelligence. Is this true? Or does the GCSE largely measure something that is culturally acquired rather than heritable? Perhaps something as simple as showing up for class, doing one’s assignments, or having a private tutor. This point is raised by one commenter:
     
    The GCSE has a pretty substantial shared environment component. That right there shows it's not a pure measure of ability, but is open to parental manipulation. That also makes cross-group comparison of GCSE suspect.

    My thought on Chisala's piece is that there is simply no there there. I didn't bother much with it because it is clear that, quite frankly, he hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking about. I was able to pick apart the key flaws with one comment, both to this piece and his previous. It's not worth the attention being given to it.

    Yes, there is variation within sub-Saharan Africa. Yes, there is individual variation within any group. Yes, selective migration is a key factor to consider whenever people move across space. Yes, both behavioral genetics and the breeder's equation do work, so the moral is that if you find something that purportedly invalidates them, Occam's Razor says you likely screwed up somewhere.

    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits.

    That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    Regression to the mean is only a one time effect if the population that is regressing to the mean continues “endogenous mating.” An individual family would not, which is why is families regression to the mean would continue through multiple generations:

    https://jasonbayz.wordpress.com/2015/10/10/regression-to-the-mean/

    Read More
    • Replies: @JayMan

    Regression to the mean is only a one time effect if the population that is regressing to the mean continues “endogenous mating.” An individual family would not, which is why is families regression to the mean would continue through multiple generations
     
    No. It is less than perfectly assortative mating that causes regression to the mean within families. Children don't regress to the mean of their population; they regress to the mean of their family. (Obviously, the mean of all families is the mean of the population.)

    If the descendants of parents whose family mean IQ is above average mate only with those whose family means are also similarly above average, there will be no regression in their offspring. This is how castes form, and this why Gregory Clark found what he found (very slow regression to the mean for families). The little regression Clark did find only occurs because people don't mate perfectly assortatively for "moxie". Clark found near 0 regression in India, where people mate within their caste.
  50. @pumpkinperson
    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82...Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75

    I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong. Only the most elite Africans...those in schools in urban areas...tend to be the one's who get tested. Psychologists do not seek out a truly random sample of sub-Saharan Africa which would involve testing AIDs orphans who don't attend school at all because they are busy taking care of their younger siblings. They don't go deep into the jungles and isolated rural areas and test children who have been ripped out of school and forced into armies since early childhood and can't even hold a pencil, let alone read or write. Now you could argue correctly that most tests would be biased against such people, but you have to report the IQ as it is, and then adjust for bias later because otherwise you're getting a selective sample.

    Richard Lynn, despite his occasional sloppy reporting, is the most underrated IQ researcher on the planet, and he devoted his life to studying this issue, and he put the African IQ at 67. But even that was likely an overestimate because the single best study of African IQ found psychology undergrads had an IQ of 79 (U.S. white norms, adjusted for obsolete norms)

    Being a psychology undergrad in sub-Saharan Africa (at the time of Rushton's study) was almost as selective as being a PhD is in white countries, so how could the average IQ be 75-82 when their academic elite averages 79. Makes no sense.


    But let’s suppose you’re right: sub-Saharan Africans have a mean IQ in the low 60s. In that case, even a very strong selection effect among African immigrants couldn’t possibly explain the relatively high IQ of Igbo immigrants to the UK (which must be at least 100).

    I haven't looked at Igbo immigrants specifically so I can't comment. If the children really do score 100+, it might imply that they are indeed genetically above most sub-Saharans (just as bushmen and pygmies are probably genetically below most sub-Saharans)

    On the other hand, if the children of Indian immigrants to the U.S. can score 110 despite India having a mean IQ around 80, then there might be a simpler explanation (on the other hand the Indian immigrants might be to India what you claim the Igbos are to sub-Sahara)


    Another thing. How could a mean sub-Saharan IQ of 60-65 square with a mean African American IQ of 80-85? African Americans are about 80% African by ancestry.

    The average African American has the opportunity to finish high school while the average sub-Saharan has only about an 8th grade education. It is known that dropping out of high school drops 8 points from your IQ (though not your real intelligence):

    https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/does-dropping-out-of-high-school-lower-your-iq/

    Adding these 8 points brings black Africans from 60-65 to 68-73.

    Next, as Steve Sailer first noted, and I later documented, black Africans are shorter than African Americans. I estimate they are about 0.8 SD shorter:

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/05/more-thoughts-on-the-high-iqs-of-african-immigrants-in-britain-2/

    Height is even more heritable than IQ is so if sub-optimum nutrition is powerful enough to deduct 0.8 SD from their height, then common sense says it deducted 0.8 SD from their IQ (12 IQ points)

    Adding these 12 points brings them from 68-73 to 80-85.

    It's very analogous to the Flynn effect. The same combination of factors that caused white IQ to rise from 70 to 100 over the 20th century, also explain contemporaneous differences between African Americans and blacks in Africa


    I suppose one could argue that Africans in Africa are malnourished, but malnutrition isn’t a problem in all African countries

    I prefer the term sub-optimum nutrition because it needn't imply people are stunted, wasted, and starving, but it does imply that all over Africa, and most of the World, people are slightly shorter than they would be if born and raised in the West (this even applies to the elites btw)

    Indeed even the U.S. had widespread sub-optimum nutrition as recently as the 1980s.

    and the IQ literature suggests that malnutrition isn’t a serious constraint on IQ (re: the famine in the Netherlands during WWII)

    Was the famine powerful enough to stunt height? If not, it's not analogous. Lynn has cited excellent research showing the effect of nutrition on IQ:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

    On the other hand, if the children of Indian immigrants to the U.S. can score 110 despite India having a mean IQ around 80, then there might be a simpler explanation (on the other hand the Indian immigrants might be to India what you claim the Igbos are to sub-Sahara)

    LOL.

    By “Indian” do you mean Aryan, Dravidian, Adivasi (aboriginal) or Mongoloid/chinese ? All of those groups are entirely separate from each other and number in the hundreds of millions in India.

    Read More
  51. There is something wrong with a man that writes article after article that proves that blacks are stupid.

    Telling someone that they are genetically inferior is a very wrong thing to do – PERIOD. Good people do not do that.

    Blacks are the way they are because they come from a tropical culture that had different criterion for success. From a cultural standpoint blacks have been separated and isolated from the main culture in America. Where they integrate with white culture, they do well. No one would call blacks in NYC “stepin fetchit.”

    The truth is that we all do not have to be rocket scientists to live and achieve a good life.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The reason such articles are repeatedly written is because whites have been blamed for any lack of success or among blacks. No matter what we do, it's whites' fault. Washington, D.C. spends more money (with a black school board for mostly black children) than anyother city, and yet the results are among the lowest. And it's all our (whites') fault, leading to yet more brow beating and tax goudging, and guilt feelings about reporting being mugged (unless of course the mugger is white.)

    That's why. It's not because anyone enjoys the process. It's sheer self-protection and also, just getting at the truth. If you feel you're doing well and you're ok, great.
    , @Deduction
    He's not telling anyone specific that they are inferior when he says that blacks have lower average IQs. Only someone who does not understand what average means should be offended and in which case as with you the presumption that they're a bit thick would be right anyway.
  52. As noted in my paper, I was mostly unable to disaggregate the scores of Black West Indian and African immigrants. As stated, I estimated an average origin IQ of 80 based on the weighted average of the region of origin countries:

    Yes, you were talking about all black immigrants to the U.S. Let’s suppose that African immigrants are more stringently selected than Caribbean immigrants. How stringent must the selection be to go from a mean IQ of 80 in the source population to a mean IQ of 100 in the immigrant population? Jason Bayz did this sort of calculation, the difference being that he used a mean IQ of 85 for the source population. His finding: to go from 85 to 100, you have to select immigrants entirely from the top 10%. No exceptions. All immigrants from the top 10%.

    To my knowledge, only the principality of Monaco has that kind of immigration policy. The United Kingdom certainly doesn’t.

    The “immigrant selection” hypothesis becomes even more untenable if the source population has a mean IQ of 80. And if we assume a mean IQ of 65 for sub-Saharan Africans, we enter the realm of make-believe. To make the hypothesis work, we have to assume that all African immigrants to the UK come from the top 1%.

    I was under the impression that African Americans are largely of Igbo descent. If Igbo are the Jews of Africa, why are our substantially Igbo descent legacy African Americans not so apt?/i>

    About 14% of all African slaves in the Americas came from the Bight of Biafra. There are other nationalities in that region, but the Igbo are the dominant one. So African Americans might be 10% of Igbo origin.

    http://africanhistory.about.com/library/bl/bl-slavery-stats4.htm

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It’s not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional.

    Who is Ben Carson?

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I’ve heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It’s based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83.

    why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn’t that big of a factor?

    The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.

    Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don’t.

    Fuerst’s study makes virtually no mention of the national origin of the immigrants, so it’s really hard to say what value it has.

    It has value for those who argue that all black nationalities are alike in terms of IQ potential. For such people, the hypothesis of immigrant selection seems to be the only explanation for the existence of high-performing African immigrants in the UK.

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82…Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75. I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong.

    I’m happy that you’re 99% sure of myself. I’m lucky if I’m 80%! Seriously, Rindermann is an HBD-friendly academic, and his review of the literature is worth more than a terse dismissal.

    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Frost is confused about regression to the mean. Genetic regression to the mean occurs

    If the regression is genetic, it isn’t what Chanda Chisala characterizes as the “HBD position,” i.e., all black people share the same genetic potential, and it is only through striving that they can make the best of this potential. When they stop striving, they revert to the same sub-Saharan mean.

    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD. However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people

    Yes, and you found only 7 scientists. My argument was that Igbo have to succeed in a society run by non-Igbo. I then referred to that list to rebut the argument that there are no Igbo scientists.

    If you moved to Nigeria, would you have the same chances for success? That’s the situation many Igbo find themselves in.

    Get the data: administer IQ tests to representative samples of Igbos and other tribal groups. Then argue about genetic influences if the Igbo scores are significantly higher.

    We have some data, and in some ways the “soft data” seem more impressive than the “hard data.” If Igbos do better than non-Igbo Nigerians in both Nigeria and the United Kingdom, they must have something going for them. If you want, you can argue that it’s simply there “culture.” One would have to do adoption studies or, better yet, genome studies to disprove the culture hypothesis.

    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits. That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    Your assumption is “random mating within the population.” My assumption is “mating with people of similar background, i.e., similar IQ.” Both assumptions are valid if one states them up front.

    Galton (who invented this term) talked about a multigenerational regression to the mean.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    "Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It’s not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional."

    There is little reason at all to suspect it given assortative mating. It's the same story today in black-white mixings- why should it have been much different in the past?

    And you ask who Ben Carson is, which is surprising. Have you followed any news of the US presidential election? You could have also googled him.

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

    "The results of a DNA test on the television series African American Lives estimated his ancestry as 20% European and 80% African, including ancestors within the Makua people."

    The Makua are a southeast african people, interestingly enough.

    "The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit."

    The effects of malnutrition are very well documented, even with just one chemical like iodine. I don't know much about the netherlands in this case, but you are simply wrong in claiming malnutrition doesn't have much effect on IQ.

    "Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don’t."

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time? I doubt it. On the other hand, how often are african IQ scores ever reliable?

    "The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It’s based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83."

    I don't buy this. Those scores come from all sectors of society and have been accumulated for decades, and you are the first person I have ever seen claim that this depresses the IQ scores. If that were the case, wouldn't this apply to whites as well? Wouldn't the effect be even larger than 2-3 points given how much more often black students are expelled or truant?

    There is no real reason from what I've seen to question that it's any lower than 85, and definitely not the possible score of 78 Rushton and Jensen came up with a few years before their death, which struck me as an attempt at shock value more than anything.
    , @pumpkinperson
    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Let's say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average. Psychology students in sub-Sahara average IQs around 79. Given the 0.6 correlation between mid-parent IQ and adult offspring IQ, the expected IQ of their kids would be 60% as far above an African mean of 65 as they are:

    0.6(79 - 65) + 65 = IQ 73

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    73 + 12 = 85

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points:

    73 + 8 = 93


    So it's easy to see how they might get to 93

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test. Or perhaps the claim that they score as high as whites is misleading because the best and brightest whites often don't attend the same schools as immigrants
    , @pumpkinperson
    The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.


    The evidence suggests the famine had minimal impact on head size, and by inference, brain size and IQ:

    https://books.google.ca/books?id=pGGmOwuXkuAC&pg=PA220&lpg=PA220&dq=dutch+nutrition+head+size&source=bl&ots=F6kvYKyOAL&sig=VHFOq2WhN2qGQaqazBC18soJa-8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAWoVChMIrdbWl9i7yAIVhZQeCh1Cvgkz#v=onepage&q=dutch%20nutrition%20head%20size&f=false


    By contrast, it is known that black Africans have smaller bodies and brains than African Americans, so nutrional difference between the First World and Third World are likely stronger.

    It's also known that 20th century nutrition increased head size and brain size in parallel with IQ gains (the Flynn effect).

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2014/12/11/the-biological-flynn-effect-rising-crania-over-the-20th-century/

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/900889

    Also, it might be too simplistic to equate nutrition with quantity of food.

    Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don’t.

    National IQ data is too unreliable for that kind of a precise analysis. At best we know the average IQ of certain regions (i.e. sub-Sahara) but national differences within said regions are largely statistical noise
    , @D. K.
    "The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It’s based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83."

    Yes, and in which classrooms are they conducted? When I was in grade school, back in the 1960s, we used to take special tests every year, yet we were never told why we even were taking them, and we were never told, later, how we had done on them. (One of my older brothers recalls his teacher, one day, calling the students' names, and giving each of them a number, without ever telling them why she was doing so, or what the number was meant to signify. His number was 148, as he recalls it. My eldest brother was privately told by his teacher, one year, what he had scored on such a test. It was either 154 or 156, as best as I can recall. One of our aunts taught at the same school, so she looked through his files, in the main office, and verified the score for him.)

    The problem is that childhood IQ scores conflate g with maturation. Children mature at different rates, especially when compared by sex or race. Simply matching students by birthdays-- I recall that we had to write on those test materials both the year and the month of our respective births-- is not enough to account for the normal distribution of maturation rates, let alone different curves for different demographic groups. (I suspect that the Flynn Effect is primarily a matter of earlier maturation, over the past century of IQ testing, rather than of our societies' getting appreciably more intelligent, over that time.)

    To have a valid and meaningful IQ comparison, on a global scale, the United Nations should make itself useful, for once, and have scientifically randomized samples of 25-year-old adults taken, in every corner of the globe, at least once, and preferably on a regular basis. By that age, everyone is fully mature, but the long, slow, inevitable decline of aging-- which, again, differs for individuals, as well as across demographic groups-- has yet to commence.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    As I think you Peter raised the question of the extent to which GCSE scores might be a proxy for IQ I hope you will consider my response to JayMan on the subject at #219.
  53. I’m happy that you’re 99% sure of myself. I’m lucky if I’m 80%!

    Oops, should be “I’m happy that you’re 99% sure of yourself.”

    Read More
  54. @JayMan

    Regression to the mean is something else. It happens because of genetic change. For instance, a man with above-average IQ will likely marry a woman with above-average IQ. But only part of their above-averageness is genetic. The rest is due to favorable circumstances. Or simply luck. So their children’s IQ will likely be a bit closer to the mean of the overall population. That second generation will in turn marry people with similar IQs. And their children will likewise be closer still to the population mean. Eventually, several generations later, the descendants of that original couple will have a mean IQ that matches the population mean
     
    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some "origin" mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits.

    That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    The breeder’s equation | West Hunter

    Yes, regression is due to luck – or more precisely, luck going away. That includes non-additive genetic effects and developmental randomness. It doesn't necessarily include most of the environmental factors most people think it does:

    Environmental Hereditarianism

    He also points to the example of African American families. The children of middle-class and even upper-class African Americans do worse on IQ tests than the children of lower-class Euro-American families. So even if you select from the black elite, the next generation will still underperform whites.
     
    Not necessarily. It depends on how tight your selection is. See my comment to Chisala

    We now come to the second explanation. It is assumed in this debate that the GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) is a good proxy for IQ, which in turn is a proxy for the heritable component of intelligence. Is this true? Or does the GCSE largely measure something that is culturally acquired rather than heritable? Perhaps something as simple as showing up for class, doing one’s assignments, or having a private tutor. This point is raised by one commenter:
     
    The GCSE has a pretty substantial shared environment component. That right there shows it's not a pure measure of ability, but is open to parental manipulation. That also makes cross-group comparison of GCSE suspect.

    My thought on Chisala's piece is that there is simply no there there. I didn't bother much with it because it is clear that, quite frankly, he hasn't the foggiest idea what he's talking about. I was able to pick apart the key flaws with one comment, both to this piece and his previous. It's not worth the attention being given to it.

    Yes, there is variation within sub-Saharan Africa. Yes, there is individual variation within any group. Yes, selective migration is a key factor to consider whenever people move across space. Yes, both behavioral genetics and the breeder's equation do work, so the moral is that if you find something that purportedly invalidates them, Occam's Razor says you likely screwed up somewhere.

    Yes, regression is due to luck – or more precisely, luck going away.

    Isn’t it also regression if the kids do better than their below-average parents?

    Read More
  55. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Stephen R. Diamond
    But your message is self-undermining. If you want to protect the status of white males, why broadcast their inferiority? To propose a policy of segretation predicated on the greater sexual desirability of the negro is to propose affirmative action in mating. This wouldn't have any greater real benefit for the esteem in which white males are held than affirmative action produced for negroes.

    And what about white women? Do they count for nothing? If she really prefers the negro, isn't the moral presumption that she should have him?

    “But your message is self-undermining. If you want to protect the status of white males, why broadcast their inferiority? To propose a policy of segretation predicated on the greater sexual desirability of the negro is to propose affirmative action in mating. This wouldn’t have any greater real benefit for the esteem in which white males are held than affirmative action produced for negroes.”

    You make a good point, but the cat is out of the bag. White women already know the negros are badderasser than white men or ‘white boys’ are.

    https://www.facebook.com/Atmjeff/videos/1109015979126843/

    This is why white guys should have been more honest about this problem long ago and effected total and permanent separation BEFORE white women came down with jungalo fever. It’s too late now.

    So, white guys must be truthful and candid in confronting this problem. They must call for a safe zone for themselves and white women who still prefer white men to black men. Of course, even white women who have sex with black men may choose to finally settle with white men cuz blacks are so out of control.

    Also, despite the physical attraction, many white women still stay away from blacks due to fact that many black males fail economically and cuz black males tend to be more volatile and abusive.

    “And what about white women? Do they count for nothing? If she really prefers the negro, isn’t the moral presumption that she should have him?”

    Sure, she can leave the white nation and go live in Jamaica, Haiti, or black Africa. Let her get her fill of Negroes but away from white nations. No one is denying her the right of jungalo fever. But let her do in a black land. But she has no right to bring a negro to white land. How dare she reject white men but then demand that white men accept her and her negro mate? Her message to white men is ‘you guys are not good enough for me’, but she expects white men to honor her and pay taxes to take care of her, her negro mate, and their mulatto kids? What kind of crap is that? That is cucky.

    It’s like eco-systems. For an eco-system to be viable, it needs to keep certain organisms while excluding others. For instance, introducing rats and pigs into Galapagos was disastrous as they ate up all the tortoise eggs.
    Releasing certain kinds of invasive species of frogs into another eco-system can disrupt stuff and wipe out existing organisms. It’s like the arrival of red ants can wipe out black ants.

    Well, among humans, there are geno-systems. For a certain geno-system to be viable, its men must have access to its women, and its women must respect its men. When you introduce Negroes into a white geno-system, Negro males pussify white males, and then white females lose respect for white men. And then Negro males act wild and hump both white women and black women and produce all kinds of problems with mulattos and black kids running wild.

    So, the white geno-system must be preserved by keeping white males safe from black males. As for white females with jungalo fever, have them go live in Nigeria or Kenya.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seck

    White women already know the negros are badderasser than white men or ‘white boys’ are.

    https://www.facebook.com/Atmjeff/videos/1109015979126843/
     
    I will take that video as a grain of salt for what's happening in reality. Let's face it, Whites can't do shit on any Blacks on street. If caught, they'd be nationally publicized as "Racists".

    So if you go up to White girls with a mic, do you really expect that they will say "I don't have a Jungle Fever."? The option of choosing one's own preference disappear when dealing with Blacks. Anything awful about Blacks, you can't say. Black people, Black culture, Black whatever. The only stereotype that they thought worth having is Pretty Huge D. Even then, we know that it's not true.

    http://picturescream.com/images/1439785643716.jpg.

    So Priss, stop posting irrelevant comment. You can do much better.
  56. @Peter Frost
    As noted in my paper, I was mostly unable to disaggregate the scores of Black West Indian and African immigrants. As stated, I estimated an average origin IQ of 80 based on the weighted average of the region of origin countries:

    Yes, you were talking about all black immigrants to the U.S. Let's suppose that African immigrants are more stringently selected than Caribbean immigrants. How stringent must the selection be to go from a mean IQ of 80 in the source population to a mean IQ of 100 in the immigrant population? Jason Bayz did this sort of calculation, the difference being that he used a mean IQ of 85 for the source population. His finding: to go from 85 to 100, you have to select immigrants entirely from the top 10%. No exceptions. All immigrants from the top 10%.

    To my knowledge, only the principality of Monaco has that kind of immigration policy. The United Kingdom certainly doesn't.

    The "immigrant selection" hypothesis becomes even more untenable if the source population has a mean IQ of 80. And if we assume a mean IQ of 65 for sub-Saharan Africans, we enter the realm of make-believe. To make the hypothesis work, we have to assume that all African immigrants to the UK come from the top 1%.

    I was under the impression that African Americans are largely of Igbo descent. If Igbo are the Jews of Africa, why are our substantially Igbo descent legacy African Americans not so apt?/i>

    About 14% of all African slaves in the Americas came from the Bight of Biafra. There are other nationalities in that region, but the Igbo are the dominant one. So African Americans might be 10% of Igbo origin.
    http://africanhistory.about.com/library/bl/bl-slavery-stats4.htm

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It's not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional.

    Who is Ben Carson?

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I’ve heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It's based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83.

    why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn’t that big of a factor?

    The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.

    Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don't.

    Fuerst’s study makes virtually no mention of the national origin of the immigrants, so it’s really hard to say what value it has.

    It has value for those who argue that all black nationalities are alike in terms of IQ potential. For such people, the hypothesis of immigrant selection seems to be the only explanation for the existence of high-performing African immigrants in the UK.

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82…Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75. I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong.

    I'm happy that you're 99% sure of myself. I'm lucky if I'm 80%! Seriously, Rindermann is an HBD-friendly academic, and his review of the literature is worth more than a terse dismissal.

    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Frost is confused about regression to the mean. Genetic regression to the mean occurs

    If the regression is genetic, it isn't what Chanda Chisala characterizes as the "HBD position," i.e., all black people share the same genetic potential, and it is only through striving that they can make the best of this potential. When they stop striving, they revert to the same sub-Saharan mean.

    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD. However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people

    Yes, and you found only 7 scientists. My argument was that Igbo have to succeed in a society run by non-Igbo. I then referred to that list to rebut the argument that there are no Igbo scientists.

    If you moved to Nigeria, would you have the same chances for success? That's the situation many Igbo find themselves in.

    Get the data: administer IQ tests to representative samples of Igbos and other tribal groups. Then argue about genetic influences if the Igbo scores are significantly higher.

    We have some data, and in some ways the "soft data" seem more impressive than the "hard data." If Igbos do better than non-Igbo Nigerians in both Nigeria and the United Kingdom, they must have something going for them. If you want, you can argue that it's simply there "culture." One would have to do adoption studies or, better yet, genome studies to disprove the culture hypothesis.

    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits. That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    Your assumption is "random mating within the population." My assumption is "mating with people of similar background, i.e., similar IQ." Both assumptions are valid if one states them up front.

    Galton (who invented this term) talked about a multigenerational regression to the mean.

    “Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It’s not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional.”

    There is little reason at all to suspect it given assortative mating. It’s the same story today in black-white mixings- why should it have been much different in the past?

    And you ask who Ben Carson is, which is surprising. Have you followed any news of the US presidential election? You could have also googled him.

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

    “The results of a DNA test on the television series African American Lives estimated his ancestry as 20% European and 80% African, including ancestors within the Makua people.”

    The Makua are a southeast african people, interestingly enough.

    “The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.”

    The effects of malnutrition are very well documented, even with just one chemical like iodine. I don’t know much about the netherlands in this case, but you are simply wrong in claiming malnutrition doesn’t have much effect on IQ.

    “Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don’t.”

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time? I doubt it. On the other hand, how often are african IQ scores ever reliable?

    “The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It’s based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83.”

    I don’t buy this. Those scores come from all sectors of society and have been accumulated for decades, and you are the first person I have ever seen claim that this depresses the IQ scores. If that were the case, wouldn’t this apply to whites as well? Wouldn’t the effect be even larger than 2-3 points given how much more often black students are expelled or truant?

    There is no real reason from what I’ve seen to question that it’s any lower than 85, and definitely not the possible score of 78 Rushton and Jensen came up with a few years before their death, which struck me as an attempt at shock value more than anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I think you and perhaps Peter may be missing a possible point about malnutrition and IQ. It is my understanding that, in utero, and during breast feeding as long as the mother has milk, the foetus and baby take the needed nutrients for development at the expense of the mother. It probably makes evolutionary sense so I think it is very likely to be true.
  57. @Anonymo1
    Guys, is it that hard to keep the comments on the topic? Just ignore Priss Factory and others purposely trying to drive the discussion off the point. Keep it on Chanda, regression, GCSE, etc.


    >Perhaps something as simple as showing up for class, doing one’s assignments, or having a private tutor.

    I remember Steve Hsu pointed to a study showing that the effects of "preparation" on SAT scores are minimal/nonexistant. I imagine the GCSE is similar but not sure.

    SAT and GCSE are quite different and coaching for GCSE works.

    Read More
  58. @Peter Frost
    As noted in my paper, I was mostly unable to disaggregate the scores of Black West Indian and African immigrants. As stated, I estimated an average origin IQ of 80 based on the weighted average of the region of origin countries:

    Yes, you were talking about all black immigrants to the U.S. Let's suppose that African immigrants are more stringently selected than Caribbean immigrants. How stringent must the selection be to go from a mean IQ of 80 in the source population to a mean IQ of 100 in the immigrant population? Jason Bayz did this sort of calculation, the difference being that he used a mean IQ of 85 for the source population. His finding: to go from 85 to 100, you have to select immigrants entirely from the top 10%. No exceptions. All immigrants from the top 10%.

    To my knowledge, only the principality of Monaco has that kind of immigration policy. The United Kingdom certainly doesn't.

    The "immigrant selection" hypothesis becomes even more untenable if the source population has a mean IQ of 80. And if we assume a mean IQ of 65 for sub-Saharan Africans, we enter the realm of make-believe. To make the hypothesis work, we have to assume that all African immigrants to the UK come from the top 1%.

    I was under the impression that African Americans are largely of Igbo descent. If Igbo are the Jews of Africa, why are our substantially Igbo descent legacy African Americans not so apt?/i>

    About 14% of all African slaves in the Americas came from the Bight of Biafra. There are other nationalities in that region, but the Igbo are the dominant one. So African Americans might be 10% of Igbo origin.
    http://africanhistory.about.com/library/bl/bl-slavery-stats4.htm

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It's not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional.

    Who is Ben Carson?

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I’ve heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It's based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83.

    why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn’t that big of a factor?

    The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.

    Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don't.

    Fuerst’s study makes virtually no mention of the national origin of the immigrants, so it’s really hard to say what value it has.

    It has value for those who argue that all black nationalities are alike in terms of IQ potential. For such people, the hypothesis of immigrant selection seems to be the only explanation for the existence of high-performing African immigrants in the UK.

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82…Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75. I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong.

    I'm happy that you're 99% sure of myself. I'm lucky if I'm 80%! Seriously, Rindermann is an HBD-friendly academic, and his review of the literature is worth more than a terse dismissal.

    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Frost is confused about regression to the mean. Genetic regression to the mean occurs

    If the regression is genetic, it isn't what Chanda Chisala characterizes as the "HBD position," i.e., all black people share the same genetic potential, and it is only through striving that they can make the best of this potential. When they stop striving, they revert to the same sub-Saharan mean.

    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD. However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people

    Yes, and you found only 7 scientists. My argument was that Igbo have to succeed in a society run by non-Igbo. I then referred to that list to rebut the argument that there are no Igbo scientists.

    If you moved to Nigeria, would you have the same chances for success? That's the situation many Igbo find themselves in.

    Get the data: administer IQ tests to representative samples of Igbos and other tribal groups. Then argue about genetic influences if the Igbo scores are significantly higher.

    We have some data, and in some ways the "soft data" seem more impressive than the "hard data." If Igbos do better than non-Igbo Nigerians in both Nigeria and the United Kingdom, they must have something going for them. If you want, you can argue that it's simply there "culture." One would have to do adoption studies or, better yet, genome studies to disprove the culture hypothesis.

    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits. That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    Your assumption is "random mating within the population." My assumption is "mating with people of similar background, i.e., similar IQ." Both assumptions are valid if one states them up front.

    Galton (who invented this term) talked about a multigenerational regression to the mean.

    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Let’s say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average. Psychology students in sub-Sahara average IQs around 79. Given the 0.6 correlation between mid-parent IQ and adult offspring IQ, the expected IQ of their kids would be 60% as far above an African mean of 65 as they are:

    0.6(79 – 65) + 65 = IQ 73

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    73 + 12 = 85

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points:

    73 + 8 = 93

    So it’s easy to see how they might get to 93

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test. Or perhaps the claim that they score as high as whites is misleading because the best and brightest whites often don’t attend the same schools as immigrants

    Read More
  59. @Dipwill
    "Richard Lynn, despite his occasional sloppy reporting, is the most underrated IQ researcher on the planet, and he devoted his life to studying this issue, and he put the African IQ at 67."

    Richard Lynn is an incredibly sloppy researcher, sorry. I'm surprised you're repeating this given the fact you accepted Jason Malloy's claims about his carelessness (who used to be a big fan of his work) here: http://humanvarieties.org/2014/07/16/hvgiq-thailand/comment-page-1/#comment-4244

    He isn't underrated by any means, unless you're talking about his lack of public acceptance or circles outside of HBD. In those though, he is tremendously popular and has been for sometime. I cannot count the number of people who've uncritically swallowed and repeated his figures for years, or will zealously defend almost anything he trots out. His errors go back to some of the earliest parts of his career (like when he in the 70's claimed the Japanese have an IQ of 110, a figure that was quickly shot down and has never been supported again), and his most egregious error I'd have to say would be when he claimed Equatorial Guinea had an IQ of 59, the lowest score in the world.

    This turned out to be a score based on developmentally disabled white children in Spain. He apparently somehow got this confused with a test (with no scores given) on rural children in EG or something in the same book. This is an incredible error, and is the exact kind of stuff liberals have used to dismiss IQ testing for decades. His more recent work has included arguing Sicilians are as smart as Mexicans (and this couldn't be due to anything other than mixing with arabs and africans), Balkan whites have lower IQ's solely due to mixing with Turks, Albania having an IQ of 80, and Mizrahi jews (who have produced 4 nobelists in science, among other accomplishments) also being just as smart as mexicans/sicilians.

    Lynn may have devoted his entire life to IQ research, but making something your life's work doesn't make you a credible researcher. If anything, Lynn strikes me as being somewhat autistic.

    Thank you for making me feel guiltless about having left most of Lynn’s stuff unread despite having no great problem with the general proposition that IQ matters and probably isn’t evenly distributed amongst different races, classes and ethnic groups.

    He, and Phil Rushton with whom I raised my doubts, seemed to have forsaken common sense altogether when they cited average IQs of 60 or less.

    Read More
  60. @Peter Frost
    As noted in my paper, I was mostly unable to disaggregate the scores of Black West Indian and African immigrants. As stated, I estimated an average origin IQ of 80 based on the weighted average of the region of origin countries:

    Yes, you were talking about all black immigrants to the U.S. Let's suppose that African immigrants are more stringently selected than Caribbean immigrants. How stringent must the selection be to go from a mean IQ of 80 in the source population to a mean IQ of 100 in the immigrant population? Jason Bayz did this sort of calculation, the difference being that he used a mean IQ of 85 for the source population. His finding: to go from 85 to 100, you have to select immigrants entirely from the top 10%. No exceptions. All immigrants from the top 10%.

    To my knowledge, only the principality of Monaco has that kind of immigration policy. The United Kingdom certainly doesn't.

    The "immigrant selection" hypothesis becomes even more untenable if the source population has a mean IQ of 80. And if we assume a mean IQ of 65 for sub-Saharan Africans, we enter the realm of make-believe. To make the hypothesis work, we have to assume that all African immigrants to the UK come from the top 1%.

    I was under the impression that African Americans are largely of Igbo descent. If Igbo are the Jews of Africa, why are our substantially Igbo descent legacy African Americans not so apt?/i>

    About 14% of all African slaves in the Americas came from the Bight of Biafra. There are other nationalities in that region, but the Igbo are the dominant one. So African Americans might be 10% of Igbo origin.
    http://africanhistory.about.com/library/bl/bl-slavery-stats4.htm

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It's not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional.

    Who is Ben Carson?

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I’ve heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It's based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83.

    why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn’t that big of a factor?

    The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.

    Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don't.

    Fuerst’s study makes virtually no mention of the national origin of the immigrants, so it’s really hard to say what value it has.

    It has value for those who argue that all black nationalities are alike in terms of IQ potential. For such people, the hypothesis of immigrant selection seems to be the only explanation for the existence of high-performing African immigrants in the UK.

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82…Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75. I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong.

    I'm happy that you're 99% sure of myself. I'm lucky if I'm 80%! Seriously, Rindermann is an HBD-friendly academic, and his review of the literature is worth more than a terse dismissal.

    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Frost is confused about regression to the mean. Genetic regression to the mean occurs

    If the regression is genetic, it isn't what Chanda Chisala characterizes as the "HBD position," i.e., all black people share the same genetic potential, and it is only through striving that they can make the best of this potential. When they stop striving, they revert to the same sub-Saharan mean.

    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD. However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people

    Yes, and you found only 7 scientists. My argument was that Igbo have to succeed in a society run by non-Igbo. I then referred to that list to rebut the argument that there are no Igbo scientists.

    If you moved to Nigeria, would you have the same chances for success? That's the situation many Igbo find themselves in.

    Get the data: administer IQ tests to representative samples of Igbos and other tribal groups. Then argue about genetic influences if the Igbo scores are significantly higher.

    We have some data, and in some ways the "soft data" seem more impressive than the "hard data." If Igbos do better than non-Igbo Nigerians in both Nigeria and the United Kingdom, they must have something going for them. If you want, you can argue that it's simply there "culture." One would have to do adoption studies or, better yet, genome studies to disprove the culture hypothesis.

    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits. That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    Your assumption is "random mating within the population." My assumption is "mating with people of similar background, i.e., similar IQ." Both assumptions are valid if one states them up front.

    Galton (who invented this term) talked about a multigenerational regression to the mean.

    The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.

    The evidence suggests the famine had minimal impact on head size, and by inference, brain size and IQ:

    https://books.google.ca/books?id=pGGmOwuXkuAC&pg=PA220&lpg=PA220&dq=dutch+nutrition+head+size&source=bl&ots=F6kvYKyOAL&sig=VHFOq2WhN2qGQaqazBC18soJa-8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAWoVChMIrdbWl9i7yAIVhZQeCh1Cvgkz#v=onepage&q=dutch%20nutrition%20head%20size&f=false

    By contrast, it is known that black Africans have smaller bodies and brains than African Americans, so nutrional difference between the First World and Third World are likely stronger.

    It’s also known that 20th century nutrition increased head size and brain size in parallel with IQ gains (the Flynn effect).

    http://pumpkinperson.com/2014/12/11/the-biological-flynn-effect-rising-crania-over-the-20th-century/

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/900889

    Also, it might be too simplistic to equate nutrition with quantity of food.

    Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don’t.

    National IQ data is too unreliable for that kind of a precise analysis. At best we know the average IQ of certain regions (i.e. sub-Sahara) but national differences within said regions are largely statistical noise

    Read More
  61. @pumpkinperson
    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Let's say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average. Psychology students in sub-Sahara average IQs around 79. Given the 0.6 correlation between mid-parent IQ and adult offspring IQ, the expected IQ of their kids would be 60% as far above an African mean of 65 as they are:

    0.6(79 - 65) + 65 = IQ 73

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    73 + 12 = 85

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points:

    73 + 8 = 93


    So it's easy to see how they might get to 93

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test. Or perhaps the claim that they score as high as whites is misleading because the best and brightest whites often don't attend the same schools as immigrants

    73 + 8 = 93

    Should say 85 + 8 = 93, obviously

    Read More
  62. Many Nigerians in the Uk, particularly London are Yoruba. The major Nigerian part of London is known as little Lagos and is called “Little Lagos” and “Yoruba town”

    “Little Lagos in south London”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4182341.stm

    Read More
  63. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mark
    For every black athlete that becomes rich as a pro, there's a thousand others who fail to do so. Inner city high schools are half filled with black kids who don't study because they think they are going to become something like the next Lebron James. The other half are black kids who don't study because they think they'll get rich as a rapper or drug dealer.

    “For every black athlete that becomes rich as a pro, there’s a thousand others who fail to do so. Inner city high schools are half filled with black kids who don’t study because they think they are going to become something like the next Lebron James.”

    That’s true, but while they’re in high school and college, they bang a lot of girls, many of them white. Black guys may be dumb, but so are white bimbos who think every black athlete in high school or college is gonna be some star one day. Or they don’t think about the future at all and only think about FUN NOW.

    Also, even if they don’t make it into the pros, they can go to night clubs and have affairs with even well-educated white women. These women will likely not settle down with these negroes, but they’ll have been familiarized with them.

    Read More
  64. @Truth

    And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one’s brain pounded into hash?

     

    Funny you should ask...

    The greatest American wrestler of the last 30 years...and possibly ever;

    http://www.jordanburroughs.com/

    “Funny you should ask…”

    I keep apologizing, Truth, for killing your 30th level fighter/assassin half-orc Sir Black Alot back in the day when I was Dungeon-Master for you in High School. Get over it, yo!

    Read More
  65. Regarding White v Black intelligence in the UK

    The UK is a much more class bound country than the US and Australia, and White working males (in particular) have a strong class aversion to academic study. The word “student” among blue collar white males is a derogratory term for someone who is seen as a slightly effeminate middle-class poser or wannabe. By contrast African Blacks in the UK tend to have a much more middle-class mentality (as opposed to the rough Yardie culture of Carribean Blacks) and a number of them are perenial students who never give up on their dream or a degree even if they fail half their exams.

    Trying to assess the IQ of working class whites males in the UK from academic grades isn’t going to be very accurate. You would really need to do actual IQ tests, which the British education system now has a very strong aversion to.

    Read More
  66. @Jason Bayz
    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits.

    That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).


    Regression to the mean is only a one time effect if the population that is regressing to the mean continues "endogenous mating." An individual family would not, which is why is families regression to the mean would continue through multiple generations:

    https://jasonbayz.wordpress.com/2015/10/10/regression-to-the-mean/

    Regression to the mean is only a one time effect if the population that is regressing to the mean continues “endogenous mating.” An individual family would not, which is why is families regression to the mean would continue through multiple generations

    No. It is less than perfectly assortative mating that causes regression to the mean within families. Children don’t regress to the mean of their population; they regress to the mean of their family. (Obviously, the mean of all families is the mean of the population.)

    If the descendants of parents whose family mean IQ is above average mate only with those whose family means are also similarly above average, there will be no regression in their offspring. This is how castes form, and this why Gregory Clark found what he found (very slow regression to the mean for families). The little regression Clark did find only occurs because people don’t mate perfectly assortatively for “moxie”. Clark found near 0 regression in India, where people mate within their caste.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Luke Lea
    "No. It is less than perfectly assortative mating that causes regression to the mean within families."

    Well, I am hardly an expert and hesitate to question a guy as sharp as Jayman. But I distinctly remember reading about a famous experiment with fruit flies at Columbia University. The flies were selected for maximum number of bristles for many generations, those with lower numbers being weeded out of the breeding population. This resulted eventually in a population with significantly higher average bristle number than the wild type. As this point the population with high bristle number was allowed to interbreed but with no further selection. After a number of generations the average bristle number returned to that of the wild type.
    , @Art
    "Regression to the mean"

    Clearly the "mean" was once a cave man. Clearly the mean can rise. Clearly the mean has a lot to do with education. Clearly the black mean is rising.

    Rarely does the offspring of a very successful person, intellectually reach his parents heights.

    These are simple facts. What is the argument all about?

    Is not the root of all this - racism?
  67. @JayMan

    Regression to the mean is only a one time effect if the population that is regressing to the mean continues “endogenous mating.” An individual family would not, which is why is families regression to the mean would continue through multiple generations
     
    No. It is less than perfectly assortative mating that causes regression to the mean within families. Children don't regress to the mean of their population; they regress to the mean of their family. (Obviously, the mean of all families is the mean of the population.)

    If the descendants of parents whose family mean IQ is above average mate only with those whose family means are also similarly above average, there will be no regression in their offspring. This is how castes form, and this why Gregory Clark found what he found (very slow regression to the mean for families). The little regression Clark did find only occurs because people don't mate perfectly assortatively for "moxie". Clark found near 0 regression in India, where people mate within their caste.

    “No. It is less than perfectly assortative mating that causes regression to the mean within families.”

    Well, I am hardly an expert and hesitate to question a guy as sharp as Jayman. But I distinctly remember reading about a famous experiment with fruit flies at Columbia University. The flies were selected for maximum number of bristles for many generations, those with lower numbers being weeded out of the breeding population. This resulted eventually in a population with significantly higher average bristle number than the wild type. As this point the population with high bristle number was allowed to interbreed but with no further selection. After a number of generations the average bristle number returned to that of the wild type.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    The flies were selected for maximum number of bristles for many generations, those with lower numbers being weeded out of the breeding population. This resulted eventually in a population with significantly higher average bristle number than the wild type. As this point the population with high bristle number was allowed to interbreed but with no further selection. After a number of generations the average bristle number returned to that of the wild type.
     
    Thanks for the interesting pointer. Do you have a detailed reference for this? I tried to find the original paper (apparently Ernst Mayr in 1948?), but could only find imprecise citations in books and web pages.

    Here are some recent papers discussing stabilizing selection for bristle number:
    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/271795599_Stabilizing_Selection_Detected_for_Bristle_Number_in_Drosophila_melanogaster
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569512/
    , @candid_observer
    This experiment demonstrated a different point: that natural selection for these flies favored the original number of bristles in the population. When artificial selection for a higher number was removed, the progeny returned to the previous average.

    Regression to the mean, in the current discussion, is supposing that selection does not play a role in the outcome.
  68. @JayMan

    Regression to the mean is only a one time effect if the population that is regressing to the mean continues “endogenous mating.” An individual family would not, which is why is families regression to the mean would continue through multiple generations
     
    No. It is less than perfectly assortative mating that causes regression to the mean within families. Children don't regress to the mean of their population; they regress to the mean of their family. (Obviously, the mean of all families is the mean of the population.)

    If the descendants of parents whose family mean IQ is above average mate only with those whose family means are also similarly above average, there will be no regression in their offspring. This is how castes form, and this why Gregory Clark found what he found (very slow regression to the mean for families). The little regression Clark did find only occurs because people don't mate perfectly assortatively for "moxie". Clark found near 0 regression in India, where people mate within their caste.

    “Regression to the mean”

    Clearly the “mean” was once a cave man. Clearly the mean can rise. Clearly the mean has a lot to do with education. Clearly the black mean is rising.

    Rarely does the offspring of a very successful person, intellectually reach his parents heights.

    These are simple facts. What is the argument all about?

    Is not the root of all this – racism?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Your nickname explain your thoughts, ;)
    , @Deduction
    Do you recognise that your sentences don't logically follow each other and that your post communicates nothing but your feelings?
  69. @Peter Frost
    As noted in my paper, I was mostly unable to disaggregate the scores of Black West Indian and African immigrants. As stated, I estimated an average origin IQ of 80 based on the weighted average of the region of origin countries:

    Yes, you were talking about all black immigrants to the U.S. Let's suppose that African immigrants are more stringently selected than Caribbean immigrants. How stringent must the selection be to go from a mean IQ of 80 in the source population to a mean IQ of 100 in the immigrant population? Jason Bayz did this sort of calculation, the difference being that he used a mean IQ of 85 for the source population. His finding: to go from 85 to 100, you have to select immigrants entirely from the top 10%. No exceptions. All immigrants from the top 10%.

    To my knowledge, only the principality of Monaco has that kind of immigration policy. The United Kingdom certainly doesn't.

    The "immigrant selection" hypothesis becomes even more untenable if the source population has a mean IQ of 80. And if we assume a mean IQ of 65 for sub-Saharan Africans, we enter the realm of make-believe. To make the hypothesis work, we have to assume that all African immigrants to the UK come from the top 1%.

    I was under the impression that African Americans are largely of Igbo descent. If Igbo are the Jews of Africa, why are our substantially Igbo descent legacy African Americans not so apt?/i>

    About 14% of all African slaves in the Americas came from the Bight of Biafra. There are other nationalities in that region, but the Igbo are the dominant one. So African Americans might be 10% of Igbo origin.
    http://africanhistory.about.com/library/bl/bl-slavery-stats4.htm

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It's not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional.

    Who is Ben Carson?

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I’ve heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It's based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83.

    why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn’t that big of a factor?

    The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit.

    Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don't.

    Fuerst’s study makes virtually no mention of the national origin of the immigrants, so it’s really hard to say what value it has.

    It has value for those who argue that all black nationalities are alike in terms of IQ potential. For such people, the hypothesis of immigrant selection seems to be the only explanation for the existence of high-performing African immigrants in the UK.

    Wicherts et al. (2010) concluded that the average IQ was 82…Rindermann (2013) comes up with a “best guess” of 75. I am 99% sure both estimates are wrong.

    I'm happy that you're 99% sure of myself. I'm lucky if I'm 80%! Seriously, Rindermann is an HBD-friendly academic, and his review of the literature is worth more than a terse dismissal.

    Please see my first answer. To go from a mean IQ of less than 65 to a mean IQ of 100 requires incredibly stringent selection and/or explanatory fudging of various sorts.

    Frost is confused about regression to the mean. Genetic regression to the mean occurs

    If the regression is genetic, it isn't what Chanda Chisala characterizes as the "HBD position," i.e., all black people share the same genetic potential, and it is only through striving that they can make the best of this potential. When they stop striving, they revert to the same sub-Saharan mean.

    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD. However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people

    Yes, and you found only 7 scientists. My argument was that Igbo have to succeed in a society run by non-Igbo. I then referred to that list to rebut the argument that there are no Igbo scientists.

    If you moved to Nigeria, would you have the same chances for success? That's the situation many Igbo find themselves in.

    Get the data: administer IQ tests to representative samples of Igbos and other tribal groups. Then argue about genetic influences if the Igbo scores are significantly higher.

    We have some data, and in some ways the "soft data" seem more impressive than the "hard data." If Igbos do better than non-Igbo Nigerians in both Nigeria and the United Kingdom, they must have something going for them. If you want, you can argue that it's simply there "culture." One would have to do adoption studies or, better yet, genome studies to disprove the culture hypothesis.

    No. Regression to the mean is a one-time effect only. If selected groups continually regressed to some “origin” mean, there could be no evolution in quantitative traits. That second generation would be at the new mean, and there would be no further regression (assuming endogamous mating).

    Your assumption is "random mating within the population." My assumption is "mating with people of similar background, i.e., similar IQ." Both assumptions are valid if one states them up front.

    Galton (who invented this term) talked about a multigenerational regression to the mean.

    “The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It’s based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83.”

    Yes, and in which classrooms are they conducted? When I was in grade school, back in the 1960s, we used to take special tests every year, yet we were never told why we even were taking them, and we were never told, later, how we had done on them. (One of my older brothers recalls his teacher, one day, calling the students’ names, and giving each of them a number, without ever telling them why she was doing so, or what the number was meant to signify. His number was 148, as he recalls it. My eldest brother was privately told by his teacher, one year, what he had scored on such a test. It was either 154 or 156, as best as I can recall. One of our aunts taught at the same school, so she looked through his files, in the main office, and verified the score for him.)

    The problem is that childhood IQ scores conflate g with maturation. Children mature at different rates, especially when compared by sex or race. Simply matching students by birthdays– I recall that we had to write on those test materials both the year and the month of our respective births– is not enough to account for the normal distribution of maturation rates, let alone different curves for different demographic groups. (I suspect that the Flynn Effect is primarily a matter of earlier maturation, over the past century of IQ testing, rather than of our societies’ getting appreciably more intelligent, over that time.)

    To have a valid and meaningful IQ comparison, on a global scale, the United Nations should make itself useful, for once, and have scientifically randomized samples of 25-year-old adults taken, in every corner of the globe, at least once, and preferably on a regular basis. By that age, everyone is fully mature, but the long, slow, inevitable decline of aging– which, again, differs for individuals, as well as across demographic groups– has yet to commence.

    Read More
  70. IQP (IQ Potential) is determined by DNA. That has to be true – no one can be what they’re not.

    ‘determined by DNA’ means the selection of some alleles and not others.

    The only way I can understand Regression to the Mean is if there are alleles in the gamete that come from the gene pool but were not expressed in the parent.

    If that is so then RtoM does not need to be a single event.

    If that is not so then where does the breeder’s equation come from? Where do R and S and h come from?

    I do find that people nowadays treat statistics as if it is a religion but it is a man-made representation of nature; it is a ‘social reality’.

    regardless of numerical examples, it should be easy to explain how RtoM relates to biological inheritence, sexual reproduction, but nobody seems to be doing that.

    Read More
    • Agree: Wizard of Oz
    • Replies: @Sam Shama
    Helena, I had thought about something in those lines:

    http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-i/#comment-1174813

    is is similar to what you are saying?
  71. This article is kind of a nonsequitur, because it veers off topic, based on an apparent misunderstanding of what is meant by “regression to the mean”.

    Regression to the mean is a statistical artefact caused by randomness. It’s not a concept specific to genetics, and it has nothing to do with whether IQ is a genetic or environmental trait – and there’s nothing about regression to the mean that implies that a brilliant scientist’s great-great-grand-children will be less intelligent than their ancestor.

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    "There's nothing about regression that implies that a brilliant scientist's great-great-great grandchildren will be less intelligent than their ancestor". Unless you are affirming a tautology I would quibble with this. Brilliance is surely abnormal and the result, to the extent that it is genetically determined, of a chance - that is random - favourable collection of alleles, epigenetic effects etc. Regression presumably results from it being logically probable that all future descendants will be unlikely individually to have the same or an equivalent favourable chance collection of ingredients.

    Actually I'm struggling a bit now I try and put it all together in concrete terms. Can someone help with precise examples?

    I start with the supposition that the father and mother who each have IQs of 150 and are the smartest in a couple of generations of smart families each have the fortunate conjunction of genes such that father benefits from favourable dominant gene P paired with an inferior allele and mother with P or maybe Q also unpaired with a good allele; neither have any paired recessive genes that are deleterious though each has unpaired deleterious recessive genes; each has some alleles favourable for high IQ though different from each others and perhaps dependent on being paired with identical alleles or on epigenetic effects which promote their effectiveness. So far makes sense? Then clearly the recombination in the offspring is unlikely to produce the same high IQ and a new population will be formed of all that couples 30 children whose average IQ will be say 135. Then they interbreed randomly but vigorously and, eliminating disastrous recessives, their progeny have IQs distributed as a normal distribution around the average of 135. SD??? Presumably 15 as we are using Wechsler or Stanford-Binet (or should it be scaled up by 135/100?).

    OK. Can the really expert tell me either that my statement of the factual situation is erroneous or missing a detail (and not just a bit implausible as stated) OR that my understanding of the math which explains the facts is wrong?

  72. @Dipwill
    I'm surprised you'd still make over the admixture factor like this. I have found time and time and time again, nobody considers the factor of assortative mating. White admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites. There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I've heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    On the other hand, why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn't that big of a factor? If it's properly treated in early childhood, the ill effects of it can be easily avoided. There's a wealth of evidence showing malnutrition lowers IQ.

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry.

    Of course you can always find some; that’s the wonder of variability. On the other hand: http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/2012/02/black-history-month.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    On the other hand, most people marry people of similar IQ, via the principle of assortative mating, and that occurs today even interracial pairings. The greatest overlap in the B-W IQ distribution is in the low 90's, and white women who have children with black men generally have lower IQ's. The correlation between white ancestry in blacks has been shown to be small at best, and yet what people like you do time and time and time again is act as if black-white mixing has long occurred between people who are of their race's respective averages. That isn't what happened now, and there's little reason to suspect it happened in the peast.

    Many of those examples are of people who lived decades or over a hundred years ago. Modern examples of people of predominantly african ancestry in high positions the US are hardly difficult to come by- Ben Carson, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas- but keep reaching for people who lived in the 1800's and an analysis from 1918 (predating modern genetics by decades) that claims nearly all eminent black men are mixed.

  73. Average IQs are like baseball batting averages, interesting numbers but they don’t tell you much. A Rogers Hornsby and Mario Mendoza might have a batting average of .300 but that did not make Mendoza a feared batter.

    A society needs a few high IQ outliers to provide the intellectual horsepower for it to succeed. A single Tom Edison is worth more than one million people with an IQ a few points above average. If Lagos were the headquarters of Google, Apple and Oracle would we be concerned with what the IQ of the average person was in Nigeria? Probably not. We would just acknowledge that Lagos rather than Santa Clara was the center of technological innovation.That it became that because it had 10,000 people with high IQ’s is all that was necessary. The other 175 million people could be dullards but they don’t count in the scheme of things.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Good society need global security inside its borders and not just ''geniuses''.
    , @Deduction
    [It's preferable not to write a large number of short comments, but instead combine them into one or two longer and more substantial ones.]

    There's no general benefit from having people around with super high IQs if you live in a very low trust society.
  74. @Dipwill
    "Genetic variability exists in all human populations. This is as true for intellectual capacity as it is for stature. It’s not necessary to assume that exceptional African Americans owe their exceptionality to white ancestry, although white (or Igbo) ancestry would increase the probability of being exceptional."

    There is little reason at all to suspect it given assortative mating. It's the same story today in black-white mixings- why should it have been much different in the past?

    And you ask who Ben Carson is, which is surprising. Have you followed any news of the US presidential election? You could have also googled him.

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

    "The results of a DNA test on the television series African American Lives estimated his ancestry as 20% European and 80% African, including ancestors within the Makua people."

    The Makua are a southeast african people, interestingly enough.

    "The Netherlands suffered from a severe famine during the last year of WW2. Since most cerebral development takes place in utero, one would expect malnutrition to exert its strongest effects on pregnant women. And yet the children of famine-affected Dutch women show no IQ deficit."

    The effects of malnutrition are very well documented, even with just one chemical like iodine. I don't know much about the netherlands in this case, but you are simply wrong in claiming malnutrition doesn't have much effect on IQ.

    "Malnutrition does exist in some African countries, but there are many others where it is not a problem. Again, if this were such a key factor, one would expect to see a considerable difference in IQ between a country like Senegal, where people eat well, and a country like Zimbabwe, where they don’t."

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time? I doubt it. On the other hand, how often are african IQ scores ever reliable?

    "The most frequently quoted mean is 85. It’s based largely on IQ tests conducted in classrooms. Such tests, however, exclude students who have been expelled or are truant. If we adjust for that factor, the mean is probably closer to 82-83."

    I don't buy this. Those scores come from all sectors of society and have been accumulated for decades, and you are the first person I have ever seen claim that this depresses the IQ scores. If that were the case, wouldn't this apply to whites as well? Wouldn't the effect be even larger than 2-3 points given how much more often black students are expelled or truant?

    There is no real reason from what I've seen to question that it's any lower than 85, and definitely not the possible score of 78 Rushton and Jensen came up with a few years before their death, which struck me as an attempt at shock value more than anything.

    I think you and perhaps Peter may be missing a possible point about malnutrition and IQ. It is my understanding that, in utero, and during breast feeding as long as the mother has milk, the foetus and baby take the needed nutrients for development at the expense of the mother. It probably makes evolutionary sense so I think it is very likely to be true.

    Read More
  75. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Whether blacks are smart or dumb, they have less moral personalities.

    Listen to their music.

    Jazz is about being slick.

    Rap is about pimpery and thuggery.

    It’s no wonder so many blacks, smart ones esp, act like this:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3268753/I-handed-Kenyan-husband-25-000-d-got-47-women-world-Retired-teacher-61-duped-lothario-met-UK-dating-site.html

    Blacks feel more self-centered, self-serving. They feel less remorse or shame.

    The Noble Negro is a pernicious white myth.

    Obama is just a lothario of politics. Jews see him for what he is and use him.

    But dumb whites fell for his bogus charm.

    Read More
  76. @Hobbesian Meliorist
    This article is kind of a nonsequitur, because it veers off topic, based on an apparent misunderstanding of what is meant by "regression to the mean".

    Regression to the mean is a statistical artefact caused by randomness. It's not a concept specific to genetics, and it has nothing to do with whether IQ is a genetic or environmental trait - and there's nothing about regression to the mean that implies that a brilliant scientist's great-great-grand-children will be less intelligent than their ancestor.

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

    “There’s nothing about regression that implies that a brilliant scientist’s great-great-great grandchildren will be less intelligent than their ancestor”. Unless you are affirming a tautology I would quibble with this. Brilliance is surely abnormal and the result, to the extent that it is genetically determined, of a chance – that is random – favourable collection of alleles, epigenetic effects etc. Regression presumably results from it being logically probable that all future descendants will be unlikely individually to have the same or an equivalent favourable chance collection of ingredients.

    Actually I’m struggling a bit now I try and put it all together in concrete terms. Can someone help with precise examples?

    I start with the supposition that the father and mother who each have IQs of 150 and are the smartest in a couple of generations of smart families each have the fortunate conjunction of genes such that father benefits from favourable dominant gene P paired with an inferior allele and mother with P or maybe Q also unpaired with a good allele; neither have any paired recessive genes that are deleterious though each has unpaired deleterious recessive genes; each has some alleles favourable for high IQ though different from each others and perhaps dependent on being paired with identical alleles or on epigenetic effects which promote their effectiveness. So far makes sense? Then clearly the recombination in the offspring is unlikely to produce the same high IQ and a new population will be formed of all that couples 30 children whose average IQ will be say 135. Then they interbreed randomly but vigorously and, eliminating disastrous recessives, their progeny have IQs distributed as a normal distribution around the average of 135. SD??? Presumably 15 as we are using Wechsler or Stanford-Binet (or should it be scaled up by 135/100?).

    OK. Can the really expert tell me either that my statement of the factual situation is erroneous or missing a detail (and not just a bit implausible as stated) OR that my understanding of the math which explains the facts is wrong?

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    I'm not an expert but I think I'm thinking about this the same way you are. Children regress to the mean only in the sense that the more children a couple has, the more of the children will 'be' similar. In a family of three children, each may appear 'unique' but in a family of thirteen children not so much. And that, 'being similar' has a probability of not inheriting all the smart alleles. But equally, the first child could be higher IQ than the parents but on average it will be lower.

    The way regression to the mean is being used in the article is premised on the idea that the children will select their mates randomly from the same gene pool that their parents came from. So arguably, Igbo migrant grandchildren could regress to any of these means:
    1. Igbo migrants
    2. Nigerian migrants
    3. Black African migrants
    4. Black migrants
    5. Igbo
    6. Nigerians
    7. Africans
    8. 'Black people'

    And it is the last of those that is really really the topic of the article - as in, 'should researchers be *allowed* to do surveys using 'black people' as a sample?' The article seems to be a very convoluted, biologically inaccurate, statistically sloppy way of saying, NO!

    But ultimately, the article is an affirmation of HBD - Igbo as a *population group* have a high mean IQ. Ta-da!

  77. @Art
    "Regression to the mean"

    Clearly the "mean" was once a cave man. Clearly the mean can rise. Clearly the mean has a lot to do with education. Clearly the black mean is rising.

    Rarely does the offspring of a very successful person, intellectually reach his parents heights.

    These are simple facts. What is the argument all about?

    Is not the root of all this - racism?

    Your nickname explain your thoughts, ;)

    Read More
  78. @unit472
    Average IQs are like baseball batting averages, interesting numbers but they don't tell you much. A Rogers Hornsby and Mario Mendoza might have a batting average of .300 but that did not make Mendoza a feared batter.

    A society needs a few high IQ outliers to provide the intellectual horsepower for it to succeed. A single Tom Edison is worth more than one million people with an IQ a few points above average. If Lagos were the headquarters of Google, Apple and Oracle would we be concerned with what the IQ of the average person was in Nigeria? Probably not. We would just acknowledge that Lagos rather than Santa Clara was the center of technological innovation.That it became that because it had 10,000 people with high IQ's is all that was necessary. The other 175 million people could be dullards but they don't count in the scheme of things.

    Good society need global security inside its borders and not just ”geniuses”.

    Read More
  79. @Wyrd
    "Funny you should ask…"

    I keep apologizing, Truth, for killing your 30th level fighter/assassin half-orc Sir Black Alot back in the day when I was Dungeon-Master for you in High School. Get over it, yo!

    Went over my head, Sport. IQ thing I guess.

    Read More
  80. The Priss Factory,

    Your comments are wildly off-topic.

    I don’t know much about the netherlands in this case

    A detailed retrospective study was made of 125,000 19-yr-old male Dutch military inductees of whom 20,000 were exposed to the Netherland’s winter famine, 1944-1945, through maternal starvation. Birth cohorts were constructed of Ss from 7 famine-stricken cities and matched with controls from 11 nonaffected areas. Results of physical and psychological examinations and the Dutch version of the Raven Progressive Matrices provided the data in addition to time and place of conception, maternal caloric intake, birth weight, fertility levels and social class. Findings show that (a) starvation during pregnancy had no detectable effects on adult mental performance of surviving male offspring. (b) Mental performance of surviving adult males from the entire population had no association with changing levels of mean birth weight in a hospital sample from the population. And (c) there was a strong association of social class with mental performance.

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1973-08869-001

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time?

    Yes, in 1994. See the above study by Wicherts et al (2010). Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa. We don’t. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers. People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    Let’s say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average.

    You can say that. I wouldn’t. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    For instance, more than 50 percent of African immigrants only have primary education relative to less than 25 percent of natives and most other immigrant groups. [...] In contrast, African men endure the slowest assimilation rate of all immigrant groups. Despite being able to cut down their employment gap with respect to similar natives by 12 percentage points within a five year period, African men still endure a 5 percentage point lower employment likelihood than alike natives. However, it is worth pointing out that much of this employment gap is likely to be explained by differences in the skills of native and African men.

    http://www.agrod.com/research/projects/p20071002_Spain.frontier/references/20071210.labor.market.in.spain.and.general.statistics/labor.market.immigrant.assimilation.pdf

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    You might. I wouldn’t. You’re building castles in the air.

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points

    You’re confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn’t increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test.

    I doubt that the United Kingdom selects Igbo immigrants more stringently than non-Igbo immigrants.

    At best we know the average IQ of certain regions (i.e. sub-Sahara) but national differences within said regions are largely statistical noise

    Variation on the order of 10 to 20 IQ points would be discernable, even with a lot of noise in the data. It would certainly be discernible to travellers and outside observers.

    This article is kind of a nonsequitur, because it veers off topic, based on an apparent misunderstanding of what is meant by “regression to the mean”. Regression to the mean is a statistical artefact caused by randomness. It’s not a concept specific to genetics, and it has nothing to do with whether IQ is a genetic or environmental trait

    The concept was first developed by Galton to explain why a genetically influenced trait will revert to its mean population value over several generations. It has since been borrowed by other fields to explain why an extreme measure on a first measurement will be closer to the mean on the second measurement. There is always a certain amount of error in any measurement, and extreme measurements are more likely to reflect errors of different sorts.

    This is not the way the concept of “regression to the mean” is used by Galton or by other human geneticists:

    This law tells heavily against the full hereditary transmission of any gift, as only a few of many children would resemble their mid- parentage. The more exceptional the amount of the gift, the more exceptional will be the good fortune of a parent who has a son who equals, and still more if he has a son who overpasses him in that respect. The law is even-handed; it levies the same heavy succession-tax on the transmission of badness as well as of goodness. If it discourages the extravagant expectations of gifted parents that their children will inherit all their powers, it no less discountenances extravagant fears that they will inherit all their weaknesses and diseases.

    http://www.stat.ucla.edu/~nchristo/statistics100C/history_regression.pdf

    Galton is not implying that IQ regresses to the mean because of measurement error. The first generation really is more intelligent (or less intelligent) than the mean. Succeeding generations revert to the mean because hereditary transmission is not 100%. Even if like marries with like, succeeding generations will move closer and closer to the mean.

    Chanda is not using “regression to the mean” in this sense (or in your sense either). He is arguing against an “HBD position”, which postulates a single black African genotype for IQ. If Africans deviate from that genotype, it’s because of luck or fortunate circumstances, and their children will tend to be closer to the mean.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    From what I can gather most Igbo have been farmers. I find it very difficult to see how a whole tribe of several millions would have been raised in IQ.

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/caste/
    An endogamous group that is exposed to unusual selective pressures – say because of their occupation – is going to change in response to those particular selective pressures. That is not the case in a society that mixes fairly freely, one in which smiths marry farmers’ daughters and the daughters of clerks marry shoemakers. In that case, the only selective pressures that result in much change have to affect a major fraction of the population, often everybody – as with adaptation to new foods or new communicable diseases.
     
    That is why I think this is a subset of the Igbo were are talking about and because the Osu were endogamous, not usually farmers, and had a motive to move to the city and pass for regular Igbo, I think the Usu caste are where these clever Igbo came from.
    , @Dipwill
    1994 predates the major period of famine in Zimbabwe by close to 10 years. I am not 100% of the nature of how malnutrition affects intelligence long term, but it has been linked repeatedly to childhood retardation, and again, you need only look up the effects of iodine deficiency. The famine in ethiopia killed many people, but I'm not sure of how those who did suffer from it recovered later on, which is indeed possible. If you want to go for personal observations though, I'm not aware of too many people who can affirmatively state (even though many who've been to Africa like to repeat the IQ scores, while reiterating experiences with people who should be rarer than unicorns if their IQ's were that lower) that continent-wide, the average person is functionally retarded, and that people have been repeatedly misled by their "winning personalities" into not realizing it's a continent full of retards.
    , @pumpkinperson
    Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa.

    You're assuming we can accurately quantify nutritional differences within sub-Sahara. We can't even quantify them within the United States. You equate sub-optimum nutrition with famine but it's much more subtle than that. It has to do with intangibles like national hygiene which affect disease which prevent the body from using nutrients. No one know what specific nutrients have caused the height of the average white American man to increase since the 1980s or why the head circumference of British infants increased by over one standard deviation since the 1950s.


    We don’t. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers.

    Not necessarily. Hardly anyone noticed the Flynn effect until Flynn popularized it in the 1980s. Prior to that, people thought society was dumbing down.


    People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    People in Ethipoia are 40% caucasoid at the genetic level, so the fact that no one can see their higher IQ caucasoid genes is evidence that it's being masked by poor nutrition,


    You can say that. I wouldn’t. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    We're talking specifically about the UK. In 1979, first generation African immigrants to the UK had a mean of 12.2 years of education, suggesting they had some university on average.

    http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_10_06.pdf

    Keep in mind that African born immigrants surveyed in 1979 were roughly 36 years old and would have likely attended university around 1963. Now see Figure 1 in this document:

    http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/fs10-trends-tertiary-education-sub-saharan-africa-2010-en.pdf

    It shows that in 1970, less than 1% of college age sub-Saharan Africans were enrolled in tertiary education. Further, in 1950 South Africa, only 0.5% of Africans even qualified for university. So the generation of African migrants to the UK who reached young adulthood in the mid 1960s were more educated than over 99% of their cohort in sub-Saharan Africa.


    You might. I wouldn’t. You’re building castles in the air.

    You're free to deny the role of nutrition on intelligence, but you're ignoring a ton of evidence, including incredible studies of identical twins who recieved unequal nutrition in the womb. The twin born with lower weight had a smaller head and lower score IQ at age 15, and the scores were especially low on the very types of tests that show the biggest Flynn effects:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

    Seems very strange to think sub-optimum nutrition is potent enough to give black Africans smaller height and heads than African Americans, yet too weak to impair their IQs, even though IQ is less heritable than height and head size, and should be MORE amenable to environmental influences, not less.


    You’re confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn’t increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    The causation works in both directions. Smart people stay in school longer, but there's also overwhelming evidence that schooling props up IQ scores (though probably not real intelligence):

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/01/might-schooling-raise-iq.html

    How the hell do you explain the Flynn effect if you deny that both the biological environment (i.e. nutrition) and the cultural environment (i.e. schooling) affect IQ?
    , @Deduction

    You can say that. I wouldn’t. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans
     
    There are very obvious differences between African migrants to Spain and to Britain. Not only is the journey shorter, but African migration to Spain is newer. Both of these factors make it a lot less elite and this is why in Spain there are a seemingly endless supply of African sunglass sellers on the street but in the UK there are none.
  81. @Dipwill
    I'm surprised you'd still make over the admixture factor like this. I have found time and time and time again, nobody considers the factor of assortative mating. White admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites. There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I've heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    On the other hand, why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn't that big of a factor? If it's properly treated in early childhood, the ill effects of it can be easily avoided. There's a wealth of evidence showing malnutrition lowers IQ.

    admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites.

    Where are your facts that support this contention?

    One can look at the 1870 censuses in the southern states and see mulattoes by the thousands with the same last names as the largest slaveholders in their area.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    It's been some time since I've ever read anything affirming it, but the idea white ancestry in american blacks came from rape of slave masters is a myth, and even people like Madison Grant did not believe it:

    http://www.amren.com/ar/2011/12/index.html

    "He writes that miscegenation has generally been the result of crosses with “the lowest and most unintelligent type of white servant.” “Those admirers of the Mulatto who boast that he carries in his veins the blue blood of the aristocratic families of the South,” he adds, “would do well to read the actual records . . . .”"

    They probably shared those names in the vein of how african-americans ended up with their non-african names.
  82. @Luke Lea
    "No. It is less than perfectly assortative mating that causes regression to the mean within families."

    Well, I am hardly an expert and hesitate to question a guy as sharp as Jayman. But I distinctly remember reading about a famous experiment with fruit flies at Columbia University. The flies were selected for maximum number of bristles for many generations, those with lower numbers being weeded out of the breeding population. This resulted eventually in a population with significantly higher average bristle number than the wild type. As this point the population with high bristle number was allowed to interbreed but with no further selection. After a number of generations the average bristle number returned to that of the wild type.

    The flies were selected for maximum number of bristles for many generations, those with lower numbers being weeded out of the breeding population. This resulted eventually in a population with significantly higher average bristle number than the wild type. As this point the population with high bristle number was allowed to interbreed but with no further selection. After a number of generations the average bristle number returned to that of the wild type.

    Thanks for the interesting pointer. Do you have a detailed reference for this? I tried to find the original paper (apparently Ernst Mayr in 1948?), but could only find imprecise citations in books and web pages.

    Here are some recent papers discussing stabilizing selection for bristle number:

    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/271795599_Stabilizing_Selection_Detected_for_Bristle_Number_in_Drosophila_melanogaster

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569512/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Luke Lea
    re: experiment on bristle number in fruit flies

    Thanks for the interesting pointer. Do you have a detailed reference for this?
     
    The experiment is described in The Eighth Day of Creation : http://goo.gl/S6B5DD, which is the first book I read when I first got getting interested in modern genetics after contracting cancer almost 20 years ago. A great book btw and I survived.

    The experiment was carried out by Thomas Hunter Morgan, an early pioneer in the field (and one of the few great scientist from south of the Mason-Dixon Line), whom you can read about here: https://goo.gl/naRxI3
  83. @Priss Factor
    Smarter or dumber, blacks are more muscular and more aggressive than white men.

    They will emasculate white men in the white world.

    THAT is the main reason why the West should oppose the arrival of more blacks.

    Suppose every African migrant to Europe had an IQ of 150. Would that be any better?

    No, the Negroes will gain not only physical but intellectual/economic power over whites.

    Hey, retard! Negroes will never have an average IQ of 90 let alone 150! Negroes are slightly physically stronger built due to thousands of years of breeding habbits (you see, Negroes have always had physical contests when determining who is going to mate with their women, unlike Caucasian and Asian women who have valued different vitues, i.e. the “sphere” of mind shall we say, when determining their mating partners; also, Africa is very hot place, and when you are exposed to extreme heat you tend not to have much fat; on the other hand, Caucasians and Asians inhabiting northern latitudes need to have some fat if they want to survive, so you see there are cultural and environmental aspects of the story). As for your liberal Western (especially Anglo) women, meh, you made whores out of them and they are doin g what they know best — whoring themselves. It is also cultural aspect on the work here, you see. After all, you Werstern libtards have made yourselves that way. You weren’t always so whorish, arrogant and stupid (an ideal environment for the Negro!). Sometime ago you were family oriented, god-fearing humans, nowadays, though, you are just scum. :)

    Read More
  84. @Immigrant from former USSR
    Dear Dr. Frost:
    I am not an expert either on anthropology or on HBD.
    However, I looked at Wikipedia reference provided by you: section “Science” in the list of Igbo people, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Igbo_people#Science
    This “Science” section refers to 7 different persons.
    4 of them may be related to “hard sciences”. All info below is from Wikipedia, unless stated otherwise.

    Bisi Ezerioha (born January 6, 1972) a.k.a. Ndubisi Ezerioha, is a professional racing driver, engine builder, engineer, and industrialist. Dr. Emesia Ezerioha holds bachelor's degrees in Earth sciences and Geology from California State University, Los Angeles, Master's degrees in Earth Science and Economics and a doctorate in International Marketing.

    Chike Obi (April 17, 1921 – March 13, 2008) was a Nigerian politician, mathematician and professor.
    Obi was educated in various parts of Nigeria before reading mathematics as an external student of the University of London. Immediately after his first degree, he won a scholarship to do research study at Pembroke College, Cambridge, followed by doctoral studies at Massachusetts Institute of Technology[citation needed] in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States, becoming in 1950, the first Nigerian to receive a PhD in mathematics. In 1997, Obi claimed to have found an elementary proof to Fermat’s Last Theorem. This work was carried out at his Nanna Institute for Scientific Studies in Onitsha, Eastern Nigeria and published in Algebras, Groups and Geometries.[1][2][3] A review of this proof published in Mathematical Reviews that Obi's proof is a previously-known false proof.[4][5] Fermat’s Last Theorem had already been solved in 1994 by Andrew Wiles and Richard Taylor.

    Bartholomew Nnaji was born in 1956 in Enugu State, and earned a Bachelor of Science degree in physics at St John's University, and then proceeded to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University for post-graduate studies. He joined the faculty at University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1983 [IffU: apparently without getting Ph.D. degree.]

    Philip Emeagwali (born in 1954) is a Nigerian-born engineer, mathematician, computer scientist and geologist. He was the winner of the 1989 Gordon Bell Prize in the "price/performance" category, for his use of a Connection Machine supercomputer, and has a 190 IQ.[1][2]. Source:
    [1]: http://emeagwali.com/biography/for-kids/ten-smartest-scientists-of-all-times.pdf
    From there: T e n S m a r t e s t S c i e n t i s t s o f A l l T i m e s Page: 1 (21)
    Ten Smartest Scientists
    1. Gottfried Leibniz (IQ 205)
    2. Blaise Pascal (IQ 195)
    3. Philip Emeagwali (IQ 190)
    3. Sir Isaac Newton (IQ 190)
    3. Pierre Laplace (IQ 190)
    6. Rene Descartes (IQ 185)
    6. Galileo (IQ 185)
    8. Johannes Kepler (IQ 175)
    9. Charles Darwin (IQ 165)
    10. Albert Einstein (IQ 160)
    Back to Wikipedia:
    Emeagwali studied for a Ph.D. degree from the University of Michigan from 1987 through 1991. His thesis was not accepted by a committee of internal and external examiners and thus he was not awarded the degree. Emeagwali filed a court challenge, stating that the decision was a violation of his civil rights and that the university had discriminated against him in several ways because of his race. The court challenge was dismissed, as was an appeal to the Michigan state Court of Appeals.[7]
    Emeagwali received the 1989 Gordon Bell Prize for an application of the CM-2 massively-parallel computer.

    IffU: working for the last 21 years in an USA University, I can tell you that it a case absolutely unheard of: that a minority student was considered as not deserving a degree, for which he was studying. The more so that in the process (in 1989) he got a Prize from ACM: Association for Computing Machinery.

    I have read in some Stephen hawking book that he had been determined to have IQ of 250 (I think it was A Brief History of Time), and we in the Balkans have had our politican star with the IQ of 205. His name is Vojislav Seselj, the youngest PhD of former Yugoslavia and the man who single-handedly destroyed that NWO court in Hague (he had been on trial for 13 fucking years; I think that under the Rome Convention a trial must be concluded within 2 or 3 years, but we cannot expect from you Western trash to uphold to the norms and standards, even the ones you yoruself created, now can we?). Anyhow, if you believe in that Anglo sources of scientists’ IQ, then you a reatard of the highest order. Typical retarded Murican I would say. ehehehehe

    hey, and Leibniz is not even amongst the first 10 scietists of all time. The most intelligent man who ever walked the Earth was Karl Friedrich Gauss. You can inform yourself about the his abilities even as 7 year old boy. I am sure that even 90% of today’s students would not be able to solve the math problems, and in time, he was able to do. Even as a boy. And no Archimedes in that list of yours too… My god, you really are simple creatures… Murican simpletons. :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Immigrant from former USSR
    Sir!
    Apparently you did not notice that
    the cited classification and ranking scientists by IQ belongs to
    Philip Emeagwali (born in 1954), the Nigerian-born engineer, mentioned
    in the list from Wikipedia. That latter list was provided by Dr. Frost.
    Just in case, I repeat the source of the IQ list , where I picked it up:
    http://emeagwali.com/biography/for-kids/ten-smartest-scientists-of-all-times.pdf
    By the way, none of the scientists mentioned by Mr. Emeagwali was alive at the moment,
    when first IQ test was administrated.
    Exceptions:
    A. Einstein (1879–1955), who never took the test, and
    Mr. Emeagwali, who failed Ph.D. studies.

    I wish you the best in your endeavors.
    Your IffU.
  85. @Dipwill
    I'm surprised you'd still make over the admixture factor like this. I have found time and time and time again, nobody considers the factor of assortative mating. White admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites. There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry. Ben Carson apparently is only 20% white, which is just slightly higher than the most recent average, of 18%.

    Why do you put a low of 80 for african-americans, by the way? I've heard that figure before, but only in much older literature.

    On the other hand, why do you think the Netherlands is proof it isn't that big of a factor? If it's properly treated in early childhood, the ill effects of it can be easily avoided. There's a wealth of evidence showing malnutrition lowers IQ.

    [It's much better to combine several short comments into one or two longer and more comprehensive ones. Also, it's not good to have long comments that are just filled with pure insults and profanity without much substantive content.]

    Ehehehe… My God, stupidity of Muricants is really stunning! Tell me something Murican Dip-o-will, how is it possible that your fellow Negro Muricunt Carlson can be “only 20% white” as you stated referring to your corporate media sources, hm? You do understand that 20% is 1/5 of something? You do understand that 1/5 is an odd number, not divisible by 2, hm? So how did your fellow Murican become then? Apparently he didn’t have both parents… well according to you that is. That’s really, really dumb. But I am not surprised that you stupid Muricants are not able to spot something that logically impossible. After all, logic is not youir “stronger point,” right? Lying, deceiving and thieving is. :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    Figures for genetic ancestry are seldom exact, and figures such as "20% of something" are hardly uncommon even in papers, even though they're not meant to be taken literally, but I'll give you credit and say it would have been better to say he's about "20% white", close to the 18% white ancestry the average african-american has. What is really, really dumb on other hand is you going into virtual meltdown over someone not giving that specific qualification.

    You are also the first person I've ever seen given a warning such as this on Unz.com, so keep it with your smarmy, spergy rants about "MURICANTS", if that means reading less of your embarrassing temper tantrums.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Boring. Further to the editorial advice to you at #86 I suggest you give up on attempts at humour which is clearly not your strong suit especially in a language which you have not yet mastered.

    If you actually know anything pertinent or can put relevant logical arguments backed by references on fact which will make up for the discredit your tone so far has brought to your contributions then I shall read your comments with interest.

  86. @Peter Frost
    The Priss Factory,

    Your comments are wildly off-topic.

    I don’t know much about the netherlands in this case

    A detailed retrospective study was made of 125,000 19-yr-old male Dutch military inductees of whom 20,000 were exposed to the Netherland's winter famine, 1944-1945, through maternal starvation. Birth cohorts were constructed of Ss from 7 famine-stricken cities and matched with controls from 11 nonaffected areas. Results of physical and psychological examinations and the Dutch version of the Raven Progressive Matrices provided the data in addition to time and place of conception, maternal caloric intake, birth weight, fertility levels and social class. Findings show that (a) starvation during pregnancy had no detectable effects on adult mental performance of surviving male offspring. (b) Mental performance of surviving adult males from the entire population had no association with changing levels of mean birth weight in a hospital sample from the population. And (c) there was a strong association of social class with mental performance.

     

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1973-08869-001

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time?

    Yes, in 1994. See the above study by Wicherts et al (2010). Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa. We don't. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers. People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    Let’s say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average.

    You can say that. I wouldn't. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    For instance, more than 50 percent of African immigrants only have primary education relative to less than 25 percent of natives and most other immigrant groups. [...] In contrast, African men endure the slowest assimilation rate of all immigrant groups. Despite being able to cut down their employment gap with respect to similar natives by 12 percentage points within a five year period, African men still endure a 5 percentage point lower employment likelihood than alike natives. However, it is worth pointing out that much of this employment gap is likely to be explained by differences in the skills of native and African men.

     

    http://www.agrod.com/research/projects/p20071002_Spain.frontier/references/20071210.labor.market.in.spain.and.general.statistics/labor.market.immigrant.assimilation.pdf

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    You might. I wouldn't. You're building castles in the air.

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points

    You're confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn't increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test.

    I doubt that the United Kingdom selects Igbo immigrants more stringently than non-Igbo immigrants.

    At best we know the average IQ of certain regions (i.e. sub-Sahara) but national differences within said regions are largely statistical noise

    Variation on the order of 10 to 20 IQ points would be discernable, even with a lot of noise in the data. It would certainly be discernible to travellers and outside observers.

    This article is kind of a nonsequitur, because it veers off topic, based on an apparent misunderstanding of what is meant by “regression to the mean”. Regression to the mean is a statistical artefact caused by randomness. It’s not a concept specific to genetics, and it has nothing to do with whether IQ is a genetic or environmental trait

    The concept was first developed by Galton to explain why a genetically influenced trait will revert to its mean population value over several generations. It has since been borrowed by other fields to explain why an extreme measure on a first measurement will be closer to the mean on the second measurement. There is always a certain amount of error in any measurement, and extreme measurements are more likely to reflect errors of different sorts.

    This is not the way the concept of "regression to the mean" is used by Galton or by other human geneticists:

    This law tells heavily against the full hereditary transmission of any gift, as only a few of many children would resemble their mid- parentage. The more exceptional the amount of the gift, the more exceptional will be the good fortune of a parent who has a son who equals, and still more if he has a son who overpasses him in that respect. The law is even-handed; it levies the same heavy succession-tax on the transmission of badness as well as of goodness. If it discourages the extravagant expectations of gifted parents that their children will inherit all their powers, it no less discountenances extravagant fears that they will inherit all their weaknesses and diseases.

     

    http://www.stat.ucla.edu/~nchristo/statistics100C/history_regression.pdf

    Galton is not implying that IQ regresses to the mean because of measurement error. The first generation really is more intelligent (or less intelligent) than the mean. Succeeding generations revert to the mean because hereditary transmission is not 100%. Even if like marries with like, succeeding generations will move closer and closer to the mean.

    Chanda is not using "regression to the mean" in this sense (or in your sense either). He is arguing against an "HBD position", which postulates a single black African genotype for IQ. If Africans deviate from that genotype, it's because of luck or fortunate circumstances, and their children will tend to be closer to the mean.

    From what I can gather most Igbo have been farmers. I find it very difficult to see how a whole tribe of several millions would have been raised in IQ.

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/caste/
    An endogamous group that is exposed to unusual selective pressures – say because of their occupation – is going to change in response to those particular selective pressures. That is not the case in a society that mixes fairly freely, one in which smiths marry farmers’ daughters and the daughters of clerks marry shoemakers. In that case, the only selective pressures that result in much change have to affect a major fraction of the population, often everybody – as with adaptation to new foods or new communicable diseases.

    That is why I think this is a subset of the Igbo were are talking about and because the Osu were endogamous, not usually farmers, and had a motive to move to the city and pass for regular Igbo, I think the Usu caste are where these clever Igbo came from.

    Read More
  87. @Truth

    And yet we white boys beat the negro’s butts over and over again in high school and college wrestling. Why is that?

    Could it be that black boys only excel (disproportionately) in sports that involve running and jumping? And getting one’s brain pounded into hash?

     

    Funny you should ask...

    The greatest American wrestler of the last 30 years...and possibly ever;

    http://www.jordanburroughs.com/
    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Yes, It's arguable. Sanderson, Gable, John Smith and Burroughs are probably the big four of all time in American wrestling.
  88. @Wizard of Oz
    "There's nothing about regression that implies that a brilliant scientist's great-great-great grandchildren will be less intelligent than their ancestor". Unless you are affirming a tautology I would quibble with this. Brilliance is surely abnormal and the result, to the extent that it is genetically determined, of a chance - that is random - favourable collection of alleles, epigenetic effects etc. Regression presumably results from it being logically probable that all future descendants will be unlikely individually to have the same or an equivalent favourable chance collection of ingredients.

    Actually I'm struggling a bit now I try and put it all together in concrete terms. Can someone help with precise examples?

    I start with the supposition that the father and mother who each have IQs of 150 and are the smartest in a couple of generations of smart families each have the fortunate conjunction of genes such that father benefits from favourable dominant gene P paired with an inferior allele and mother with P or maybe Q also unpaired with a good allele; neither have any paired recessive genes that are deleterious though each has unpaired deleterious recessive genes; each has some alleles favourable for high IQ though different from each others and perhaps dependent on being paired with identical alleles or on epigenetic effects which promote their effectiveness. So far makes sense? Then clearly the recombination in the offspring is unlikely to produce the same high IQ and a new population will be formed of all that couples 30 children whose average IQ will be say 135. Then they interbreed randomly but vigorously and, eliminating disastrous recessives, their progeny have IQs distributed as a normal distribution around the average of 135. SD??? Presumably 15 as we are using Wechsler or Stanford-Binet (or should it be scaled up by 135/100?).

    OK. Can the really expert tell me either that my statement of the factual situation is erroneous or missing a detail (and not just a bit implausible as stated) OR that my understanding of the math which explains the facts is wrong?

    I’m not an expert but I think I’m thinking about this the same way you are. Children regress to the mean only in the sense that the more children a couple has, the more of the children will ‘be’ similar. In a family of three children, each may appear ‘unique’ but in a family of thirteen children not so much. And that, ‘being similar’ has a probability of not inheriting all the smart alleles. But equally, the first child could be higher IQ than the parents but on average it will be lower.

    The way regression to the mean is being used in the article is premised on the idea that the children will select their mates randomly from the same gene pool that their parents came from. So arguably, Igbo migrant grandchildren could regress to any of these means:
    1. Igbo migrants
    2. Nigerian migrants
    3. Black African migrants
    4. Black migrants
    5. Igbo
    6. Nigerians
    7. Africans
    8. ‘Black people’

    And it is the last of those that is really really the topic of the article – as in, ‘should researchers be *allowed* to do surveys using ‘black people’ as a sample?’ The article seems to be a very convoluted, biologically inaccurate, statistically sloppy way of saying, NO!

    But ultimately, the article is an affirmation of HBD – Igbo as a *population group* have a high mean IQ. Ta-da!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    So arguably, Igbo migrant grandchildren could regress to any of these means:
    1. Igbo migrants
    2. Nigerian migrants
    3. Black African migrants
    4. Black migrants
    5. Igbo
    6. Nigerians
    7. Africans
    8. ‘Black people’
     
    So that would mean a regression anywhere from 65 to what, 90?
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Thank you for your response to something I wrote when diverted from complimenting you on #71. But I sm not sure about your suggestion that regression to the mean could be to the mean of any of the many groups you mention. Maybe you are saying that a choice of population whose average might be regressed to is possible on various mating assumptions and depending on the number of generations considered???
    , @iffen
    What defines the group, Igbo? Can a person self-identify? If a person has only one Igbo parent, is he an Igbo?

    If we take anything other than a completely unbiased and random sample from a collection (a collection in this case that is not even precisely defined) we cannot have any confidence in our observations of the sample as reflecting upon the whole.

    We do not know the IQ of the group, Igbo.

    We do know that the sample in question from this ill-defined group is not random and un-biased.
  89. @helena
    Viewpoints/physiology (based on averages)

    Afro men bigger than Euro, and different lean tissue/fat ratio
    Afro men more likely to body-build
    Afro men more territorial*
    Afro men better at short-twitch sports
    Euro men better at endurance sport (trunk/leg proportions)
    Afro men more assertive in mating rituals
    Euro women mis-perceive mating attention as long-term commitment

    It's called a discussion!

    People calling each other trolls is tedious.

    *I know a few recently arrived Africans. It seems that when one of them answers the door, they then go and get the person who the caller is calling to see, before the person at the door is invited in.

    Hello Anglo whore. I am sorry, I don’t mean to offend you. You see, I love to state the facts, and the facts say you Western women are whores, since you on average have sexual reltionship with many a man (north of ten on average, possible even mid 20s, I’d say; what do you think? There ought to be some independent inquiry or study on the matter though; the results would be most interesting). Also, that makes you Westerners sons and daughters of whores, does it not? SOBs. You see the literal meaning that childish insult contains actually?! :)

    But what I was wondering, is true that you Westerners are so envious of our women’s beauty that you breed with African negroes in order to recreate it in your offsprings? I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Moghaddam#/media/File:Nina-Moghaddam.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29#/media/File:Ceca_koncert_ljubljana_2009.jpeg

    Aren’t they beautiful, hm? And they are so virtrous… so morally superior to your western Caucasian stock that I think it must awake envious feelings in you, hm? I can understand how it does, and that is why you breed with negroes, but unfortunatelly the only thing you get in your half-breed offsprings is some unhealthy, ghoulish, zombish skin color. Tough luck. It seems the Lord does not look kindly at your behavior. ehehehehe :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    Hello Anglo whore. I am sorry, I don’t mean to offend you
     
    Dude, I don't even need to meet you to know you're a cuck.
    , @Sam Shama
    Why don't you take yourself elsewhere you filthy dunce? You contribute nothing to the discussion.
    , @Mark Eugenikos
    "I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!"

    Well, if you like women with big noses, wide faces, and olive complexion, it's your choice. Just don't assume everyone does.

    Nina Moghaddam is Persian, not much info about her in English so I have nothing to add. Ceca (Serbian singer) is not even close to being the most attractive Serbian woman/girl, IMO, but again, de gustibus non est disputandum. I prefer the northern/Czech/Russian look, so to each his own.

    Now regarding that purported moral superiority, from Wiki about Ceca:

    ...She dated Dejan "Šaban" Marjanović, a minor Belgrade gangster, who was murdered.[1] She was then in a relationship with former FK Borac footballer and restaurateur Haro Samardžić.[1]

    While performing for the Serb Volunteer Guard (SDG), a paramilitary force also known as Arkan's Tigers, in Erdut on 11 October 1993 during the Croatian War, she met her husband, Željko "Arkan" Ražnatović, a paramilitary and criminal. ... He was married at the time, and the divorce that ended that marriage was finalized two months before their wedding. Arkan proposed to Ceca on 7 January 1995 and they married one month later on 19 February. Their wedding was broadcast on television, made headlines in newspapers... Ceca's parents, Mira and Slobodan, were against the marriage of their daughter to a paramilitary member."[9]

    Arkan was shot on 15 January 2000 in a Belgrade hotel by four gunmen. Despite having been shot in the head, he remained alive for a brief period of time but died in Ceca's arms in the backseat of the car that was taking them to the emergency room. After fifteen months of mourning, she made her first public appearance in April 2001 in a television interview. "A part of me died that day... I will always love him, and only him, I'm sure of that...," she said in the interview.[1]

    Reformist Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Đinđić was assassinated on 12 March 2003, prompting Serbian authorities to launch Operation Sablja. Ceca's luxury Belgrade home was raided as part of the crackdown on the network of criminals and nationalists behind the assassination.[10] The raid led to a thorough investigation. She was arrested on 17 March 2003 and charged with illegal possession of multiple firearms. Ceca was one of dozens of people detained in the crackdown and she spent three months in prison. She also claimed the firearms were brought to the house by her late husband.

    In 2011, Ražnatović pleaded guilty to embezzling millions of euros from the transfers of players from the football club FK Obilić, which she inherited from her late husband, and again illegal possession of eleven weapons. Ceca had sold fifteen players of FK Obilić to several international football clubs (such as Fenerbahçe.) Serbian state prosecutors accused her of taking for personal use an illegal share in the sale of fifteen players. Ceca denied having been involved in any kind of illegal activities, saying that her late husband was responsible for FK Obilić and that the eleven illegally possessed weapons found in her home also belonged to him.[11] Under a plea bargain, Ražnatović was ordered to spend eight months under house arrest, avoiding the maximum sentence that the charges against her carry, 12 years in prison.[12][13] Ceca was sentenced to one-year house arrest (May 2011 - February 2012) and fined EUR 1.5 million.

    According to court records, she has paid 1 million EUR of the fine; the remaining third is guaranteed by a mortgage on her Belgrade home. Ceca continues to face other court cases, such as for violent criminal behavior, repaying a loan from Komercijalna bank, and repaying a debt to Vojislav Đurković, a former member of the paramilitary unit once controlled by Arkan.
     
    Is this your definition of morality? Seriously?
  90. @WowJustWow

    There is also the fact that some of the most accomplished african-americans are clearly of mostly african ancestry.
     
    Of course you can always find some; that's the wonder of variability. On the other hand: http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/2012/02/black-history-month.html

    On the other hand, most people marry people of similar IQ, via the principle of assortative mating, and that occurs today even interracial pairings. The greatest overlap in the B-W IQ distribution is in the low 90′s, and white women who have children with black men generally have lower IQ’s. The correlation between white ancestry in blacks has been shown to be small at best, and yet what people like you do time and time and time again is act as if black-white mixing has long occurred between people who are of their race’s respective averages. That isn’t what happened now, and there’s little reason to suspect it happened in the peast.

    Many of those examples are of people who lived decades or over a hundred years ago. Modern examples of people of predominantly african ancestry in high positions the US are hardly difficult to come by- Ben Carson, Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas- but keep reaching for people who lived in the 1800′s and an analysis from 1918 (predating modern genetics by decades) that claims nearly all eminent black men are mixed.

    Read More
  91. @Khan Bodin
    I have read in some Stephen hawking book that he had been determined to have IQ of 250 (I think it was A Brief History of Time), and we in the Balkans have had our politican star with the IQ of 205. His name is Vojislav Seselj, the youngest PhD of former Yugoslavia and the man who single-handedly destroyed that NWO court in Hague (he had been on trial for 13 fucking years; I think that under the Rome Convention a trial must be concluded within 2 or 3 years, but we cannot expect from you Western trash to uphold to the norms and standards, even the ones you yoruself created, now can we?). Anyhow, if you believe in that Anglo sources of scientists' IQ, then you a reatard of the highest order. Typical retarded Murican I would say. ehehehehe


    hey, and Leibniz is not even amongst the first 10 scietists of all time. The most intelligent man who ever walked the Earth was Karl Friedrich Gauss. You can inform yourself about the his abilities even as 7 year old boy. I am sure that even 90% of today's students would not be able to solve the math problems, and in time, he was able to do. Even as a boy. And no Archimedes in that list of yours too... My god, you really are simple creatures... Murican simpletons. :)

    Sir!
    Apparently you did not notice that
    the cited classification and ranking scientists by IQ belongs to
    Philip Emeagwali (born in 1954), the Nigerian-born engineer, mentioned
    in the list from Wikipedia. That latter list was provided by Dr. Frost.
    Just in case, I repeat the source of the IQ list , where I picked it up:

    http://emeagwali.com/biography/for-kids/ten-smartest-scientists-of-all-times.pdf

    By the way, none of the scientists mentioned by Mr. Emeagwali was alive at the moment,
    when first IQ test was administrated.
    Exceptions:
    A. Einstein (1879–1955), who never took the test, and
    Mr. Emeagwali, who failed Ph.D. studies.

    I wish you the best in your endeavors.
    Your IffU.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dukljanin
    Who made that "all-time scietists' IQ rankings or classification lists" then? That Nigerian man? The list would explain its stupidity I would say then. So you believe in any study your Western "scientists" do, hm? In that case you are very dumb person. Your scietists can make you thatever the results you desire in such works (studies and inquiries of theirs)... if you pay them, sponsor their work. That was true 200 years ago with Charles Darwin, and it is true so now. It is like making that political studies and polls or government statistics you know. Whoever is making the poll, whoever is paying, is defining the results... outcomes of their work. Their work is not the theorethical and logical work of mathematicians and physicians so that the outcomes have to be grounded in logic or that they cannot be falsified. It's more like a soap opera than science.And that is the direct result of that degenerate and clownish liberal culture of yours (of the English speaking world). Once upon the time German culture was incredibly vigorous and rich, but then came Anglo wars and Germany was occupied and later infested with liberal Anglo disease. We all know, or should know to say better, what follows after infestation. They dissapear. They die.
    , @Dukljanin
    Sorry, didn't see your name at first. I thought you were Anglo (or Murican), and I tend not to be mild in my remarks with them. Anyhow, you shouldn't believe anything coming from those Anglo sources. Nothing. That liberal culture of theirs is a culture of stupidity, deception, corruption, lie, degenerations, decadence and decline, so anything that comes out of it you should regard as lie and fraud until proven otherwise. There is nothing you should take at face value, and that is especially and principally true for Anglo-Murican sources.

    p.s.
    And Gauss was the smartest man ever to walk the Earth. From that list you put there, only Newton and Pascal do truly belong there, and not in the positions they are. And those IQ numbers are laughabable. Eistein with the IQ of 160 and that Nigerian man who did nothing at 190! ehehehe A prime example of stupidity.

  92. @Peter Frost
    The Priss Factory,

    Your comments are wildly off-topic.

    I don’t know much about the netherlands in this case

    A detailed retrospective study was made of 125,000 19-yr-old male Dutch military inductees of whom 20,000 were exposed to the Netherland's winter famine, 1944-1945, through maternal starvation. Birth cohorts were constructed of Ss from 7 famine-stricken cities and matched with controls from 11 nonaffected areas. Results of physical and psychological examinations and the Dutch version of the Raven Progressive Matrices provided the data in addition to time and place of conception, maternal caloric intake, birth weight, fertility levels and social class. Findings show that (a) starvation during pregnancy had no detectable effects on adult mental performance of surviving male offspring. (b) Mental performance of surviving adult males from the entire population had no association with changing levels of mean birth weight in a hospital sample from the population. And (c) there was a strong association of social class with mental performance.

     

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1973-08869-001

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time?

    Yes, in 1994. See the above study by Wicherts et al (2010). Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa. We don't. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers. People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    Let’s say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average.

    You can say that. I wouldn't. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    For instance, more than 50 percent of African immigrants only have primary education relative to less than 25 percent of natives and most other immigrant groups. [...] In contrast, African men endure the slowest assimilation rate of all immigrant groups. Despite being able to cut down their employment gap with respect to similar natives by 12 percentage points within a five year period, African men still endure a 5 percentage point lower employment likelihood than alike natives. However, it is worth pointing out that much of this employment gap is likely to be explained by differences in the skills of native and African men.

     

    http://www.agrod.com/research/projects/p20071002_Spain.frontier/references/20071210.labor.market.in.spain.and.general.statistics/labor.market.immigrant.assimilation.pdf

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    You might. I wouldn't. You're building castles in the air.

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points

    You're confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn't increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test.

    I doubt that the United Kingdom selects Igbo immigrants more stringently than non-Igbo immigrants.

    At best we know the average IQ of certain regions (i.e. sub-Sahara) but national differences within said regions are largely statistical noise

    Variation on the order of 10 to 20 IQ points would be discernable, even with a lot of noise in the data. It would certainly be discernible to travellers and outside observers.

    This article is kind of a nonsequitur, because it veers off topic, based on an apparent misunderstanding of what is meant by “regression to the mean”. Regression to the mean is a statistical artefact caused by randomness. It’s not a concept specific to genetics, and it has nothing to do with whether IQ is a genetic or environmental trait

    The concept was first developed by Galton to explain why a genetically influenced trait will revert to its mean population value over several generations. It has since been borrowed by other fields to explain why an extreme measure on a first measurement will be closer to the mean on the second measurement. There is always a certain amount of error in any measurement, and extreme measurements are more likely to reflect errors of different sorts.

    This is not the way the concept of "regression to the mean" is used by Galton or by other human geneticists:

    This law tells heavily against the full hereditary transmission of any gift, as only a few of many children would resemble their mid- parentage. The more exceptional the amount of the gift, the more exceptional will be the good fortune of a parent who has a son who equals, and still more if he has a son who overpasses him in that respect. The law is even-handed; it levies the same heavy succession-tax on the transmission of badness as well as of goodness. If it discourages the extravagant expectations of gifted parents that their children will inherit all their powers, it no less discountenances extravagant fears that they will inherit all their weaknesses and diseases.

     

    http://www.stat.ucla.edu/~nchristo/statistics100C/history_regression.pdf

    Galton is not implying that IQ regresses to the mean because of measurement error. The first generation really is more intelligent (or less intelligent) than the mean. Succeeding generations revert to the mean because hereditary transmission is not 100%. Even if like marries with like, succeeding generations will move closer and closer to the mean.

    Chanda is not using "regression to the mean" in this sense (or in your sense either). He is arguing against an "HBD position", which postulates a single black African genotype for IQ. If Africans deviate from that genotype, it's because of luck or fortunate circumstances, and their children will tend to be closer to the mean.

    1994 predates the major period of famine in Zimbabwe by close to 10 years. I am not 100% of the nature of how malnutrition affects intelligence long term, but it has been linked repeatedly to childhood retardation, and again, you need only look up the effects of iodine deficiency. The famine in ethiopia killed many people, but I’m not sure of how those who did suffer from it recovered later on, which is indeed possible. If you want to go for personal observations though, I’m not aware of too many people who can affirmatively state (even though many who’ve been to Africa like to repeat the IQ scores, while reiterating experiences with people who should be rarer than unicorns if their IQ’s were that lower) that continent-wide, the average person is functionally retarded, and that people have been repeatedly misled by their “winning personalities” into not realizing it’s a continent full of retards.

    Read More
  93. @iffen

    admixture did not come from things like slave masters sleeping with/raping their slaves, contrary to popular imagination- it seemed to come mostly from lower-class and slave whites.
     
    Where are your facts that support this contention?

    One can look at the 1870 censuses in the southern states and see mulattoes by the thousands with the same last names as the largest slaveholders in their area.

    It’s been some time since I’ve ever read anything affirming it, but the idea white ancestry in american blacks came from rape of slave masters is a myth, and even people like Madison Grant did not believe it:

    http://www.amren.com/ar/2011/12/index.html

    “He writes that miscegenation has generally been the result of crosses with “the lowest and most unintelligent type of white servant.” “Those admirers of the Mulatto who boast that he carries in his veins the blue blood of the aristocratic families of the South,” he adds, “would do well to read the actual records . . . .””

    They probably shared those names in the vein of how african-americans ended up with their non-african names.

    Read More
  94. @Khan Bodin
    [It's much better to combine several short comments into one or two longer and more comprehensive ones. Also, it's not good to have long comments that are just filled with pure insults and profanity without much substantive content.]

    Ehehehe... My God, stupidity of Muricants is really stunning! Tell me something Murican Dip-o-will, how is it possible that your fellow Negro Muricunt Carlson can be "only 20% white" as you stated referring to your corporate media sources, hm? You do understand that 20% is 1/5 of something? You do understand that 1/5 is an odd number, not divisible by 2, hm? So how did your fellow Murican become then? Apparently he didn't have both parents... well according to you that is. That's really, really dumb. But I am not surprised that you stupid Muricants are not able to spot something that logically impossible. After all, logic is not youir "stronger point," right? Lying, deceiving and thieving is. :)

    Figures for genetic ancestry are seldom exact, and figures such as “20% of something” are hardly uncommon even in papers, even though they’re not meant to be taken literally, but I’ll give you credit and say it would have been better to say he’s about “20% white”, close to the 18% white ancestry the average african-american has. What is really, really dumb on other hand is you going into virtual meltdown over someone not giving that specific qualification.

    You are also the first person I’ve ever seen given a warning such as this on Unz.com, so keep it with your smarmy, spergy rants about “MURICANTS”, if that means reading less of your embarrassing temper tantrums.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Deduction

    Figures for genetic ancestry are seldom exact, and figures such as “20% of something” are hardly uncommon even in papers, even though they’re not meant to be taken literally, but I’ll give you credit and say it would have been better to say he’s about “20% white”, close to the 18% white ancestry the average african-american has. What is really, really dumb on other hand is you going into virtual meltdown over someone not giving that specific qualification.
     
    That qualification is unnecessary. A person can be any percentage at all. If my mother was half Igbo and my father was Danish, I might inherit no Igbo genes, although the probability of that happening is vanishingly small.

    The point is that you do not necessarily or even probably inherit an equal number of genes from your grandparents, as I learned doing Biology GCSE haha.

  95. There are no actual IQ measurements to analyze. The original author doesn’t even attempt to demonstrate the reliability of the proxy. May God have mercy on his soul.

    Read More
  96. @EriK
    This guy wasn't bad
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cael_Sanderson#2004_Olympics

    Yes, It’s arguable. Sanderson, Gable, John Smith and Burroughs are probably the big four of all time in American wrestling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    I don't know about that. Was anything more surprising than Gardner's win in 2000 against an unbeatable Russian?

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

  97. @helena
    I'm not an expert but I think I'm thinking about this the same way you are. Children regress to the mean only in the sense that the more children a couple has, the more of the children will 'be' similar. In a family of three children, each may appear 'unique' but in a family of thirteen children not so much. And that, 'being similar' has a probability of not inheriting all the smart alleles. But equally, the first child could be higher IQ than the parents but on average it will be lower.

    The way regression to the mean is being used in the article is premised on the idea that the children will select their mates randomly from the same gene pool that their parents came from. So arguably, Igbo migrant grandchildren could regress to any of these means:
    1. Igbo migrants
    2. Nigerian migrants
    3. Black African migrants
    4. Black migrants
    5. Igbo
    6. Nigerians
    7. Africans
    8. 'Black people'

    And it is the last of those that is really really the topic of the article - as in, 'should researchers be *allowed* to do surveys using 'black people' as a sample?' The article seems to be a very convoluted, biologically inaccurate, statistically sloppy way of saying, NO!

    But ultimately, the article is an affirmation of HBD - Igbo as a *population group* have a high mean IQ. Ta-da!

    So arguably, Igbo migrant grandchildren could regress to any of these means:
    1. Igbo migrants
    2. Nigerian migrants
    3. Black African migrants
    4. Black migrants
    5. Igbo
    6. Nigerians
    7. Africans
    8. ‘Black people’

    So that would mean a regression anywhere from 65 to what, 90?

    Read More
  98. @Khan Bodin
    Hello Anglo whore. I am sorry, I don't mean to offend you. You see, I love to state the facts, and the facts say you Western women are whores, since you on average have sexual reltionship with many a man (north of ten on average, possible even mid 20s, I'd say; what do you think? There ought to be some independent inquiry or study on the matter though; the results would be most interesting). Also, that makes you Westerners sons and daughters of whores, does it not? SOBs. You see the literal meaning that childish insult contains actually?! :)


    But what I was wondering, is true that you Westerners are so envious of our women's beauty that you breed with African negroes in order to recreate it in your offsprings? I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Moghaddam#/media/File:Nina-Moghaddam.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29#/media/File:Ceca_koncert_ljubljana_2009.jpeg

    Aren't they beautiful, hm? And they are so virtrous... so morally superior to your western Caucasian stock that I think it must awake envious feelings in you, hm? I can understand how it does, and that is why you breed with negroes, but unfortunatelly the only thing you get in your half-breed offsprings is some unhealthy, ghoulish, zombish skin color. Tough luck. It seems the Lord does not look kindly at your behavior. ehehehehe :)

    Hello Anglo whore. I am sorry, I don’t mean to offend you

    Dude, I don’t even need to meet you to know you’re a cuck.

    Read More
  99. @helena
    IQP (IQ Potential) is determined by DNA. That has to be true - no one can be what they're not.

    'determined by DNA' means the selection of some alleles and not others.

    The only way I can understand Regression to the Mean is if there are alleles in the gamete that come from the gene pool but were not expressed in the parent.

    If that is so then RtoM does not need to be a single event.

    If that is not so then where does the breeder's equation come from? Where do R and S and h come from?

    I do find that people nowadays treat statistics as if it is a religion but it is a man-made representation of nature; it is a 'social reality'.

    regardless of numerical examples, it should be easy to explain how RtoM relates to biological inheritence, sexual reproduction, but nobody seems to be doing that.

    Helena, I had thought about something in those lines:

    http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-i/#comment-1174813

    is is similar to what you are saying?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I think that we need some expert advice on the place of the presumed "unexpressed genes [or should that be alleles?]" that are passed on to offspring and then expressed so as to make the offspring on average brighter than dumb and dumber than smart parents. If we assume that mother and father are pretty close to identical genetically how would that random expression of genes unexpressed in the parents work? Would that be enough to explain regression toward the mean?
    , @helena
    I'm not sure. I think you might be thinking that the mean is regressing because each trial is open to chance but I think the mean is regressing because (Igbo) high IQ is already a 'high-end of the bell curve' subset of the total population (of Africans).
  100. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Art
    There is something wrong with a man that writes article after article that proves that blacks are stupid.

    Telling someone that they are genetically inferior is a very wrong thing to do – PERIOD. Good people do not do that.

    Blacks are the way they are because they come from a tropical culture that had different criterion for success. From a cultural standpoint blacks have been separated and isolated from the main culture in America. Where they integrate with white culture, they do well. No one would call blacks in NYC “stepin fetchit.”

    The truth is that we all do not have to be rocket scientists to live and achieve a good life.

    The reason such articles are repeatedly written is because whites have been blamed for any lack of success or among blacks. No matter what we do, it’s whites’ fault. Washington, D.C. spends more money (with a black school board for mostly black children) than anyother city, and yet the results are among the lowest. And it’s all our (whites’) fault, leading to yet more brow beating and tax goudging, and guilt feelings about reporting being mugged (unless of course the mugger is white.)

    That’s why. It’s not because anyone enjoys the process. It’s sheer self-protection and also, just getting at the truth. If you feel you’re doing well and you’re ok, great.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "The reason such articles are repeatedly written is because whites have been blamed for any lack of success or among blacks. No matter what we do, it’s whites’ fault. "

    Blacks in America have lived under the political force and control of whites for hundreds of years. Two hundred years of slavery, one hundred years of Jim Crow, and fifty years of Jews using them as fodder for their tribal political power, pushing blacks ever deeper into debilitating victimhood.

    For what extended period of time have black people been accepted into white culture? Does it not take time to overcome the past?

    African culture is different from European culture - blacks in America have never had a real chance to grow into Western culture.
  101. @Khan Bodin
    Hello Anglo whore. I am sorry, I don't mean to offend you. You see, I love to state the facts, and the facts say you Western women are whores, since you on average have sexual reltionship with many a man (north of ten on average, possible even mid 20s, I'd say; what do you think? There ought to be some independent inquiry or study on the matter though; the results would be most interesting). Also, that makes you Westerners sons and daughters of whores, does it not? SOBs. You see the literal meaning that childish insult contains actually?! :)


    But what I was wondering, is true that you Westerners are so envious of our women's beauty that you breed with African negroes in order to recreate it in your offsprings? I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Moghaddam#/media/File:Nina-Moghaddam.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29#/media/File:Ceca_koncert_ljubljana_2009.jpeg

    Aren't they beautiful, hm? And they are so virtrous... so morally superior to your western Caucasian stock that I think it must awake envious feelings in you, hm? I can understand how it does, and that is why you breed with negroes, but unfortunatelly the only thing you get in your half-breed offsprings is some unhealthy, ghoulish, zombish skin color. Tough luck. It seems the Lord does not look kindly at your behavior. ehehehehe :)

    Why don’t you take yourself elsewhere you filthy dunce? You contribute nothing to the discussion.

    Read More
  102. @res

    The flies were selected for maximum number of bristles for many generations, those with lower numbers being weeded out of the breeding population. This resulted eventually in a population with significantly higher average bristle number than the wild type. As this point the population with high bristle number was allowed to interbreed but with no further selection. After a number of generations the average bristle number returned to that of the wild type.
     
    Thanks for the interesting pointer. Do you have a detailed reference for this? I tried to find the original paper (apparently Ernst Mayr in 1948?), but could only find imprecise citations in books and web pages.

    Here are some recent papers discussing stabilizing selection for bristle number:
    http://www.researchgate.net/publication/271795599_Stabilizing_Selection_Detected_for_Bristle_Number_in_Drosophila_melanogaster
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569512/

    re: experiment on bristle number in fruit flies

    Thanks for the interesting pointer. Do you have a detailed reference for this?

    The experiment is described in The Eighth Day of Creation : http://goo.gl/S6B5DD, which is the first book I read when I first got getting interested in modern genetics after contracting cancer almost 20 years ago. A great book btw and I survived.

    The experiment was carried out by Thomas Hunter Morgan, an early pioneer in the field (and one of the few great scientist from south of the Mason-Dixon Line), whom you can read about here: https://goo.gl/naRxI3

    Read More
  103. 30 million Igbos. I hope with all this intelligence, they at least have a standard of life superior to that of Spain.

    http://igboisrael.blogspot.com.br/2009/08/what-are-responsible-for-igbo-and.html

    We need more hyper-tribalistic and arrogant tribe **

    Incidentally, I know almost nothing about the Ashkenazi. They show so little about themselves, about higher verbal IQ, a Jewish version of the Jewish story, relentless persecution by ” irrational reasons ” now they are trying to convince us that the Jews have higher average IQ so it’s okay. This is intelligence. It is just by merit.

    Reality resembles what McDonald has written on his blog. The current Jewish success is far from being just a pure innate brilliance. It depends on how you are looking at, from which perspective.

    It’s brilliant take the societies of others, distorting the facts and eliminate them via low fertility, immigration en masse and miscegenation. But it is not wise.

    I do not know anything about the Ashkenazis, on average, but may know through what they do bad, that omit or try to excuse the behavior of one of his chosen lightly.

    Read More
  104. @Khan Bodin
    [It's much better to combine several short comments into one or two longer and more comprehensive ones. Also, it's not good to have long comments that are just filled with pure insults and profanity without much substantive content.]

    Ehehehe... My God, stupidity of Muricants is really stunning! Tell me something Murican Dip-o-will, how is it possible that your fellow Negro Muricunt Carlson can be "only 20% white" as you stated referring to your corporate media sources, hm? You do understand that 20% is 1/5 of something? You do understand that 1/5 is an odd number, not divisible by 2, hm? So how did your fellow Murican become then? Apparently he didn't have both parents... well according to you that is. That's really, really dumb. But I am not surprised that you stupid Muricants are not able to spot something that logically impossible. After all, logic is not youir "stronger point," right? Lying, deceiving and thieving is. :)

    Boring. Further to the editorial advice to you at #86 I suggest you give up on attempts at humour which is clearly not your strong suit especially in a language which you have not yet mastered.

    If you actually know anything pertinent or can put relevant logical arguments backed by references on fact which will make up for the discredit your tone so far has brought to your contributions then I shall read your comments with interest.

    Read More
  105. @Sam Shama
    Helena, I had thought about something in those lines:

    http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-i/#comment-1174813

    is is similar to what you are saying?

    I think that we need some expert advice on the place of the presumed “unexpressed genes [or should that be alleles?]” that are passed on to offspring and then expressed so as to make the offspring on average brighter than dumb and dumber than smart parents. If we assume that mother and father are pretty close to identical genetically how would that random expression of genes unexpressed in the parents work? Would that be enough to explain regression toward the mean?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Shama

    I think that we need some expert advice on the place of the presumed “unexpressed genes [or should that be alleles?]”
     
    Agree. Razib Khan would be my pick.
  106. @helena
    I'm not an expert but I think I'm thinking about this the same way you are. Children regress to the mean only in the sense that the more children a couple has, the more of the children will 'be' similar. In a family of three children, each may appear 'unique' but in a family of thirteen children not so much. And that, 'being similar' has a probability of not inheriting all the smart alleles. But equally, the first child could be higher IQ than the parents but on average it will be lower.

    The way regression to the mean is being used in the article is premised on the idea that the children will select their mates randomly from the same gene pool that their parents came from. So arguably, Igbo migrant grandchildren could regress to any of these means:
    1. Igbo migrants
    2. Nigerian migrants
    3. Black African migrants
    4. Black migrants
    5. Igbo
    6. Nigerians
    7. Africans
    8. 'Black people'

    And it is the last of those that is really really the topic of the article - as in, 'should researchers be *allowed* to do surveys using 'black people' as a sample?' The article seems to be a very convoluted, biologically inaccurate, statistically sloppy way of saying, NO!

    But ultimately, the article is an affirmation of HBD - Igbo as a *population group* have a high mean IQ. Ta-da!

    Thank you for your response to something I wrote when diverted from complimenting you on #71. But I sm not sure about your suggestion that regression to the mean could be to the mean of any of the many groups you mention. Maybe you are saying that a choice of population whose average might be regressed to is possible on various mating assumptions and depending on the number of generations considered???

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "Maybe you are saying that a choice of population whose average might be regressed to is possible on various mating assumptions and depending on the number of generations considered???"

    Yes. It's easy to understand that the mean can be regressed to 'all Igbo', because the Igbo migrants will choose mates from that group, i.e. from that total set of alleles.

    It's harder to understand why there could be a valid regression to the mean of all Africans,

    but I'm hoping that the Breeders Equation is the link that makes the genetic relationship, between Igbo and Africans, amenable to statistical measures.

    The Igbo are like a phenotype. If all Igbo mated with other Africans, the Igbo phenotype would dissolve back into the African bell curve.
  107. @Truth
    Yes, It's arguable. Sanderson, Gable, John Smith and Burroughs are probably the big four of all time in American wrestling.

    I don’t know about that. Was anything more surprising than Gardner’s win in 2000 against an unbeatable Russian?

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

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Gardner's event may have been the greatest SINGLE EVENT in US Wrestling, but the other four had a long history of excellence.
  108. @Khan Bodin
    Hello Anglo whore. I am sorry, I don't mean to offend you. You see, I love to state the facts, and the facts say you Western women are whores, since you on average have sexual reltionship with many a man (north of ten on average, possible even mid 20s, I'd say; what do you think? There ought to be some independent inquiry or study on the matter though; the results would be most interesting). Also, that makes you Westerners sons and daughters of whores, does it not? SOBs. You see the literal meaning that childish insult contains actually?! :)


    But what I was wondering, is true that you Westerners are so envious of our women's beauty that you breed with African negroes in order to recreate it in your offsprings? I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Moghaddam#/media/File:Nina-Moghaddam.jpg

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29#/media/File:Ceca_koncert_ljubljana_2009.jpeg

    Aren't they beautiful, hm? And they are so virtrous... so morally superior to your western Caucasian stock that I think it must awake envious feelings in you, hm? I can understand how it does, and that is why you breed with negroes, but unfortunatelly the only thing you get in your half-breed offsprings is some unhealthy, ghoulish, zombish skin color. Tough luck. It seems the Lord does not look kindly at your behavior. ehehehehe :)

    “I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!”

    Well, if you like women with big noses, wide faces, and olive complexion, it’s your choice. Just don’t assume everyone does.

    Nina Moghaddam is Persian, not much info about her in English so I have nothing to add. Ceca (Serbian singer) is not even close to being the most attractive Serbian woman/girl, IMO, but again, de gustibus non est disputandum. I prefer the northern/Czech/Russian look, so to each his own.

    Now regarding that purported moral superiority, from Wiki about Ceca:

    …She dated Dejan “Šaban” Marjanović, a minor Belgrade gangster, who was murdered.[1] She was then in a relationship with former FK Borac footballer and restaurateur Haro Samardžić.[1]

    While performing for the Serb Volunteer Guard (SDG), a paramilitary force also known as Arkan’s Tigers, in Erdut on 11 October 1993 during the Croatian War, she met her husband, Željko “Arkan” Ražnatović, a paramilitary and criminal. … He was married at the time, and the divorce that ended that marriage was finalized two months before their wedding. Arkan proposed to Ceca on 7 January 1995 and they married one month later on 19 February. Their wedding was broadcast on television, made headlines in newspapers… Ceca’s parents, Mira and Slobodan, were against the marriage of their daughter to a paramilitary member.”[9]

    Arkan was shot on 15 January 2000 in a Belgrade hotel by four gunmen. Despite having been shot in the head, he remained alive for a brief period of time but died in Ceca’s arms in the backseat of the car that was taking them to the emergency room. After fifteen months of mourning, she made her first public appearance in April 2001 in a television interview. “A part of me died that day… I will always love him, and only him, I’m sure of that…,” she said in the interview.[1]

    Reformist Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Đinđić was assassinated on 12 March 2003, prompting Serbian authorities to launch Operation Sablja. Ceca’s luxury Belgrade home was raided as part of the crackdown on the network of criminals and nationalists behind the assassination.[10] The raid led to a thorough investigation. She was arrested on 17 March 2003 and charged with illegal possession of multiple firearms. Ceca was one of dozens of people detained in the crackdown and she spent three months in prison. She also claimed the firearms were brought to the house by her late husband.

    In 2011, Ražnatović pleaded guilty to embezzling millions of euros from the transfers of players from the football club FK Obilić, which she inherited from her late husband, and again illegal possession of eleven weapons. Ceca had sold fifteen players of FK Obilić to several international football clubs (such as Fenerbahçe.) Serbian state prosecutors accused her of taking for personal use an illegal share in the sale of fifteen players. Ceca denied having been involved in any kind of illegal activities, saying that her late husband was responsible for FK Obilić and that the eleven illegally possessed weapons found in her home also belonged to him.[11] Under a plea bargain, Ražnatović was ordered to spend eight months under house arrest, avoiding the maximum sentence that the charges against her carry, 12 years in prison.[12][13] Ceca was sentenced to one-year house arrest (May 2011 – February 2012) and fined EUR 1.5 million.

    According to court records, she has paid 1 million EUR of the fine; the remaining third is guaranteed by a mortgage on her Belgrade home. Ceca continues to face other court cases, such as for violent criminal behavior, repaying a loan from Komercijalna bank, and repaying a debt to Vojislav Đurković, a former member of the paramilitary unit once controlled by Arkan.

    Is this your definition of morality? Seriously?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dukljanin
    She had dated one man before she was married. She herself said that she has been only with 2 men, and she is no liar. You should try and find that kind of sincerity in your whorish women. I think you might find it only in those religious kind, which I know some still exists in your degenerate liberal land Murica. Also, have in mind that she is a star here in the Balkans. You might compare her popularity with that of your big Hollywood stars. There is no way you can compare the virtues of our women to yours. None.
  109. @Peter Frost
    The Priss Factory,

    Your comments are wildly off-topic.

    I don’t know much about the netherlands in this case

    A detailed retrospective study was made of 125,000 19-yr-old male Dutch military inductees of whom 20,000 were exposed to the Netherland's winter famine, 1944-1945, through maternal starvation. Birth cohorts were constructed of Ss from 7 famine-stricken cities and matched with controls from 11 nonaffected areas. Results of physical and psychological examinations and the Dutch version of the Raven Progressive Matrices provided the data in addition to time and place of conception, maternal caloric intake, birth weight, fertility levels and social class. Findings show that (a) starvation during pregnancy had no detectable effects on adult mental performance of surviving male offspring. (b) Mental performance of surviving adult males from the entire population had no association with changing levels of mean birth weight in a hospital sample from the population. And (c) there was a strong association of social class with mental performance.

     

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1973-08869-001

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time?

    Yes, in 1994. See the above study by Wicherts et al (2010). Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa. We don't. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers. People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    Let’s say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average.

    You can say that. I wouldn't. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    For instance, more than 50 percent of African immigrants only have primary education relative to less than 25 percent of natives and most other immigrant groups. [...] In contrast, African men endure the slowest assimilation rate of all immigrant groups. Despite being able to cut down their employment gap with respect to similar natives by 12 percentage points within a five year period, African men still endure a 5 percentage point lower employment likelihood than alike natives. However, it is worth pointing out that much of this employment gap is likely to be explained by differences in the skills of native and African men.

     

    http://www.agrod.com/research/projects/p20071002_Spain.frontier/references/20071210.labor.market.in.spain.and.general.statistics/labor.market.immigrant.assimilation.pdf

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    You might. I wouldn't. You're building castles in the air.

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points

    You're confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn't increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test.

    I doubt that the United Kingdom selects Igbo immigrants more stringently than non-Igbo immigrants.

    At best we know the average IQ of certain regions (i.e. sub-Sahara) but national differences within said regions are largely statistical noise

    Variation on the order of 10 to 20 IQ points would be discernable, even with a lot of noise in the data. It would certainly be discernible to travellers and outside observers.

    This article is kind of a nonsequitur, because it veers off topic, based on an apparent misunderstanding of what is meant by “regression to the mean”. Regression to the mean is a statistical artefact caused by randomness. It’s not a concept specific to genetics, and it has nothing to do with whether IQ is a genetic or environmental trait

    The concept was first developed by Galton to explain why a genetically influenced trait will revert to its mean population value over several generations. It has since been borrowed by other fields to explain why an extreme measure on a first measurement will be closer to the mean on the second measurement. There is always a certain amount of error in any measurement, and extreme measurements are more likely to reflect errors of different sorts.

    This is not the way the concept of "regression to the mean" is used by Galton or by other human geneticists:

    This law tells heavily against the full hereditary transmission of any gift, as only a few of many children would resemble their mid- parentage. The more exceptional the amount of the gift, the more exceptional will be the good fortune of a parent who has a son who equals, and still more if he has a son who overpasses him in that respect. The law is even-handed; it levies the same heavy succession-tax on the transmission of badness as well as of goodness. If it discourages the extravagant expectations of gifted parents that their children will inherit all their powers, it no less discountenances extravagant fears that they will inherit all their weaknesses and diseases.

     

    http://www.stat.ucla.edu/~nchristo/statistics100C/history_regression.pdf

    Galton is not implying that IQ regresses to the mean because of measurement error. The first generation really is more intelligent (or less intelligent) than the mean. Succeeding generations revert to the mean because hereditary transmission is not 100%. Even if like marries with like, succeeding generations will move closer and closer to the mean.

    Chanda is not using "regression to the mean" in this sense (or in your sense either). He is arguing against an "HBD position", which postulates a single black African genotype for IQ. If Africans deviate from that genotype, it's because of luck or fortunate circumstances, and their children will tend to be closer to the mean.

    Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa.

    You’re assuming we can accurately quantify nutritional differences within sub-Sahara. We can’t even quantify them within the United States. You equate sub-optimum nutrition with famine but it’s much more subtle than that. It has to do with intangibles like national hygiene which affect disease which prevent the body from using nutrients. No one know what specific nutrients have caused the height of the average white American man to increase since the 1980s or why the head circumference of British infants increased by over one standard deviation since the 1950s.

    We don’t. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers.

    Not necessarily. Hardly anyone noticed the Flynn effect until Flynn popularized it in the 1980s. Prior to that, people thought society was dumbing down.

    People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    People in Ethipoia are 40% caucasoid at the genetic level, so the fact that no one can see their higher IQ caucasoid genes is evidence that it’s being masked by poor nutrition,

    You can say that. I wouldn’t. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    We’re talking specifically about the UK. In 1979, first generation African immigrants to the UK had a mean of 12.2 years of education, suggesting they had some university on average.

    http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_10_06.pdf

    Keep in mind that African born immigrants surveyed in 1979 were roughly 36 years old and would have likely attended university around 1963. Now see Figure 1 in this document:

    http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/fs10-trends-tertiary-education-sub-saharan-africa-2010-en.pdf

    It shows that in 1970, less than 1% of college age sub-Saharan Africans were enrolled in tertiary education. Further, in 1950 South Africa, only 0.5% of Africans even qualified for university. So the generation of African migrants to the UK who reached young adulthood in the mid 1960s were more educated than over 99% of their cohort in sub-Saharan Africa.

    You might. I wouldn’t. You’re building castles in the air.

    You’re free to deny the role of nutrition on intelligence, but you’re ignoring a ton of evidence, including incredible studies of identical twins who recieved unequal nutrition in the womb. The twin born with lower weight had a smaller head and lower score IQ at age 15, and the scores were especially low on the very types of tests that show the biggest Flynn effects:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

    Seems very strange to think sub-optimum nutrition is potent enough to give black Africans smaller height and heads than African Americans, yet too weak to impair their IQs, even though IQ is less heritable than height and head size, and should be MORE amenable to environmental influences, not less.

    You’re confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn’t increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    The causation works in both directions. Smart people stay in school longer, but there’s also overwhelming evidence that schooling props up IQ scores (though probably not real intelligence):

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/01/might-schooling-raise-iq.html

    How the hell do you explain the Flynn effect if you deny that both the biological environment (i.e. nutrition) and the cultural environment (i.e. schooling) affect IQ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    ''Caucasoid blood'' among ethiopians DOESN'T mean ''european-caucasoid with -high iq genes-'', ;)
    , @Stephen R. Diamond

    You’re assuming we can accurately quantify nutritional differences within sub-Sahara.
     
    No, he need assume only that large nutritional deficits would produce substantial effects (are more likely to produce them than are minor deficits). That some minor deficits might also produce harmful effects doesn't invalidate his reasonable assumption.

    Hardly anyone noticed the Flynn effect until Flynn popularized it in the 1980s.
     
    We can't "notice" it now; only accept it. Which leads even Flynn to suspect that only specific aptitudes increased, at the expense of other(unmeasured) aptitudes.

    With these kinds of arguments you misplace the burden of proof (by building "castles in the air.")

  110. @Priss Factor
    "But your message is self-undermining. If you want to protect the status of white males, why broadcast their inferiority? To propose a policy of segretation predicated on the greater sexual desirability of the negro is to propose affirmative action in mating. This wouldn’t have any greater real benefit for the esteem in which white males are held than affirmative action produced for negroes."

    You make a good point, but the cat is out of the bag. White women already know the negros are badderasser than white men or 'white boys' are.

    https://www.facebook.com/Atmjeff/videos/1109015979126843/

    This is why white guys should have been more honest about this problem long ago and effected total and permanent separation BEFORE white women came down with jungalo fever. It's too late now.

    So, white guys must be truthful and candid in confronting this problem. They must call for a safe zone for themselves and white women who still prefer white men to black men. Of course, even white women who have sex with black men may choose to finally settle with white men cuz blacks are so out of control.

    Also, despite the physical attraction, many white women still stay away from blacks due to fact that many black males fail economically and cuz black males tend to be more volatile and abusive.

    "And what about white women? Do they count for nothing? If she really prefers the negro, isn’t the moral presumption that she should have him?"

    Sure, she can leave the white nation and go live in Jamaica, Haiti, or black Africa. Let her get her fill of Negroes but away from white nations. No one is denying her the right of jungalo fever. But let her do in a black land. But she has no right to bring a negro to white land. How dare she reject white men but then demand that white men accept her and her negro mate? Her message to white men is 'you guys are not good enough for me', but she expects white men to honor her and pay taxes to take care of her, her negro mate, and their mulatto kids? What kind of crap is that? That is cucky.

    It's like eco-systems. For an eco-system to be viable, it needs to keep certain organisms while excluding others. For instance, introducing rats and pigs into Galapagos was disastrous as they ate up all the tortoise eggs.
    Releasing certain kinds of invasive species of frogs into another eco-system can disrupt stuff and wipe out existing organisms. It's like the arrival of red ants can wipe out black ants.

    Well, among humans, there are geno-systems. For a certain geno-system to be viable, its men must have access to its women, and its women must respect its men. When you introduce Negroes into a white geno-system, Negro males pussify white males, and then white females lose respect for white men. And then Negro males act wild and hump both white women and black women and produce all kinds of problems with mulattos and black kids running wild.

    So, the white geno-system must be preserved by keeping white males safe from black males. As for white females with jungalo fever, have them go live in Nigeria or Kenya.

    White women already know the negros are badderasser than white men or ‘white boys’ are.

    https://www.facebook.com/Atmjeff/videos/1109015979126843/

    I will take that video as a grain of salt for what’s happening in reality. Let’s face it, Whites can’t do shit on any Blacks on street. If caught, they’d be nationally publicized as “Racists”.

    So if you go up to White girls with a mic, do you really expect that they will say “I don’t have a Jungle Fever.”? The option of choosing one’s own preference disappear when dealing with Blacks. Anything awful about Blacks, you can’t say. Black people, Black culture, Black whatever. The only stereotype that they thought worth having is Pretty Huge D. Even then, we know that it’s not true.

    http://picturescream.com/images/1439785643716.jpg.

    So Priss, stop posting irrelevant comment. You can do much better.

    Read More
  111. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    The reason such articles are repeatedly written is because whites have been blamed for any lack of success or among blacks. No matter what we do, it's whites' fault. Washington, D.C. spends more money (with a black school board for mostly black children) than anyother city, and yet the results are among the lowest. And it's all our (whites') fault, leading to yet more brow beating and tax goudging, and guilt feelings about reporting being mugged (unless of course the mugger is white.)

    That's why. It's not because anyone enjoys the process. It's sheer self-protection and also, just getting at the truth. If you feel you're doing well and you're ok, great.

    “The reason such articles are repeatedly written is because whites have been blamed for any lack of success or among blacks. No matter what we do, it’s whites’ fault. “

    Blacks in America have lived under the political force and control of whites for hundreds of years. Two hundred years of slavery, one hundred years of Jim Crow, and fifty years of Jews using them as fodder for their tribal political power, pushing blacks ever deeper into debilitating victimhood.

    For what extended period of time have black people been accepted into white culture? Does it not take time to overcome the past?

    African culture is different from European culture – blacks in America have never had a real chance to grow into Western culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    What makes you think they can? Or even want to?
  112. @pumpkinperson
    Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa.

    You're assuming we can accurately quantify nutritional differences within sub-Sahara. We can't even quantify them within the United States. You equate sub-optimum nutrition with famine but it's much more subtle than that. It has to do with intangibles like national hygiene which affect disease which prevent the body from using nutrients. No one know what specific nutrients have caused the height of the average white American man to increase since the 1980s or why the head circumference of British infants increased by over one standard deviation since the 1950s.


    We don’t. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers.

    Not necessarily. Hardly anyone noticed the Flynn effect until Flynn popularized it in the 1980s. Prior to that, people thought society was dumbing down.


    People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    People in Ethipoia are 40% caucasoid at the genetic level, so the fact that no one can see their higher IQ caucasoid genes is evidence that it's being masked by poor nutrition,


    You can say that. I wouldn’t. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    We're talking specifically about the UK. In 1979, first generation African immigrants to the UK had a mean of 12.2 years of education, suggesting they had some university on average.

    http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_10_06.pdf

    Keep in mind that African born immigrants surveyed in 1979 were roughly 36 years old and would have likely attended university around 1963. Now see Figure 1 in this document:

    http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/fs10-trends-tertiary-education-sub-saharan-africa-2010-en.pdf

    It shows that in 1970, less than 1% of college age sub-Saharan Africans were enrolled in tertiary education. Further, in 1950 South Africa, only 0.5% of Africans even qualified for university. So the generation of African migrants to the UK who reached young adulthood in the mid 1960s were more educated than over 99% of their cohort in sub-Saharan Africa.


    You might. I wouldn’t. You’re building castles in the air.

    You're free to deny the role of nutrition on intelligence, but you're ignoring a ton of evidence, including incredible studies of identical twins who recieved unequal nutrition in the womb. The twin born with lower weight had a smaller head and lower score IQ at age 15, and the scores were especially low on the very types of tests that show the biggest Flynn effects:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

    Seems very strange to think sub-optimum nutrition is potent enough to give black Africans smaller height and heads than African Americans, yet too weak to impair their IQs, even though IQ is less heritable than height and head size, and should be MORE amenable to environmental influences, not less.


    You’re confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn’t increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    The causation works in both directions. Smart people stay in school longer, but there's also overwhelming evidence that schooling props up IQ scores (though probably not real intelligence):

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/01/might-schooling-raise-iq.html

    How the hell do you explain the Flynn effect if you deny that both the biological environment (i.e. nutrition) and the cultural environment (i.e. schooling) affect IQ?

    ”Caucasoid blood” among ethiopians DOESN’T mean ”european-caucasoid with -high iq genes-”, ;)

    Read More
    • Replies: @pumpkinperson
    Caucasoid blood” among ethiopians DOESN’T mean ”european-caucasoid with -high iq genes-


    Even non-white caucasoids score a lot higher than sub-Saharans.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Please see my rely to Pumpkinperson at #222
  113. @unit472
    I imagine most of us remember the students in school with the highest GPA or who ran for student body president etc. They were typically rewarded by gaining admission to better colleges but after that did they shine in the real world to the same degree? While they would have above average incomes and tend to have more prestigious positions these would be the residue of their academic
    credentials and conformist behavior not any superior talents or abilities. You go to Stanford or Dartmouth your degree lifts you a notch or two above where your actual skill set may get you. OTOH it won't carry you to the top.

    Now I learn from Mr. Frost's article that the Igbo ( known to me as Ibo from a nasty civil war ) are 18% of Nigeria's population with a substantial diaspora in West Africa and beyond. This would indicate that they number in Nigeria alone more than 30 million people or about the population of Canada and 50% more than Taiwan. Any evidence the Igbo have created anything like a Research in Motion or Taiwan Semiconductor anywhere in the world? Any Igbo scientists of international renown?

    you made me laugh which is getting very difficult lately!

    Read More
  114. @Santoculto
    ''Caucasoid blood'' among ethiopians DOESN'T mean ''european-caucasoid with -high iq genes-'', ;)

    Caucasoid blood” among ethiopians DOESN’T mean ”european-caucasoid with -high iq genes-

    Even non-white caucasoids score a lot higher than sub-Saharans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Yes i know, ''genetic archaic introgession'' among decanted or original subsaarian ones may have greater impact on their continental-comparative intelligence.

    But my criticism about your sentence is that seems when you are talking about ''caucasoid blood'' or ''caucasoid genes'' you are talking in a generalized way. My impression is that this people who believe in lamarckian shazan magic for finish ''black-white iq gap'' tend to think starting by this thinking lines.

    Other interesting stuff, people luv to debate about BLACK-WHITE GAP but avoid talk about BLACK-YELLOW-EAST ASIAN GAP. Whites, as a intermediary and/or very complex group, even inside subgroups or peoples, produce this fake impression about human transcontinental universalism or cultural transferability while east asians are strongly behaviourally, cognitively and homogeneously different than blacks, specially.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    And by what mechanism would he hypothesize "high IQ genes" to have been excluded?

    Perhaps the Ethiopian caucasoids are those that spent several generations trying to make a go of it but, when credentialism became rife, those who failed entry to the professional schools of the University of Caucasia just migrated back to East Africa and bred. You see imagination can make it happen but what is SantoCulto's theory.... (Mind you - where does that 40 per cent figure come from? And what other East Africans does it apply to? Luo? Tutsi?..)
  115. @MarkinLA
    I don't know about that. Was anything more surprising than Gardner's win in 2000 against an unbeatable Russian?

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

    Gardner’s event may have been the greatest SINGLE EVENT in US Wrestling, but the other four had a long history of excellence.

    Read More
  116. @pumpkinperson
    Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa.

    You're assuming we can accurately quantify nutritional differences within sub-Sahara. We can't even quantify them within the United States. You equate sub-optimum nutrition with famine but it's much more subtle than that. It has to do with intangibles like national hygiene which affect disease which prevent the body from using nutrients. No one know what specific nutrients have caused the height of the average white American man to increase since the 1980s or why the head circumference of British infants increased by over one standard deviation since the 1950s.


    We don’t. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers.

    Not necessarily. Hardly anyone noticed the Flynn effect until Flynn popularized it in the 1980s. Prior to that, people thought society was dumbing down.


    People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    People in Ethipoia are 40% caucasoid at the genetic level, so the fact that no one can see their higher IQ caucasoid genes is evidence that it's being masked by poor nutrition,


    You can say that. I wouldn’t. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    We're talking specifically about the UK. In 1979, first generation African immigrants to the UK had a mean of 12.2 years of education, suggesting they had some university on average.

    http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_10_06.pdf

    Keep in mind that African born immigrants surveyed in 1979 were roughly 36 years old and would have likely attended university around 1963. Now see Figure 1 in this document:

    http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/fs10-trends-tertiary-education-sub-saharan-africa-2010-en.pdf

    It shows that in 1970, less than 1% of college age sub-Saharan Africans were enrolled in tertiary education. Further, in 1950 South Africa, only 0.5% of Africans even qualified for university. So the generation of African migrants to the UK who reached young adulthood in the mid 1960s were more educated than over 99% of their cohort in sub-Saharan Africa.


    You might. I wouldn’t. You’re building castles in the air.

    You're free to deny the role of nutrition on intelligence, but you're ignoring a ton of evidence, including incredible studies of identical twins who recieved unequal nutrition in the womb. The twin born with lower weight had a smaller head and lower score IQ at age 15, and the scores were especially low on the very types of tests that show the biggest Flynn effects:

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn1990.pdf

    Seems very strange to think sub-optimum nutrition is potent enough to give black Africans smaller height and heads than African Americans, yet too weak to impair their IQs, even though IQ is less heritable than height and head size, and should be MORE amenable to environmental influences, not less.


    You’re confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn’t increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    The causation works in both directions. Smart people stay in school longer, but there's also overwhelming evidence that schooling props up IQ scores (though probably not real intelligence):

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/01/might-schooling-raise-iq.html

    How the hell do you explain the Flynn effect if you deny that both the biological environment (i.e. nutrition) and the cultural environment (i.e. schooling) affect IQ?

    You’re assuming we can accurately quantify nutritional differences within sub-Sahara.

    No, he need assume only that large nutritional deficits would produce substantial effects (are more likely to produce them than are minor deficits). That some minor deficits might also produce harmful effects doesn’t invalidate his reasonable assumption.

    Hardly anyone noticed the Flynn effect until Flynn popularized it in the 1980s.

    We can’t “notice” it now; only accept it. Which leads even Flynn to suspect that only specific aptitudes increased, at the expense of other(unmeasured) aptitudes.

    With these kinds of arguments you misplace the burden of proof (by building “castles in the air.”)

    Read More
  117. @Englishman Abroad
    And, his claim that African immigrants outperform native whites in UK schools is patently untrue. The tables he gave just showed that more black Africans pass five GSCE exams than white British. This is not by any respectable measure academic achievement. GCSEs are pathetically easy and ANYONE who tries REMOTELY hard can pass them. All the tables show is that black Africans try harder than the white English working class, who generally speaking do not give a flying fuck about even turning up to exams. Now, why doesn't Chanda show us the stats about the ethnic groups who obtain straight As/A*s.

    Let's compare people who actually try hard and look at elite achievement, not who gets above the baseline. There's a world of difference between obtaining 12 A*s at GSCE and 5 Cs. Blacks are woefully underrepresented in the hard sciences and at elite universities.

    FWIW, speaking for myself, I think the jury's out on whether blacks are dumber. Very hard to disentangle IQ from retarded cultures that discourage critical thinking. Now, the burden of all that physical power and lack of impulse control is another matter...

    And, his claim that African immigrants outperform native whites in UK schools is patently untrue. The tables he gave just showed that more black Africans pass five GSCE exams than white British. This is not by any respectable measure academic achievement

    Yes, he seems to see it as an elite marker when in fact failing to achieve this is akin to not graduating from high school.

    Read More
  118. @DIpwill
    I read your post, and 82 is still too low as a genetic average. The problem is also that Rushton was largely a charlatan when it came to race differences, and Jensen's credibility isn't as clear cut as it was (contrary to what his fans in academia and on the internet liked to claim) given that he embraced so much of Rushton's work uncritically, which is more apparent in face of how he signed on to a later Rushton paper that offhandedly claimed african-americans could have an IQ of 78 because somehow, researchers have for years and years overlooked an ultra-retarded subset in the deep inner cities.

    You've also gone on record as detailing on you used to speak with Rushton extensively on the phone and called him the Darwin of the 21st century, one of various other sterling bits of autism on Rushton's credibility (such as Lynn calling it worthy of the nobel prize, Taylor saying it's a guide to understanding the world as is etc.) However, Rushton did claim that around 70 was their genetic average, going by university students in SA, (with no regard to the fact university standards have dramatically declined since the apartheid era, baseless claims about the selection of universities throughout africa etc.) so it's better than him atleast.

    You also seem to genuinely consider the idea that Victorians had an IQ dramatically higher than now, which is also absurd.

    You also seem to genuinely consider the idea that Victorians had an IQ dramatically higher than now, which is also absurd

    It strikes me as absurd that they wouldn’t. It’s pretty clear that the lowest achieving sections of British society have contributed the most to population growth over the last 150 years. Five generations of selection for poverty and fecklessness seems very likely to reduce average genetic IQ.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dipwill
    No, the idea the british have seen something like a 15 point drop in IQ in 150 years is crazy. The claims of IQ dysgenics within european populations in modern times have born little real evidence. I've gotten the impression this is based heavily on the wordy, haughty writing styles that were more prominent in the Victorian era, and the original proponents of this claim (mainly Bruce Charleton, who is now a convert to mormonism, really hilarious given how he came up with "clever sillies") have taken this as evidence they were as smart as old figures given for ashkenazi jews. It's nuts. And that would mean the British were smarter than they are still even several decades ago. Does anybody really believe that?

    I mean, why hasn't this been extended to anywhere else in europe or east asia? People have found it difficult to believe the behavior selection for adaption to modern ecomonies/society could have happened not just in Britain, but in many other places we call the developed world, but that seems to have overwhelmingly (if not entirely) concerned personality traits, and not IQ. And you're telling me that the British alone were dramatically smarter than they were 150 years ago? Not even likely.
  119. @Art
    There is something wrong with a man that writes article after article that proves that blacks are stupid.

    Telling someone that they are genetically inferior is a very wrong thing to do – PERIOD. Good people do not do that.

    Blacks are the way they are because they come from a tropical culture that had different criterion for success. From a cultural standpoint blacks have been separated and isolated from the main culture in America. Where they integrate with white culture, they do well. No one would call blacks in NYC “stepin fetchit.”

    The truth is that we all do not have to be rocket scientists to live and achieve a good life.

    He’s not telling anyone specific that they are inferior when he says that blacks have lower average IQs. Only someone who does not understand what average means should be offended and in which case as with you the presumption that they’re a bit thick would be right anyway.

    Read More
  120. @Art
    "Regression to the mean"

    Clearly the "mean" was once a cave man. Clearly the mean can rise. Clearly the mean has a lot to do with education. Clearly the black mean is rising.

    Rarely does the offspring of a very successful person, intellectually reach his parents heights.

    These are simple facts. What is the argument all about?

    Is not the root of all this - racism?

    Do you recognise that your sentences don’t logically follow each other and that your post communicates nothing but your feelings?

    Read More
  121. @unit472
    Average IQs are like baseball batting averages, interesting numbers but they don't tell you much. A Rogers Hornsby and Mario Mendoza might have a batting average of .300 but that did not make Mendoza a feared batter.

    A society needs a few high IQ outliers to provide the intellectual horsepower for it to succeed. A single Tom Edison is worth more than one million people with an IQ a few points above average. If Lagos were the headquarters of Google, Apple and Oracle would we be concerned with what the IQ of the average person was in Nigeria? Probably not. We would just acknowledge that Lagos rather than Santa Clara was the center of technological innovation.That it became that because it had 10,000 people with high IQ's is all that was necessary. The other 175 million people could be dullards but they don't count in the scheme of things.

    [It's preferable not to write a large number of short comments, but instead combine them into one or two longer and more substantial ones.]

    There’s no general benefit from having people around with super high IQs if you live in a very low trust society.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Deduction

    [It's preferable not to write a large number of short comments, but instead combine them into one or two longer and more substantial ones
     
    Is this true even if the posts are replies to different people? Or even just replies to different posts?

    That preference somewhat defeats the 'reply to' link's purpose, and could be quite confusing.

    Maybe you were just gently telling me to make fewer but higher quality posts lol
  122. @Peter Frost
    The Priss Factory,

    Your comments are wildly off-topic.

    I don’t know much about the netherlands in this case

    A detailed retrospective study was made of 125,000 19-yr-old male Dutch military inductees of whom 20,000 were exposed to the Netherland's winter famine, 1944-1945, through maternal starvation. Birth cohorts were constructed of Ss from 7 famine-stricken cities and matched with controls from 11 nonaffected areas. Results of physical and psychological examinations and the Dutch version of the Raven Progressive Matrices provided the data in addition to time and place of conception, maternal caloric intake, birth weight, fertility levels and social class. Findings show that (a) starvation during pregnancy had no detectable effects on adult mental performance of surviving male offspring. (b) Mental performance of surviving adult males from the entire population had no association with changing levels of mean birth weight in a hospital sample from the population. And (c) there was a strong association of social class with mental performance.

     

    http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1973-08869-001

    Malnutrition has been a factor in Zimbabwe for mainly the past 15 years, but it has variously subsided. Have there been any IQ tests from that country during that time?

    Yes, in 1994. See the above study by Wicherts et al (2010). Again, if malnutrition were a major factor (and that seems to be your argument), we would see large differences in IQ within sub-Saharan Africa. We don't. Moreover, an IQ difference of 10 to 20 points would be noticeable to outside observers. People in Gabon or Senegal would seem much more intelligent than people in Ethiopia, for instance.

    Let’s say African migrants who are accepted into the UK have at least a year of university education on average.

    You can say that. I wouldn't. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans:

    For instance, more than 50 percent of African immigrants only have primary education relative to less than 25 percent of natives and most other immigrant groups. [...] In contrast, African men endure the slowest assimilation rate of all immigrant groups. Despite being able to cut down their employment gap with respect to similar natives by 12 percentage points within a five year period, African men still endure a 5 percentage point lower employment likelihood than alike natives. However, it is worth pointing out that much of this employment gap is likely to be explained by differences in the skills of native and African men.

     

    http://www.agrod.com/research/projects/p20071002_Spain.frontier/references/20071210.labor.market.in.spain.and.general.statistics/labor.market.immigrant.assimilation.pdf

    But because the kids were born with first world nutrition, you might add 12 points to their expected IQ:

    You might. I wouldn't. You're building castles in the air.

    Then because First World people get about 4 extra years of schooling than they would have got in sub-Sahara, which is know to add 8 IQ points, you add 8 points

    You're confusing cause and effect. Going to university doesn't increase your IQ. Having a higher IQ simply makes you better able to go to university.

    Getting them all the way to 100 is a bit trickier. Perhaps the Igbo are genetically 7 points smarter than other sub-Saharans, or perhaps they are more highly selected or study more for the test.

    I doubt that the United Kingdom selects Igbo immigrants more stringently than non-Igbo immigrants.

    At best we know the average IQ of certain regions (i.e. sub-Sahara) but national differences within said regions are largely statistical noise

    Variation on the order of 10 to 20 IQ points would be discernable, even with a lot of noise in the data. It would certainly be discernible to travellers and outside observers.

    This article is kind of a nonsequitur, because it veers off topic, based on an apparent misunderstanding of what is meant by “regression to the mean”. Regression to the mean is a statistical artefact caused by randomness. It’s not a concept specific to genetics, and it has nothing to do with whether IQ is a genetic or environmental trait

    The concept was first developed by Galton to explain why a genetically influenced trait will revert to its mean population value over several generations. It has since been borrowed by other fields to explain why an extreme measure on a first measurement will be closer to the mean on the second measurement. There is always a certain amount of error in any measurement, and extreme measurements are more likely to reflect errors of different sorts.

    This is not the way the concept of "regression to the mean" is used by Galton or by other human geneticists:

    This law tells heavily against the full hereditary transmission of any gift, as only a few of many children would resemble their mid- parentage. The more exceptional the amount of the gift, the more exceptional will be the good fortune of a parent who has a son who equals, and still more if he has a son who overpasses him in that respect. The law is even-handed; it levies the same heavy succession-tax on the transmission of badness as well as of goodness. If it discourages the extravagant expectations of gifted parents that their children will inherit all their powers, it no less discountenances extravagant fears that they will inherit all their weaknesses and diseases.

     

    http://www.stat.ucla.edu/~nchristo/statistics100C/history_regression.pdf

    Galton is not implying that IQ regresses to the mean because of measurement error. The first generation really is more intelligent (or less intelligent) than the mean. Succeeding generations revert to the mean because hereditary transmission is not 100%. Even if like marries with like, succeeding generations will move closer and closer to the mean.

    Chanda is not using "regression to the mean" in this sense (or in your sense either). He is arguing against an "HBD position", which postulates a single black African genotype for IQ. If Africans deviate from that genotype, it's because of luck or fortunate circumstances, and their children will tend to be closer to the mean.

    You can say that. I wouldn’t. A Spanish study found that African immigrants are less educated and less skilled than native Europeans

    There are very obvious differences between African migrants to Spain and to Britain. Not only is the journey shorter, but African migration to Spain is newer. Both of these factors make it a lot less elite and this is why in Spain there are a seemingly endless supply of African sunglass sellers on the street but in the UK there are none.

    Read More
  123. @Dipwill
    Figures for genetic ancestry are seldom exact, and figures such as "20% of something" are hardly uncommon even in papers, even though they're not meant to be taken literally, but I'll give you credit and say it would have been better to say he's about "20% white", close to the 18% white ancestry the average african-american has. What is really, really dumb on other hand is you going into virtual meltdown over someone not giving that specific qualification.

    You are also the first person I've ever seen given a warning such as this on Unz.com, so keep it with your smarmy, spergy rants about "MURICANTS", if that means reading less of your embarrassing temper tantrums.

    Figures for genetic ancestry are seldom exact, and figures such as “20% of something” are hardly uncommon even in papers, even though they’re not meant to be taken literally, but I’ll give you credit and say it would have been better to say he’s about “20% white”, close to the 18% white ancestry the average african-american has. What is really, really dumb on other hand is you going into virtual meltdown over someone not giving that specific qualification.

    That qualification is unnecessary. A person can be any percentage at all. If my mother was half Igbo and my father was Danish, I might inherit no Igbo genes, although the probability of that happening is vanishingly small.

    The point is that you do not necessarily or even probably inherit an equal number of genes from your grandparents, as I learned doing Biology GCSE haha.

    Read More
  124. @Mark Eugenikos
    "I mean just look at the ancient beauty of women of our eastern Caucasian ethnical stock!"

    Well, if you like women with big noses, wide faces, and olive complexion, it's your choice. Just don't assume everyone does.

    Nina Moghaddam is Persian, not much info about her in English so I have nothing to add. Ceca (Serbian singer) is not even close to being the most attractive Serbian woman/girl, IMO, but again, de gustibus non est disputandum. I prefer the northern/Czech/Russian look, so to each his own.

    Now regarding that purported moral superiority, from Wiki about Ceca:

    ...She dated Dejan "Šaban" Marjanović, a minor Belgrade gangster, who was murdered.[1] She was then in a relationship with former FK Borac footballer and restaurateur Haro Samardžić.[1]

    While performing for the Serb Volunteer Guard (SDG), a paramilitary force also known as Arkan's Tigers, in Erdut on 11 October 1993 during the Croatian War, she met her husband, Željko "Arkan" Ražnatović, a paramilitary and criminal. ... He was married at the time, and the divorce that ended that marriage was finalized two months before their wedding. Arkan proposed to Ceca on 7 January 1995 and they married one month later on 19 February. Their wedding was broadcast on television, made headlines in newspapers... Ceca's parents, Mira and Slobodan, were against the marriage of their daughter to a paramilitary member."[9]

    Arkan was shot on 15 January 2000 in a Belgrade hotel by four gunmen. Despite having been shot in the head, he remained alive for a brief period of time but died in Ceca's arms in the backseat of the car that was taking them to the emergency room. After fifteen months of mourning, she made her first public appearance in April 2001 in a television interview. "A part of me died that day... I will always love him, and only him, I'm sure of that...," she said in the interview.[1]

    Reformist Serbian Prime Minister Zoran Đinđić was assassinated on 12 March 2003, prompting Serbian authorities to launch Operation Sablja. Ceca's luxury Belgrade home was raided as part of the crackdown on the network of criminals and nationalists behind the assassination.[10] The raid led to a thorough investigation. She was arrested on 17 March 2003 and charged with illegal possession of multiple firearms. Ceca was one of dozens of people detained in the crackdown and she spent three months in prison. She also claimed the firearms were brought to the house by her late husband.

    In 2011, Ražnatović pleaded guilty to embezzling millions of euros from the transfers of players from the football club FK Obilić, which she inherited from her late husband, and again illegal possession of eleven weapons. Ceca had sold fifteen players of FK Obilić to several international football clubs (such as Fenerbahçe.) Serbian state prosecutors accused her of taking for personal use an illegal share in the sale of fifteen players. Ceca denied having been involved in any kind of illegal activities, saying that her late husband was responsible for FK Obilić and that the eleven illegally possessed weapons found in her home also belonged to him.[11] Under a plea bargain, Ražnatović was ordered to spend eight months under house arrest, avoiding the maximum sentence that the charges against her carry, 12 years in prison.[12][13] Ceca was sentenced to one-year house arrest (May 2011 - February 2012) and fined EUR 1.5 million.

    According to court records, she has paid 1 million EUR of the fine; the remaining third is guaranteed by a mortgage on her Belgrade home. Ceca continues to face other court cases, such as for violent criminal behavior, repaying a loan from Komercijalna bank, and repaying a debt to Vojislav Đurković, a former member of the paramilitary unit once controlled by Arkan.
     
    Is this your definition of morality? Seriously?

    She had dated one man before she was married. She herself said that she has been only with 2 men, and she is no liar. You should try and find that kind of sincerity in your whorish women. I think you might find it only in those religious kind, which I know some still exists in your degenerate liberal land Murica. Also, have in mind that she is a star here in the Balkans. You might compare her popularity with that of your big Hollywood stars. There is no way you can compare the virtues of our women to yours. None.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mark Eugenikos
    Which part of "In 2011, Ražnatović pleaded guilty to embezzling millions of euros from the transfers of players from the football club FK Obilić, which she inherited from her late husband, and again illegal possession of eleven weapons" didn't you understand? Morality isn't just who you have sex with, you dolt.

    I am also not "Murican" and big Hollywood stars aren't mine by any measure.

    You have started commenting here yesterday and you're offending people you don't even know and showing yourself to be a complete ignorant @$$hole. By your name I guess you're from Montenegro or Serbia. If you think you're going to show your tribe in a positive light, or look cool, by acting like a $hithe@d towards strangers, well then you're sorely mistaken.
  125. @Immigrant from former USSR
    Sir!
    Apparently you did not notice that
    the cited classification and ranking scientists by IQ belongs to
    Philip Emeagwali (born in 1954), the Nigerian-born engineer, mentioned
    in the list from Wikipedia. That latter list was provided by Dr. Frost.
    Just in case, I repeat the source of the IQ list , where I picked it up:
    http://emeagwali.com/biography/for-kids/ten-smartest-scientists-of-all-times.pdf
    By the way, none of the scientists mentioned by Mr. Emeagwali was alive at the moment,
    when first IQ test was administrated.
    Exceptions:
    A. Einstein (1879–1955), who never took the test, and
    Mr. Emeagwali, who failed Ph.D. studies.

    I wish you the best in your endeavors.
    Your IffU.

    Who made that “all-time scietists’ IQ rankings or classification lists” then? That Nigerian man? The list would explain its stupidity I would say then. So you believe in any study your Western “scientists” do, hm? In that case you are very dumb person. Your scietists can make you thatever the results you desire in such works (studies and inquiries of theirs)… if you pay them, sponsor their work. That was true 200 years ago with Charles Darwin, and it is true so now. It is like making that political studies and polls or government statistics you know. Whoever is making the poll, whoever is paying, is defining the results… outcomes of their work. Their work is not the theorethical and logical work of mathematicians and physicians so that the outcomes have to be grounded in logic or that they cannot be falsified. It’s more like a soap opera than science.And that is the direct result of that degenerate and clownish liberal culture of yours (of the English speaking world). Once upon the time German culture was incredibly vigorous and rich, but then came Anglo wars and Germany was occupied and later infested with liberal Anglo disease. We all know, or should know to say better, what follows after infestation. They dissapear. They die.

    Read More
  126. @Immigrant from former USSR
    Sir!
    Apparently you did not notice that
    the cited classification and ranking scientists by IQ belongs to
    Philip Emeagwali (born in 1954), the Nigerian-born engineer, mentioned
    in the list from Wikipedia. That latter list was provided by Dr. Frost.
    Just in case, I repeat the source of the IQ list , where I picked it up:
    http://emeagwali.com/biography/for-kids/ten-smartest-scientists-of-all-times.pdf
    By the way, none of the scientists mentioned by Mr. Emeagwali was alive at the moment,
    when first IQ test was administrated.
    Exceptions:
    A. Einstein (1879–1955), who never took the test, and
    Mr. Emeagwali, who failed Ph.D. studies.

    I wish you the best in your endeavors.
    Your IffU.

    Sorry, didn’t see your name at first. I thought you were Anglo (or Murican), and I tend not to be mild in my remarks with them. Anyhow, you shouldn’t believe anything coming from those Anglo sources. Nothing. That liberal culture of theirs is a culture of stupidity, deception, corruption, lie, degenerations, decadence and decline, so anything that comes out of it you should regard as lie and fraud until proven otherwise. There is nothing you should take at face value, and that is especially and principally true for Anglo-Murican sources.

    p.s.
    And Gauss was the smartest man ever to walk the Earth. From that list you put there, only Newton and Pascal do truly belong there, and not in the positions they are. And those IQ numbers are laughabable. Eistein with the IQ of 160 and that Nigerian man who did nothing at 190! ehehehe A prime example of stupidity.

    Read More
  127. @Deduction
    [It's preferable not to write a large number of short comments, but instead combine them into one or two longer and more substantial ones.]

    There's no general benefit from having people around with super high IQs if you live in a very low trust society.

    [It's preferable not to write a large number of short comments, but instead combine them into one or two longer and more substantial ones

    Is this true even if the posts are replies to different people? Or even just replies to different posts?

    That preference somewhat defeats the ‘reply to’ link’s purpose, and could be quite confusing.

    Maybe you were just gently telling me to make fewer but higher quality posts lol

    Read More
    • Replies: @D. K.
    I am with you, on this one. Some of us check our own comment list, to see if anyone has replied to us, because we have neither the time nor the inclination to read thousands of comments per day, just to see if someone responded to us, and to who knows whom else, without using the "REPLY" button provided.
  128. @Wizard of Oz
    Thank you for your response to something I wrote when diverted from complimenting you on #71. But I sm not sure about your suggestion that regression to the mean could be to the mean of any of the many groups you mention. Maybe you are saying that a choice of population whose average might be regressed to is possible on various mating assumptions and depending on the number of generations considered???

    “Maybe you are saying that a choice of population whose average might be regressed to is possible on various mating assumptions and depending on the number of generations considered???”

    Yes. It’s easy to understand that the mean can be regressed to ‘all Igbo’, because the Igbo migrants will choose mates from that group, i.e. from that total set of alleles.

    It’s harder to understand why there could be a valid regression to the mean of all Africans,

    but I’m hoping that the Breeders Equation is the link that makes the genetic relationship, between Igbo and Africans, amenable to statistical measures.

    The Igbo are like a phenotype. If all Igbo mated with other Africans, the Igbo phenotype would dissolve back into the African bell curve.

    Read More
  129. @Sam Shama
    Helena, I had thought about something in those lines:

    http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-i/#comment-1174813

    is is similar to what you are saying?

    I’m not sure. I think you might be thinking that the mean is regressing because each trial is open to chance but I think the mean is regressing because (Igbo) high IQ is already a ‘high-end of the bell curve’ subset of the total population (of Africans).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Afro-americans that score higher in cognitive tests are in The right end of bell curve of major afro-American population.
    SOME or subgroup of igbos are a endogamic population without greater proportion of cousin marriage, seems, and higher intelligence or specially, similar intelligence bases on " western standards".

    Lower proportion of smart types in populations reverberates in lower proportion of genes or genetic combination probabilities in the gene pool that increase chance to produce this phenotypes.

    Demographic-"trait" rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence.
  130. @pumpkinperson
    Caucasoid blood” among ethiopians DOESN’T mean ”european-caucasoid with -high iq genes-


    Even non-white caucasoids score a lot higher than sub-Saharans.

    Yes i know, ”genetic archaic introgession” among decanted or original subsaarian ones may have greater impact on their continental-comparative intelligence.

    But my criticism about your sentence is that seems when you are talking about ”caucasoid blood” or ”caucasoid genes” you are talking in a generalized way. My impression is that this people who believe in lamarckian shazan magic for finish ”black-white iq gap” tend to think starting by this thinking lines.

    Other interesting stuff, people luv to debate about BLACK-WHITE GAP but avoid talk about BLACK-YELLOW-EAST ASIAN GAP. Whites, as a intermediary and/or very complex group, even inside subgroups or peoples, produce this fake impression about human transcontinental universalism or cultural transferability while east asians are strongly behaviourally, cognitively and homogeneously different than blacks, specially.

    Read More
  131. I would like to urge all of you to show restraint in your comments. Some of the comments would be considered illegal in my country (Canada) and could expose me to prosecution. This is particularly the case in Quebec, which has recently expanded the powers of its Human Rights Commission. Yes, I can be held criminally responsible for the comments you write.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    It is not our fault you live in a stupid country with a fascist court riding roughshod over your rights. I have no intention of self-censoring my right to say what I think.
    , @Santoculto
    Searching for euphemisms, ;)
    , @MarkinLA
    You and other Canadians need to do what the gun owners in the western provinces did to scuttle your gun registry. I could be wrong but I remember reading (maybe I hallucinated it) stories of large demonstrations of gun owners carrying signs and shouting that they have not complied with the registration law and demand that they be arrested.

    You Canadians need to organize demonstrations against these laws. Carry signs and use language clearly defying these totalitarian laws.
    , @AndrewR
    The laws won't change unless someone challenges them. I don't know your situation but you could man up and stand up to your communist state.
  132. Thanks for the article, Dr. Frost. Illuminating, where as I found (as an admitted non-academic) Chanda’s article to be confused and embedded with traces of smoke and mirror fragments. It was too grandiose of a conclusion he derived from a population that seemed a little too carefully carved out, assembled and gerrymandered. I think he is a good writer, though.

    Read More
  133. But that is the problem! In order to deceive, one has to acknowledge a statement of fact then leave it alone where the reality will show the true state of affaires.

    n the model of an egalitarian society, people make choices as part of freedom as opposed to illegal, immoral or unethical realities made legal by the nation state apparatus. As an example The laws stipulation that the black US citizens must go to the back of the bus when a white person entered said place, or the separate but equal facilities, etc all went against this fraud of democracy prior to the 1970′s but the illegal laws made certain people fell priviledged because they could not succeed otherweise if they were not in place. Now they feel that they were cheated because of that.

    Read More
  134. @Peter Frost
    I would like to urge all of you to show restraint in your comments. Some of the comments would be considered illegal in my country (Canada) and could expose me to prosecution. This is particularly the case in Quebec, which has recently expanded the powers of its Human Rights Commission. Yes, I can be held criminally responsible for the comments you write.

    It is not our fault you live in a stupid country with a fascist court riding roughshod over your rights. I have no intention of self-censoring my right to say what I think.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    You would say that if you had ulterior motives, o pseudonymous one.
    , @iffen
    You make a decent case for censorship.

    Mr. Frost,

    How can you be held responsible if Unz will not allow you to screen the comments?
  135. No, Blacks Aren’t All Alike. Who Said They Were?

    The democrats. That is why they trash any black who strays from their plantation.

    Read More
  136. Their actual performance is so opposite of that prediction that there is now even a discussion of whether some of the African ethnicities in the UK have sometimes beaten the infamously “testocratic” Chinese students themselves on average (see part 2 for more convincing data on that question) when the discussion should really have been on whether they can beat the Irish Travelers who, according to hereditarian estimates, are supposed to have a higher average IQ than the elites of Africa!

    I do not think it so unlikely that Irish Travelers (historically an endogamous non farming caste) have higher IQ than the majority of the Irish, or poor whites, but lower IQ than Africans who are in England.

    GCSE attainment for children entitled to free school meals, by ethnic group. The liberal explanation is poor working class whites have supposedly ‘hunkered down’ and become impervious to aspirational motivation such as immigrants have, but I don’t see the graph as wholly explicable in those terms, because the immigrant descendants who have the next worst-achievement (in subjects including English literacy) of British whites is the one-black-parent-and-one -white parent children group. My reading is it points to a genetic IQ basis for why children of low-income families of the indigenous British working class have inferior attainment to low income immigrant black African children.

    Read More
  137. @Peter Frost
    I would like to urge all of you to show restraint in your comments. Some of the comments would be considered illegal in my country (Canada) and could expose me to prosecution. This is particularly the case in Quebec, which has recently expanded the powers of its Human Rights Commission. Yes, I can be held criminally responsible for the comments you write.

    Searching for euphemisms, ;)

    Read More
  138. @woodNfish
    It is not our fault you live in a stupid country with a fascist court riding roughshod over your rights. I have no intention of self-censoring my right to say what I think.

    You would say that if you had ulterior motives, o pseudonymous one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    I have no idea which of my comments you are referring to.
  139. @woodNfish
    It is not our fault you live in a stupid country with a fascist court riding roughshod over your rights. I have no intention of self-censoring my right to say what I think.

    You make a decent case for censorship.

    Mr. Frost,

    How can you be held responsible if Unz will not allow you to screen the comments?

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish

    You make a decent case for censorship.
     
    Spoken like a true fascist.
  140. @Wizard of Oz
    I think that we need some expert advice on the place of the presumed "unexpressed genes [or should that be alleles?]" that are passed on to offspring and then expressed so as to make the offspring on average brighter than dumb and dumber than smart parents. If we assume that mother and father are pretty close to identical genetically how would that random expression of genes unexpressed in the parents work? Would that be enough to explain regression toward the mean?

    I think that we need some expert advice on the place of the presumed “unexpressed genes [or should that be alleles?]”

    Agree. Razib Khan would be my pick.

    Read More
  141. @Deduction

    [It's preferable not to write a large number of short comments, but instead combine them into one or two longer and more substantial ones
     
    Is this true even if the posts are replies to different people? Or even just replies to different posts?

    That preference somewhat defeats the 'reply to' link's purpose, and could be quite confusing.

    Maybe you were just gently telling me to make fewer but higher quality posts lol

    I am with you, on this one. Some of us check our own comment list, to see if anyone has replied to us, because we have neither the time nor the inclination to read thousands of comments per day, just to see if someone responded to us, and to who knows whom else, without using the “REPLY” button provided.

    Read More
  142. It is not our fault you live in a stupid country with a fascist court riding roughshod over your rights. I have no intention of self-censoring my right to say what I think.

    Anonymous commenting seems to have a perverse effect on people. It doesn’t prepare them for the real world and real political change. Instead, it creates a useless, narcissistic mindset.

    This has nothing to do with “fascism.” Try calling your next-door neighbor a “whore” and a “son of a bitch.” If you’re lucky, he’ll have nothing more to do with you. If you’re not so lucky, you’ll have to see a dentist …

    Are you concerned about what’s happening in this world? Then learn to tone your speech down. That’s not selling out. That’s learning how to sell your ideas.

    And assume ownership of your ideas. You’re not going to live forever, so make the most of your short life by making your ideas an expression of yourself, and not an expression of a pseudonym. Yes, that’s tough, but it’s necessary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish

    This has nothing to do with “fascism.”
     
    It has everything to do with the decline of the West into fascism, socialism, communism, and stalinism (pick your ism, they are all just shades of gray in difference), which do not respect free speech and other rights and people like you who are too willing to give up those rights for some phony "comfort" and "security". People like you think that just because you silence a person's ability to voice their opinions those opinions go away. They don't. Of ten they find other outlet of expression, sometimes violent ones. It is better to know who those people are and what they have to say. If it makes you uncomfortable, too bad.
    , @woodNfish
    Lecture someone else Peter. I wasn't offering any ideas, I was making a comment on the leftwing kanadian human rights court which is an affront to democracy and individual rights.
  143. There is an outward appearance of sameness when 95% of Afro-blacks vote consistently for the US Democrat party.

    Read More
  144. @Dukljanin
    She had dated one man before she was married. She herself said that she has been only with 2 men, and she is no liar. You should try and find that kind of sincerity in your whorish women. I think you might find it only in those religious kind, which I know some still exists in your degenerate liberal land Murica. Also, have in mind that she is a star here in the Balkans. You might compare her popularity with that of your big Hollywood stars. There is no way you can compare the virtues of our women to yours. None.

    Which part of “In 2011, Ražnatović pleaded guilty to embezzling millions of euros from the transfers of players from the football club FK Obilić, which she inherited from her late husband, and again illegal possession of eleven weapons” didn’t you understand? Morality isn’t just who you have sex with, you dolt.

    I am also not “Murican” and big Hollywood stars aren’t mine by any measure.

    You have started commenting here yesterday and you’re offending people you don’t even know and showing yourself to be a complete ignorant @$$hole. By your name I guess you’re from Montenegro or Serbia. If you think you’re going to show your tribe in a positive light, or look cool, by acting like a $hithe@d towards strangers, well then you’re sorely mistaken.

    Read More
  145. @Peter Frost
    I would like to urge all of you to show restraint in your comments. Some of the comments would be considered illegal in my country (Canada) and could expose me to prosecution. This is particularly the case in Quebec, which has recently expanded the powers of its Human Rights Commission. Yes, I can be held criminally responsible for the comments you write.

    You and other Canadians need to do what the gun owners in the western provinces did to scuttle your gun registry. I could be wrong but I remember reading (maybe I hallucinated it) stories of large demonstrations of gun owners carrying signs and shouting that they have not complied with the registration law and demand that they be arrested.

    You Canadians need to organize demonstrations against these laws. Carry signs and use language clearly defying these totalitarian laws.

    Read More
  146. @helena
    I'm not sure. I think you might be thinking that the mean is regressing because each trial is open to chance but I think the mean is regressing because (Igbo) high IQ is already a 'high-end of the bell curve' subset of the total population (of Africans).

    Afro-americans that score higher in cognitive tests are in The right end of bell curve of major afro-American population.
    SOME or subgroup of igbos are a endogamic population without greater proportion of cousin marriage, seems, and higher intelligence or specially, similar intelligence bases on ” western standards”.

    Lower proportion of smart types in populations reverberates in lower proportion of genes or genetic combination probabilities in the gene pool that increase chance to produce this phenotypes.

    Demographic-”trait” rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    "Demographic-”trait” rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence."

    I think that's the same as what I'm saying. Groups that emerge from other groups are like mini-bell curves somewhere on the bigger bell curve.

    Amish came from Dutch (?), Dutch came from nEuros, nEuros came from Bronze Age Euros, Bronze Age Euros came from admix of EEF+WHG+ANE and so relate also to Middle-East and Eurasia, Mid-E + Eurasia + Europe = Cauc-Asian. So, a bell curve for Cauc-Asian will have hypothetically smaller bell curves, for each of the component groups, on the curve .

    If Amish marry Dutch, they disappear back into the Dutch bell curve. If Dutch marry nEuro, they disappear into a nEuro bell curve. But equally, the mean of the larger bell curve shifts as the smaller population mixes back into it.

    If all Pakistanis in UK mate with English, Pakistanis disappear into English bell curve, and change the mean of the English bell curve. Which is exactly what liberals imagine can happen - all world disappears into one big human bell curve. But it can't happen because populations stay isolated from each other and if anything keep creating new little bell curves by their mating habits, including bell curves for socio-econ within an otherwise homogenous population. Brahmin regress first to mean for Brahmin, then Hindu, then Indian, then S Asian etc.

    The difference with 'race' is that when bell curves mix, the change in gene pool is much greater because there are more differences between the original gene pools of races. So if all Igbo married English they wouldn't just 'melt back' into the bell curve they would (metaphorically) introduce gene loci that never existed before in English bell curve.
  147. @Santoculto
    Afro-americans that score higher in cognitive tests are in The right end of bell curve of major afro-American population.
    SOME or subgroup of igbos are a endogamic population without greater proportion of cousin marriage, seems, and higher intelligence or specially, similar intelligence bases on " western standards".

    Lower proportion of smart types in populations reverberates in lower proportion of genes or genetic combination probabilities in the gene pool that increase chance to produce this phenotypes.

    Demographic-"trait" rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence.

    “Demographic-”trait” rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence.”

    I think that’s the same as what I’m saying. Groups that emerge from other groups are like mini-bell curves somewhere on the bigger bell curve.

    Amish came from Dutch (?), Dutch came from nEuros, nEuros came from Bronze Age Euros, Bronze Age Euros came from admix of EEF+WHG+ANE and so relate also to Middle-East and Eurasia, Mid-E + Eurasia + Europe = Cauc-Asian. So, a bell curve for Cauc-Asian will have hypothetically smaller bell curves, for each of the component groups, on the curve .

    If Amish marry Dutch, they disappear back into the Dutch bell curve. If Dutch marry nEuro, they disappear into a nEuro bell curve. But equally, the mean of the larger bell curve shifts as the smaller population mixes back into it.

    If all Pakistanis in UK mate with English, Pakistanis disappear into English bell curve, and change the mean of the English bell curve. Which is exactly what liberals imagine can happen – all world disappears into one big human bell curve. But it can’t happen because populations stay isolated from each other and if anything keep creating new little bell curves by their mating habits, including bell curves for socio-econ within an otherwise homogenous population. Brahmin regress first to mean for Brahmin, then Hindu, then Indian, then S Asian etc.

    The difference with ‘race’ is that when bell curves mix, the change in gene pool is much greater because there are more differences between the original gene pools of races. So if all Igbo married English they wouldn’t just ‘melt back’ into the bell curve they would (metaphorically) introduce gene loci that never existed before in English bell curve.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    I have many ideas about why the leftist liberal think so. But the fact is that zombies do not think, just repeat the mantra without any substance that are led to believe.

    The ideology of the modern cultural Marxism has a motivation, world domination, the idea of ​​total control over the entire planet.

    '' We are all equal '' because we have the same bosses.

    leftists are distractions, is not that they have no value, almost every intelligent WEIRD- has at least one or two friends who are leftists. It is that social engineers saw in them a great potential to be EXPLOITED, their ingenuity, their weaknesses, the fact that many of them are really good people who believe in mantras that follow, including because they are mantras that validate themselves, often by example, why 90% of Western homosexuals are leftists ** Indeed, when liberals talk about social constructions, they are talking about themselves because previously did not have an official ideology, which was dominated by the monotheistic religions.

    You can blame a leftist but be sure to do the same with other believers. What does the leftist is what Christians have done for centuries.
    , @Sam Shama
    This makes sense. You are saying that mixture of normal distributions will tend to new normal distributions with changed parameters (mean and std deviation). I was wondering , are you aware at of any studies that might have looked into whether groups such as Ashkenazi Jews, Indian Brahmins etc. might actually be better represented by right skewed and kurtotic distributions at all? (in other words is there any reason to believe that eugenics practised by these groups inherently biases outcomes to non-normal distributions)

    "I reckon genes work in ‘systems’ a lot more than we give them credit for. Genes don’t seem to be inherited on an individual ’50:50 chance’ basis."

    Yes!!

    , @Dipwill
    There is no evidence that east asians have a narrower IQ distributions (despite what people on the internet like to claim), or that genetically homogenous populations have narrower ones outside of small, inbred populations (numbering in the hundreds or a few thousand). This is just baseless, spergy HBD rambling, and why you seem to have a poor time of understanding biology and making these nutty claims about race mixing and genetics.
  148. “they would (metaphorically) introduce gene loci that never existed before in English bell curve.”

    Because, races have evolved under selection pressures for wholly different environments. That’s the irony, liberals pursue an ideology that falsifies their own ideology.

    An observation I’ve made is that mixed race people sometimes have unusual jaw/teeth alignment. That shouldn’t be surprising. Two different ‘systems’ for ‘constructing a jaw’ don’t neccessarily blend 50:50 and make a perfect ‘compromise’. But we don’t know that the same can’t happen with IQ. How do we know Igbo IQ comes from the same gene loci as Euro IQ? Maybe autism is a similar phenomenon. Maybe homosexuality is. I reckon genes work in ‘systems’ a lot more than we give them credit for. Genes don’t seem to be inherited on an individual ’50:50 chance’ basis.

    I’m not making an argument against race mixing per se. Simply trying to understand biology.

    Read More
  149. The logic of what Chanda Chisala says is that white groups are all the same, and there is no genetic IQ difference between the European nations or the English elite and the English poor Lets get away from IQ for a moment; are all white groups the same in incidence of schizophrenia? I think it is established that the poor have higher rates as do the ethnically Irish, and that must be genetic.

    Read More
  150. @iffen
    You make a decent case for censorship.

    Mr. Frost,

    How can you be held responsible if Unz will not allow you to screen the comments?

    You make a decent case for censorship.

    Spoken like a true fascist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J1234

    Spoken like a true fascist.
     
    The origins of freedom of speech were based on the notion that government needn't limit our speech because we possess the maturity and ability to limit it ourselves. "Speech" - as with everything else in life - is within the context of culture. Any culture. Peter Frost's culture isn't fascist (do a little research on fascism) but it is overly leftist - way too much - and he's trying his best to function within it. There's no law that says you have to help him do that...but why wouldn't you want to? I'm guessing the rewards of his bravery are little enough as it is.
  151. @Peter Frost
    It is not our fault you live in a stupid country with a fascist court riding roughshod over your rights. I have no intention of self-censoring my right to say what I think.

    Anonymous commenting seems to have a perverse effect on people. It doesn't prepare them for the real world and real political change. Instead, it creates a useless, narcissistic mindset.

    This has nothing to do with "fascism." Try calling your next-door neighbor a "whore" and a "son of a bitch." If you're lucky, he'll have nothing more to do with you. If you're not so lucky, you'll have to see a dentist ...

    Are you concerned about what's happening in this world? Then learn to tone your speech down. That's not selling out. That's learning how to sell your ideas.

    And assume ownership of your ideas. You're not going to live forever, so make the most of your short life by making your ideas an expression of yourself, and not an expression of a pseudonym. Yes, that's tough, but it's necessary.

    This has nothing to do with “fascism.”

    It has everything to do with the decline of the West into fascism, socialism, communism, and stalinism (pick your ism, they are all just shades of gray in difference), which do not respect free speech and other rights and people like you who are too willing to give up those rights for some phony “comfort” and “security”. People like you think that just because you silence a person’s ability to voice their opinions those opinions go away. They don’t. Of ten they find other outlet of expression, sometimes violent ones. It is better to know who those people are and what they have to say. If it makes you uncomfortable, too bad.

    Read More
  152. @Sean
    You would say that if you had ulterior motives, o pseudonymous one.

    I have no idea which of my comments you are referring to.

    Read More
  153. Dr. Frost after receiving all these comments are you going to make an update post? It’s all pretty confusing and would be nice to have it in a bite sized form.

    Read More
  154. @Peter Frost
    It is not our fault you live in a stupid country with a fascist court riding roughshod over your rights. I have no intention of self-censoring my right to say what I think.

    Anonymous commenting seems to have a perverse effect on people. It doesn't prepare them for the real world and real political change. Instead, it creates a useless, narcissistic mindset.

    This has nothing to do with "fascism." Try calling your next-door neighbor a "whore" and a "son of a bitch." If you're lucky, he'll have nothing more to do with you. If you're not so lucky, you'll have to see a dentist ...

    Are you concerned about what's happening in this world? Then learn to tone your speech down. That's not selling out. That's learning how to sell your ideas.

    And assume ownership of your ideas. You're not going to live forever, so make the most of your short life by making your ideas an expression of yourself, and not an expression of a pseudonym. Yes, that's tough, but it's necessary.

    Lecture someone else Peter. I wasn’t offering any ideas, I was making a comment on the leftwing kanadian human rights court which is an affront to democracy and individual rights.

    Read More
  155. @helena
    "Demographic-”trait” rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence."

    I think that's the same as what I'm saying. Groups that emerge from other groups are like mini-bell curves somewhere on the bigger bell curve.

    Amish came from Dutch (?), Dutch came from nEuros, nEuros came from Bronze Age Euros, Bronze Age Euros came from admix of EEF+WHG+ANE and so relate also to Middle-East and Eurasia, Mid-E + Eurasia + Europe = Cauc-Asian. So, a bell curve for Cauc-Asian will have hypothetically smaller bell curves, for each of the component groups, on the curve .

    If Amish marry Dutch, they disappear back into the Dutch bell curve. If Dutch marry nEuro, they disappear into a nEuro bell curve. But equally, the mean of the larger bell curve shifts as the smaller population mixes back into it.

    If all Pakistanis in UK mate with English, Pakistanis disappear into English bell curve, and change the mean of the English bell curve. Which is exactly what liberals imagine can happen - all world disappears into one big human bell curve. But it can't happen because populations stay isolated from each other and if anything keep creating new little bell curves by their mating habits, including bell curves for socio-econ within an otherwise homogenous population. Brahmin regress first to mean for Brahmin, then Hindu, then Indian, then S Asian etc.

    The difference with 'race' is that when bell curves mix, the change in gene pool is much greater because there are more differences between the original gene pools of races. So if all Igbo married English they wouldn't just 'melt back' into the bell curve they would (metaphorically) introduce gene loci that never existed before in English bell curve.

    I have many ideas about why the leftist liberal think so. But the fact is that zombies do not think, just repeat the mantra without any substance that are led to believe.

    The ideology of the modern cultural Marxism has a motivation, world domination, the idea of ​​total control over the entire planet.

    ” We are all equal ” because we have the same bosses.

    leftists are distractions, is not that they have no value, almost every intelligent WEIRD- has at least one or two friends who are leftists. It is that social engineers saw in them a great potential to be EXPLOITED, their ingenuity, their weaknesses, the fact that many of them are really good people who believe in mantras that follow, including because they are mantras that validate themselves, often by example, why 90% of Western homosexuals are leftists ** Indeed, when liberals talk about social constructions, they are talking about themselves because previously did not have an official ideology, which was dominated by the monotheistic religions.

    You can blame a leftist but be sure to do the same with other believers. What does the leftist is what Christians have done for centuries.

    Read More
  156. @helena
    "Demographic-”trait” rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence."

    I think that's the same as what I'm saying. Groups that emerge from other groups are like mini-bell curves somewhere on the bigger bell curve.

    Amish came from Dutch (?), Dutch came from nEuros, nEuros came from Bronze Age Euros, Bronze Age Euros came from admix of EEF+WHG+ANE and so relate also to Middle-East and Eurasia, Mid-E + Eurasia + Europe = Cauc-Asian. So, a bell curve for Cauc-Asian will have hypothetically smaller bell curves, for each of the component groups, on the curve .

    If Amish marry Dutch, they disappear back into the Dutch bell curve. If Dutch marry nEuro, they disappear into a nEuro bell curve. But equally, the mean of the larger bell curve shifts as the smaller population mixes back into it.

    If all Pakistanis in UK mate with English, Pakistanis disappear into English bell curve, and change the mean of the English bell curve. Which is exactly what liberals imagine can happen - all world disappears into one big human bell curve. But it can't happen because populations stay isolated from each other and if anything keep creating new little bell curves by their mating habits, including bell curves for socio-econ within an otherwise homogenous population. Brahmin regress first to mean for Brahmin, then Hindu, then Indian, then S Asian etc.

    The difference with 'race' is that when bell curves mix, the change in gene pool is much greater because there are more differences between the original gene pools of races. So if all Igbo married English they wouldn't just 'melt back' into the bell curve they would (metaphorically) introduce gene loci that never existed before in English bell curve.

    This makes sense. You are saying that mixture of normal distributions will tend to new normal distributions with changed parameters (mean and std deviation). I was wondering , are you aware at of any studies that might have looked into whether groups such as Ashkenazi Jews, Indian Brahmins etc. might actually be better represented by right skewed and kurtotic distributions at all? (in other words is there any reason to believe that eugenics practised by these groups inherently biases outcomes to non-normal distributions)

    “I reckon genes work in ‘systems’ a lot more than we give them credit for. Genes don’t seem to be inherited on an individual ’50:50 chance’ basis.”

    Yes!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    Sam,
    I really have no idea. But there aren't many examples of skewed distributions, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356396/

    Ashkenazi Europeans :)

    As well as IBD (genes inherited together in strings), just one allele, EDAR, v370 A, can cause four massive differences - 'increased scalp hair thickness, shovel-shaped incisors, an increase in the number of eccrine sweat glands, and smaller breasts'. It beggars belief really; how life evolves.

    **************

    @ Santo - WEIRD is supposed to refer to countries - Democracies ("Our findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies..." http://www.vdare.com/posts/weirdwestern-educated-industrialized-rich-and-democratic-societies-think-differently ). The Child Poverty rate in the UK is either 1/4 or 1/3; those kids are not 'rich'. And anyway, democracy has all but left the EU. Who wants to be called weird?

    **************

    In a comment above I said new gene loci could be introduced. That's not what I meant - I meant it must at least be possible after enough time that, a population group has switched off alleles to the extent that, all alleles in circulation in the gene pool are different from all alleles in circulation in a different population group. In the example of Amish and Dutch - the two groups are still circulating the same or overlapping sets of alleles albeit with different frequencies. Which is different to Han and Dravidian - are both groups circulating similar alleles for any given trait? But maybe, thinking about EDAR, it isn't sets of alleles that make the difference, just the presence or not of one allele with dramatic effects.

  157. @helena
    I'm not an expert but I think I'm thinking about this the same way you are. Children regress to the mean only in the sense that the more children a couple has, the more of the children will 'be' similar. In a family of three children, each may appear 'unique' but in a family of thirteen children not so much. And that, 'being similar' has a probability of not inheriting all the smart alleles. But equally, the first child could be higher IQ than the parents but on average it will be lower.

    The way regression to the mean is being used in the article is premised on the idea that the children will select their mates randomly from the same gene pool that their parents came from. So arguably, Igbo migrant grandchildren could regress to any of these means:
    1. Igbo migrants
    2. Nigerian migrants
    3. Black African migrants
    4. Black migrants
    5. Igbo
    6. Nigerians
    7. Africans
    8. 'Black people'

    And it is the last of those that is really really the topic of the article - as in, 'should researchers be *allowed* to do surveys using 'black people' as a sample?' The article seems to be a very convoluted, biologically inaccurate, statistically sloppy way of saying, NO!

    But ultimately, the article is an affirmation of HBD - Igbo as a *population group* have a high mean IQ. Ta-da!

    What defines the group, Igbo? Can a person self-identify? If a person has only one Igbo parent, is he an Igbo?

    If we take anything other than a completely unbiased and random sample from a collection (a collection in this case that is not even precisely defined) we cannot have any confidence in our observations of the sample as reflecting upon the whole.

    We do not know the IQ of the group, Igbo.

    We do know that the sample in question from this ill-defined group is not random and un-biased.

    Read More
    • Replies: @helena
    That's why Galton's discovery was thrown out in the context of biology and also why liberals refuse to acknowledge race; they say it's too fuzzy. I think Cochran has the answer with the Breeders Equation but that's a guess.
  158. Thank you Peter Frost for your interesting thoughts. Thank you multiple commentators for the continued discussion on regression to the mean. I suggest that the gentlemanly moderator take control of these threads by banning the trolls and the idiots. Readers shouldn’t be having to sift through the “you are a whore” comments to find ones that contribute to the subject originated by Peter Frost.

    Regression to the mean works in blog forums just like it works in genetics. Intellectual conversations degenerate into blathering nonsense without firm control by the moderator. I can read the conversations over at other blogs because idiots and trolls get banned. Here I am sad to say it is not worth the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen

    I can read the conversations over at other blogs because idiots and trolls get banned.
     
    Contrast with Razib's where you can read his post and then just continue straight through all of the comments.
  159. @dave chamberlin
    Thank you Peter Frost for your interesting thoughts. Thank you multiple commentators for the continued discussion on regression to the mean. I suggest that the gentlemanly moderator take control of these threads by banning the trolls and the idiots. Readers shouldn't be having to sift through the "you are a whore" comments to find ones that contribute to the subject originated by Peter Frost.

    Regression to the mean works in blog forums just like it works in genetics. Intellectual conversations degenerate into blathering nonsense without firm control by the moderator. I can read the conversations over at other blogs because idiots and trolls get banned. Here I am sad to say it is not worth the time.

    I can read the conversations over at other blogs because idiots and trolls get banned.

    Contrast with Razib’s where you can read his post and then just continue straight through all of the comments.

    Read More
  160. @woodNfish

    You make a decent case for censorship.
     
    Spoken like a true fascist.

    Spoken like a true fascist.

    The origins of freedom of speech were based on the notion that government needn’t limit our speech because we possess the maturity and ability to limit it ourselves. “Speech” – as with everything else in life – is within the context of culture. Any culture. Peter Frost’s culture isn’t fascist (do a little research on fascism) but it is overly leftist – way too much – and he’s trying his best to function within it. There’s no law that says you have to help him do that…but why wouldn’t you want to? I’m guessing the rewards of his bravery are little enough as it is.

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    Any government that would hold a person responsible for someone else's words should be defied and overthrown. Why should I do anything that helps his fascist government and its appointed thugs suppress him?

    The origins of freedom of speech were based on the notion that government needn’t limit our speech because we possess the maturity and ability to limit it ourselves.
     
    No. "Freedom of speech" means exactly what it says whether you like it or not. You're additions have nothing to do with it and are simply your opinion.

    Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech
     
    I think that is pretty clear.

    I did not say Peter's culture was "fascist", his government is. So is ours. I do not claim to know his culture other than it is Western.
  161. @J1234

    Spoken like a true fascist.
     
    The origins of freedom of speech were based on the notion that government needn't limit our speech because we possess the maturity and ability to limit it ourselves. "Speech" - as with everything else in life - is within the context of culture. Any culture. Peter Frost's culture isn't fascist (do a little research on fascism) but it is overly leftist - way too much - and he's trying his best to function within it. There's no law that says you have to help him do that...but why wouldn't you want to? I'm guessing the rewards of his bravery are little enough as it is.

    Any government that would hold a person responsible for someone else’s words should be defied and overthrown. Why should I do anything that helps his fascist government and its appointed thugs suppress him?

    The origins of freedom of speech were based on the notion that government needn’t limit our speech because we possess the maturity and ability to limit it ourselves.

    No. “Freedom of speech” means exactly what it says whether you like it or not. You’re additions have nothing to do with it and are simply your opinion.

    Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech

    I think that is pretty clear.

    I did not say Peter’s culture was “fascist”, his government is. So is ours. I do not claim to know his culture other than it is Western.

    Read More
    • Replies: @szopen
    By agreeing to tone down you are not helping Peter Frost's government; you are helping Peter Frost. By refusing to tone down you are not fighting against his government; you are rather trying to harm Peter Frost. Do you get it?

    Peter Frost is most likely already under a risk of an attack from leftist ideologues. He is acting bravely under his own name, risking his career and reputation. You, on the other hand, you are risking nothing. Instead it seems like you want to help "fascist" government to get a pretext to destroy people like Peter Frost.
    , @J1234

    No. “Freedom of speech” means exactly what it says whether you like it or not.
     
    Oh, so that's why you have all that child pornography and copies of letters to your friends about assassinating President Obama in your basement.

    (Oh, and the lies I just said about you are also not allowed under freedom of speech.)

    Culture is embedded in everything, even government.
  162. @Sam Shama
    This makes sense. You are saying that mixture of normal distributions will tend to new normal distributions with changed parameters (mean and std deviation). I was wondering , are you aware at of any studies that might have looked into whether groups such as Ashkenazi Jews, Indian Brahmins etc. might actually be better represented by right skewed and kurtotic distributions at all? (in other words is there any reason to believe that eugenics practised by these groups inherently biases outcomes to non-normal distributions)

    "I reckon genes work in ‘systems’ a lot more than we give them credit for. Genes don’t seem to be inherited on an individual ’50:50 chance’ basis."

    Yes!!

    Sam,
    I really have no idea. But there aren’t many examples of skewed distributions, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356396/

    Ashkenazi Europeans :)

    As well as IBD (genes inherited together in strings), just one allele, EDAR, v370 A, can cause four massive differences – ‘increased scalp hair thickness, shovel-shaped incisors, an increase in the number of eccrine sweat glands, and smaller breasts’. It beggars belief really; how life evolves.

    **************

    @ Santo – WEIRD is supposed to refer to countries – Democracies (“Our findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies…” http://www.vdare.com/posts/weirdwestern-educated-industrialized-rich-and-democratic-societies-think-differently ). The Child Poverty rate in the UK is either 1/4 or 1/3; those kids are not ‘rich’. And anyway, democracy has all but left the EU. Who wants to be called weird?

    **************

    In a comment above I said new gene loci could be introduced. That’s not what I meant – I meant it must at least be possible after enough time that, a population group has switched off alleles to the extent that, all alleles in circulation in the gene pool are different from all alleles in circulation in a different population group. In the example of Amish and Dutch – the two groups are still circulating the same or overlapping sets of alleles albeit with different frequencies. Which is different to Han and Dravidian – are both groups circulating similar alleles for any given trait? But maybe, thinking about EDAR, it isn’t sets of alleles that make the difference, just the presence or not of one allele with dramatic effects.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Shama
    thx for the link to the generalized-normal distribution for the longevity study. I suppose I am a bit obsessed with non-Gaussian distributions, which often work rather well with fin-derivatives models.

    Ashkenazi Europeans - ;-) as generous a description of the Other as I have encountered in these pages of UR/HBD

    as a neophyte in this area (HBD and general Identity by descent), it certainly strikes me as a rich area for study, albeit one which in fact may defy any precise non-statistical quantification in the end. The strings or systems of genes, with the presence/absence of single alleles producing vastly differentiated outcomes reminds me of large scale Monte Carlo models with external shocks and the difficulty of calibrating stable correlation matrix inputs (I could be wildly wrong of course!)
    , @Santoculto
    Urbanized, ''educated'' and western people, supposedly.
  163. @iffen
    What defines the group, Igbo? Can a person self-identify? If a person has only one Igbo parent, is he an Igbo?

    If we take anything other than a completely unbiased and random sample from a collection (a collection in this case that is not even precisely defined) we cannot have any confidence in our observations of the sample as reflecting upon the whole.

    We do not know the IQ of the group, Igbo.

    We do know that the sample in question from this ill-defined group is not random and un-biased.

    That’s why Galton’s discovery was thrown out in the context of biology and also why liberals refuse to acknowledge race; they say it’s too fuzzy. I think Cochran has the answer with the Breeders Equation but that’s a guess.

    Read More
    • Replies: @iffen
    You misunderstood.

    I am not saying that race does not exist and that sub-groups within each race do not exist.

    I am saying that if you want to see the IQ Bell Curve for a group then you have to define the group and give the group or a statistically valid sample of the group an IQ test.
  164. @helena
    Sam,
    I really have no idea. But there aren't many examples of skewed distributions, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356396/

    Ashkenazi Europeans :)

    As well as IBD (genes inherited together in strings), just one allele, EDAR, v370 A, can cause four massive differences - 'increased scalp hair thickness, shovel-shaped incisors, an increase in the number of eccrine sweat glands, and smaller breasts'. It beggars belief really; how life evolves.

    **************

    @ Santo - WEIRD is supposed to refer to countries - Democracies ("Our findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies..." http://www.vdare.com/posts/weirdwestern-educated-industrialized-rich-and-democratic-societies-think-differently ). The Child Poverty rate in the UK is either 1/4 or 1/3; those kids are not 'rich'. And anyway, democracy has all but left the EU. Who wants to be called weird?

    **************

    In a comment above I said new gene loci could be introduced. That's not what I meant - I meant it must at least be possible after enough time that, a population group has switched off alleles to the extent that, all alleles in circulation in the gene pool are different from all alleles in circulation in a different population group. In the example of Amish and Dutch - the two groups are still circulating the same or overlapping sets of alleles albeit with different frequencies. Which is different to Han and Dravidian - are both groups circulating similar alleles for any given trait? But maybe, thinking about EDAR, it isn't sets of alleles that make the difference, just the presence or not of one allele with dramatic effects.

    thx for the link to the generalized-normal distribution for the longevity study. I suppose I am a bit obsessed with non-Gaussian distributions, which often work rather well with fin-derivatives models.

    Ashkenazi Europeans;-) as generous a description of the Other as I have encountered in these pages of UR/HBD

    as a neophyte in this area (HBD and general Identity by descent), it certainly strikes me as a rich area for study, albeit one which in fact may defy any precise non-statistical quantification in the end. The strings or systems of genes, with the presence/absence of single alleles producing vastly differentiated outcomes reminds me of large scale Monte Carlo models with external shocks and the difficulty of calibrating stable correlation matrix inputs (I could be wildly wrong of course!)

    Read More
  165. How can you be held responsible if Unz will not allow you to screen the comments?

    I would have to show that Ron is publishing my columns without my knowledge or consent. If I write my columns knowing they will be used as a platform for “hate speech,” I’ll be no less guilty than someone who directly engages in hate speech. That’s how the government sees it.

    This is spelled out in Bill 59, which was passed by Quebec’s National Assembly a month ago. It criminalizes both direct and indirect participation in “hate speech”:

    Engaging in or disseminating the types of speech described in section 1 is prohibited.

    Acting in such a manner as to cause such types of speech to be engaged in or disseminated is also prohibited.

    The term “hate speech” is supposedly defined in section 1 of Bill 59, but section 1 simply repeats the same term:

    The Act applies to hate speech and speech inciting violence that are engaged in or disseminated publicly and that target a group of people sharing a characteristic identified as prohibited grounds for discrimination under section 10 of the Charter of human rights and freedoms (chapter C-12).

    In short, “hate speech” will be defined by the Quebec Human Rights Commission as it see fits. The only limitation is that it must target a “protected group.”

    You Canadians need to organize demonstrations against these laws. Carry signs and use language clearly defying these totalitarian laws.

    A demonstration against Bill 59 was organized in Montreal. It was broken up by a hundred antifas. The police were there but not a single antifa was arrested.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond

    In short, “hate speech” will be defined by the Quebec Human Rights Commission as it see fits.
     
    Then how are commenters supposed to follow your advice to avoid what could be mistaken for it?
    , @iffen
    Thanks for the explanation. I have read about the laws in Germany and France. I had no idea that such a tragedy could happen in Canada. It may be true that we (US) are next as some people have already worried about.

    Does this only apply in Quebec and not the other provinces?
    , @iffen
    What is to prevent your antifas from trolling the sites that they don't like and bringing it down by massive numbers of comments that are clearly offensive and racist?
    , @Stubborn in Germany
    Bizarre and frightening. Here in Germany, many of the antifas are paid by the government. The way it works is, the government does not actually say, here is fifty euros, now go and throw rocks at anti-immigration protesters.

    Instead, the government pours many millions into "Gegen rechts" (against the right) projects ostensibly designed to combat extreme-right activities (such as throwing incendiary devices at asylee housing). These projects usually produce nothing more than paper reports that no one reads, but they subsidize the antifas' lifestyle. Of course, no public funds exist for any "Gegen links" (against the left) projects even though the extreme left commit just as many acts of violence as their counterparts on the right.

    Unless you have a "critical mass" of people getting together for a demonstration, say, against millions of immigrants from the middle east, the antifas will outnumber you, try to beat you up, take your photo and spread it on social media, shout you down with bullhorns, falsely accuse you of assault, etc. So far, the only town that has consistently mustered thousands of demonstrators is Dresden with the Pegida rallies.

    The police are no help, they get no backing from the politicians.

    Here is a video of the antifa "protests" several months ago in Frankfurt. You can see them smashing the windows of police cars and setting them on fire. The video was taken from inside the police precinct. The cops had orders not to interfere.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYCXKSIioW0
    , @Harold
    I understand Unz’s wish to keep the columnist comment sections as absolute free speech zones, while at the same time I see the benefits of a curated discussion, even apart from any possible legal problems (regarding the likelihood of which I am doubtful). Unz already allows the bloggers to moderate their comment sections, indeed Razib Khan rules his comment section like a petulant toddler with an iron fist. While you do fit more into the columnist mold, if you wish to moderate your comments maybe you could ask Unz to move you to the blogger section. That way you can both be happy; you can avoid legal problems and he can keep the columnist comment sections as a free speech zone.
  166. Chanda’s refutation of this post should be quite easy if average black Africans have higher intelligence than Irish Travelers as he claims. He can simply provide examples of such achievement from sub Saharan African populations and individuals who are definitely not Igbo.

    Read More
  167. @Peter Frost
    How can you be held responsible if Unz will not allow you to screen the comments?

    I would have to show that Ron is publishing my columns without my knowledge or consent. If I write my columns knowing they will be used as a platform for "hate speech," I'll be no less guilty than someone who directly engages in hate speech. That's how the government sees it.

    This is spelled out in Bill 59, which was passed by Quebec's National Assembly a month ago. It criminalizes both direct and indirect participation in "hate speech":

    Engaging in or disseminating the types of speech described in section 1 is prohibited.
     

    Acting in such a manner as to cause such types of speech to be engaged in or disseminated is also prohibited.
     
    The term "hate speech" is supposedly defined in section 1 of Bill 59, but section 1 simply repeats the same term:

    The Act applies to hate speech and speech inciting violence that are engaged in or disseminated publicly and that target a group of people sharing a characteristic identified as prohibited grounds for discrimination under section 10 of the Charter of human rights and freedoms (chapter C-12).
     
    In short, "hate speech" will be defined by the Quebec Human Rights Commission as it see fits. The only limitation is that it must target a "protected group."

    You Canadians need to organize demonstrations against these laws. Carry signs and use language clearly defying these totalitarian laws.

    A demonstration against Bill 59 was organized in Montreal. It was broken up by a hundred antifas. The police were there but not a single antifa was arrested.

    In short, “hate speech” will be defined by the Quebec Human Rights Commission as it see fits.

    Then how are commenters supposed to follow your advice to avoid what could be mistaken for it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    The commenters may have expert knowledge of what is defined as hate speech in Canada because they are agent provocateurs. There are examples of Canadians going on to foreign sites and eliciting conversations that were then used to bring a case against other Canadians. If commenters are sincerely interested in the post and what Peter has to say they will take their cue on how to discuss issues from him, and not be mistaken for those intent on using this site for hate speech, or agent provocateurs with ulterior motives.
  168. @helena
    "Demographic-”trait” rarity is likely to cause regression to mean. Less people with similar/ fit phenotype for reproduce it mean higher probability to back to mean. But remember, every group have its own mean. Mean is not universal meaning for mediocrity but for demographic/numerical prevalence."

    I think that's the same as what I'm saying. Groups that emerge from other groups are like mini-bell curves somewhere on the bigger bell curve.

    Amish came from Dutch (?), Dutch came from nEuros, nEuros came from Bronze Age Euros, Bronze Age Euros came from admix of EEF+WHG+ANE and so relate also to Middle-East and Eurasia, Mid-E + Eurasia + Europe = Cauc-Asian. So, a bell curve for Cauc-Asian will have hypothetically smaller bell curves, for each of the component groups, on the curve .

    If Amish marry Dutch, they disappear back into the Dutch bell curve. If Dutch marry nEuro, they disappear into a nEuro bell curve. But equally, the mean of the larger bell curve shifts as the smaller population mixes back into it.

    If all Pakistanis in UK mate with English, Pakistanis disappear into English bell curve, and change the mean of the English bell curve. Which is exactly what liberals imagine can happen - all world disappears into one big human bell curve. But it can't happen because populations stay isolated from each other and if anything keep creating new little bell curves by their mating habits, including bell curves for socio-econ within an otherwise homogenous population. Brahmin regress first to mean for Brahmin, then Hindu, then Indian, then S Asian etc.

    The difference with 'race' is that when bell curves mix, the change in gene pool is much greater because there are more differences between the original gene pools of races. So if all Igbo married English they wouldn't just 'melt back' into the bell curve they would (metaphorically) introduce gene loci that never existed before in English bell curve.

    There is no evidence that east asians have a narrower IQ distributions (despite what people on the internet like to claim), or that genetically homogenous populations have narrower ones outside of small, inbred populations (numbering in the hundreds or a few thousand). This is just baseless, spergy HBD rambling, and why you seem to have a poor time of understanding biology and making these nutty claims about race mixing and genetics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    "There is no evidence...." means you are claiming familiarity with the evidence - the research papers for example - that allow you to make that confident assertion. Also you imply something about your expertise when you disparage Helena's. So....

    Please give us the benefit of your knowledge with quotes, references and citations. I for one am really interested because I have been vaguely willing to believe in some lower group SDs, especially East Asian, just as I do believe that women's IQs are probably distributed with lower SD than for men, at least amongst Europeans. (It doesn't matter to me but it seems probable that natural selection would favour potential mothers not being too dumb. And that could, just possibly, be causally connected to something which limited the variation on the upside. Could it be a heterozygotic good-homozygotic bad phenomenon...?)

    Back to your point. Links or quotes please.
  169. @Peter Frost
    How can you be held responsible if Unz will not allow you to screen the comments?

    I would have to show that Ron is publishing my columns without my knowledge or consent. If I write my columns knowing they will be used as a platform for "hate speech," I'll be no less guilty than someone who directly engages in hate speech. That's how the government sees it.

    This is spelled out in Bill 59, which was passed by Quebec's National Assembly a month ago. It criminalizes both direct and indirect participation in "hate speech":

    Engaging in or disseminating the types of speech described in section 1 is prohibited.
     

    Acting in such a manner as to cause such types of speech to be engaged in or disseminated is also prohibited.
     
    The term "hate speech" is supposedly defined in section 1 of Bill 59, but section 1 simply repeats the same term:

    The Act applies to hate speech and speech inciting violence that are engaged in or disseminated publicly and that target a group of people sharing a characteristic identified as prohibited grounds for discrimination under section 10 of the Charter of human rights and freedoms (chapter C-12).
     
    In short, "hate speech" will be defined by the Quebec Human Rights Commission as it see fits. The only limitation is that it must target a "protected group."

    You Canadians need to organize demonstrations against these laws. Carry signs and use language clearly defying these totalitarian laws.

    A demonstration against Bill 59 was organized in Montreal. It was broken up by a hundred antifas. The police were there but not a single antifa was arrested.

    Thanks for the explanation. I have read about the laws in Germany and France. I had no idea that such a tragedy could happen in Canada. It may be true that we (US) are next as some people have already worried about.

    Does this only apply in Quebec and not the other provinces?

    Read More
  170. @helena
    That's why Galton's discovery was thrown out in the context of biology and also why liberals refuse to acknowledge race; they say it's too fuzzy. I think Cochran has the answer with the Breeders Equation but that's a guess.

    You misunderstood.

    I am not saying that race does not exist and that sub-groups within each race do not exist.

    I am saying that if you want to see the IQ Bell Curve for a group then you have to define the group and give the group or a statistically valid sample of the group an IQ test.

    Read More
  171. @Peter Frost
    How can you be held responsible if Unz will not allow you to screen the comments?

    I would have to show that Ron is publishing my columns without my knowledge or consent. If I write my columns knowing they will be used as a platform for "hate speech," I'll be no less guilty than someone who directly engages in hate speech. That's how the government sees it.

    This is spelled out in Bill 59, which was passed by Quebec's National Assembly a month ago. It criminalizes both direct and indirect participation in "hate speech":

    Engaging in or disseminating the types of speech described in section 1 is prohibited.
     

    Acting in such a manner as to cause such types of speech to be engaged in or disseminated is also prohibited.
     
    The term "hate speech" is supposedly defined in section 1 of Bill 59, but section 1 simply repeats the same term:

    The Act applies to hate speech and speech inciting violence that are engaged in or disseminated publicly and that target a group of people sharing a characteristic identified as prohibited grounds for discrimination under section 10 of the Charter of human rights and freedoms (chapter C-12).
     
    In short, "hate speech" will be defined by the Quebec Human Rights Commission as it see fits. The only limitation is that it must target a "protected group."

    You Canadians need to organize demonstrations against these laws. Carry signs and use language clearly defying these totalitarian laws.

    A demonstration against Bill 59 was organized in Montreal. It was broken up by a hundred antifas. The police were there but not a single antifa was arrested.

    What is to prevent your antifas from trolling the sites that they don’t like and bringing it down by massive numbers of comments that are clearly offensive and racist?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Deduction
    My guess is that you have pinpointed a facet of anarcho-tyranny...and the answer is nothing, which explains the craziest of the commenters quite well.

    I mean this entirely seriously. A number of the commenters at this site are either very ill or agent provocateurs. A prosecution based on theirs words, in either case, is not only the result of a poor law, that limiting speech, but also its terrible application.

    Mark Steyn has got to be a key SME on this subject. What has befallen him is grossly unjustifiable even by the logic of his prosecutors. And yes, they have tried to use the idiot words of their own stupid sock puppets against him!

    My only recourse to the prosecutors in this context is that with every prosecution they make alternative civilizations more attractive and so reduce their own power base. Were I forced to choose between the Muslim Brotherhood and this nonsense I would now find the decision somewhat difficult!