The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Unz Archive
Race/IQ: Should Scientists Bother Reading the Books They Denounce?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
si-wadebook

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

The letters column of the Sunday New York Times Book Review carried a sharp attack on Nicholas Wade’s best-selling new book A Troublesome Inheritance by several individuals, organizers of a denunciatory public statement that they had persuaded some 139 prominent genetic scientists to sign.

Although these signatories may be credible experts in their own scientific fields, their participation revealed themselves to be total laughingstocks as public intellectuals, demonstrating that they had not even bothered to read the book they were so harshly condemning.

One of their central charges against Wade was that he had claimed that worldwide differences in IQ test results were due to recent natural selection and largely caused by genetic differences. Yet as Wade has now pointed out, he had actually made exactly the opposite suggestion, noting on pp. 192-3 of his book the strong evidence that large differences in worldwide IQ may be caused by environmental factors such as wealth and education, with changes in those conditions sometimes causing relative IQ rises of 10 or 15 points within just a single generation or so.

I am well aware of his position on this controversial topic because he had cited my own 2012 article Race, IQ, and Wealth as his source for this analysis. In that long analysis and the series of a dozen or more columns that followed, I had provided the overwhelming empirical evidence against what I termed “the Strong IQ Hypothesis,” drawing primarily upon the data gathered by leading IQ advocates such as Richard Lynn.

Nicholas Wade is hardly an insignificant figure, being a longtime science editor and reporter at The New York Times and perhaps America’s foremost journalist on evolutionary matters, whose previous bestsellers have gathered almost universal praise. Therefore, I find it very odd that his most strident critics apparently have not bothered to carefully read the book they were attacking.

One might suspect that the organizers of the vilification campaign perhaps quietly feared that Wade’s views were likely correct and that reading his persuasive book might reduce their zeal in criticizing it, much like the timorous ideological opponents of Richard Lynn had for years avoiding his writings, thereby failing to notice that he had scored a game-ending own-goal against his IQ-determinist theories.

In any event, I expect that this contretemps will at least quickly generate 139 additional book sales for Wade, or at least 139 quick visits to local academic libraries by cheapskate scientists.

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity, Science • Tags: Nicholas Wade, Race/IQ 
The Race/IQ Series
Hide 50 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Sean says:

    Maybe a good environment can cause ‘relative IQ rises of 10 or 15 points within just a single generation or so.’ But the question is whether they are passed on . Lysenko got real improvements. What damned him as a scientist was when he went beyond the epigenetic results, and said the improvements became hereditary. I think Wade’s critics understand that improvements can’t be passed on, and that is why they deny there are any real differences .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Environmental effects can be passed on, its called transgenerational epigenetics. They found in mice that even something like fear or reaction to certain smells can be created by invironment and passed on through the dads sperm.

    Its nonsense that environment cant be passed on. Complete nonsense.
    , @Michelle
    I recently watched a movie on Netflix, "Twinsters", it is called. It is about twin girls from Korea who were separated from birth and adopted by Caucasians. One girl was raised in France, one in Southern California. What struck me the most was how robust and hearty the American twin looks compared to the French twin. Physiques, complexions, hair, are totally different. The French twin is somewhat depressed and lacking in confidence compared to the American. The American grew up in a mostly white environment, yet she felt nothing but confidence and love, while the French twin grew up in multicultural Paris and felt incomplete and left out. They both seem to possess equal intelligence though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /runz/raceiq-should-scientists-bother-reading-the-books-they-denounce/#comment-669251
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Sean c says:

    “that differences in behavior among groups, and in the disparate societies they construct, are based on genetic differences. While that might in principle be true, we simply have no evidence for that conclusion, and it was irresponsible of Wade to suggest that such evidence existed.”

    They have no evidence at all. I am pretty sure that there is a lot of observational evidence for this. If Wade wrote that environment causes behavioral differences would they come out with a letter stating that there is no evidence for that? I highly doubt they would.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Priss Factor [AKA "Andrea Ostrov Letania"] says:

    Environmental factors don’t negate genetic factors.

    Even if environmental factors can boost IQ points by 15 pts for all groups, what if the natural IQ of People A is 100 and the natural IQ of People B is 115?

    Add 15 to 100, it’s 115.

    Add 15 to 115, it’s 130.

    Scores go up for both groups, but the gap persists.

    Same thing with athletics.

    If People A can naturally run faster than People B and if training makes both groups run faster, People A will still run faster than People B.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Priss Factor [AKA "Andrea Ostrov Letania"] says:

    I really think all this stuff about IQ misses the point.

    The real problem with blacks in the US has much more to do with physical and emotional differences than IQ differences. Fear of blackness has to do with black thuggery and aggression than with lower black IQ.
    If lower IQ per se is so threatening, we would be frightened out of our wits of white, Asian, and Mexican retards. But we are not. We just take pity on them and try to help them.

    Imagine if most blacks were 5 ft 1, soft and flabby, mild-tempered, and had average IQ of 80.
    Many would be poor, but we would hardly worry about the black problem except as burden on our taxes.

    The black problem has to do with the fact that blacks are bigger, more muscular, and more aggressive. Black aggressiveness is made all the more aggressive since they know they can push around other races who are afraid of blacks. Blacks know they can whup the asses of all other races combined.

    Suppose there are two guys: A short guy who is naturally aggressive and a big strong guy who is gentle and nice. The short guy will have to restrain his aggressiveness because the big gentle guy might finally lose his patience and stomp on him.
    But imagine if one guy is both bigger/stronger and more aggressive. He’s gonna be a truly nasty rotten punk like Muhammad Ali or Mike Tyson. And there are too many such blacks thugs all around. AND THAT IS WHY SO MANY NON-BLACKS–whites, Asians, Mexicans, Muslims, Jews, homos, conservatives, liberals(yes liberals too) etc—PREFER TO AVOID BLACK AREAS.

    So, what’s with all this stuff about IQ? Enough already! Since when did lower black IQ give someone a bloody nose, get someone’s ass whupped, get some white woman raped, get some school kid beaten up?

    Also, while I do believe there are natural differences in IQ among races–though not as much as Lynn suggests–, EVEN IF we were to assume that white and black IQs are naturally the same, the greater natural aggressiveness among blacks could negatively impact their intellectual performance.
    Using one’s mind intellectually and academically isn’t only about ability but about self-control, concentration, focus, and etc. But if blacks are naturally more aggressive, they are (1) more like to flip out in the class room or (2) paradoxically, more likely to zonk out and get bored unless the instruction doesn’t stimulate them to clap their hands and shake their booties. Blacks just feel more natural when they holler, shout, clap their hands, sing, dance, and go nuts. Just look at black churches. The only time they feel like they’re communing with God is when they think God wants them to boogie-woogie.

    If black racial personality is like this, it means that black IQ, even if equal with white IQ, is too easily distracted by ‘stupid shit’. Maybe one way to try out this hypothesis is by feeding a lot of ritalin to black kids so they’ll calm down a bit and focus better.

    The impact of emotions on education can be seen between white girls and white boys. Though equal in IQ, white girls are lately performing better because they have more self-control whereas too many white guys are like acting like the fool in SPECTACULAR NOW.
    Bella may be kinda nutty in TWILIGHT but at least she does her homework . But look at the kid in KINGS OF SUMMER. Lovable as he is, he’s more out-of-control than most girls are.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. In that long analysis and the series of a dozen or more columns that followed, I had provided the overwhelming empirical evidence against what I termed “the Strong IQ Hypothesis”

    You didn’t, really. You just observed that there is a lot of volatility in IQ test results (which there is) and drew the mistaken conclusion that this indicates rapid large scale changes in group IQ is both possible and not uncommon.

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

    This reminds me of when the American Association of Physical Anthropologists passed a resolution denouncing Carleton Putnam’s book Race and Reason. Carleton Coon who was the presiding officer for the meeting when the resolution took place and also advised Putnum on his book recalls in his autobiography that when he asked how many of the assembled anthropologists had read Putnam’s book, only one of them had.

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

    The Political Correctness Officers strike back! They are like medieval priests putting someone on trial for heresy.

    How far we have NOT come.

    We need to call these people out for the groveling PC bots that they are. These are the people who destroy science, not the “backward religious hillbillies” they love to sneer at.

    Cowards.

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

    Why all this endless Race-IQ discussion – the truth is that most people of all races can lead a good prosperous life – IF – they live in productive non-coercive mostly private culture. It does not require a high IQ to be a good neighbor and a productive citizen. Our thoughts should be on that.

    Truly what good does this do – why this obsession with race identity and intellectual identity – what is wrong with the intellectuals on the left and the right? Telling people they are inferior or superior does no good.

    Putting people in a hopeless box is wrong – good people do not do this.

    In Western culture how you use what you know is king – not DNA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bruce
    Hi. The main reason is that the hereditarian argument is a (maybe THE) counter-argument to the more-or-less dominant leftist narrative of empirical equality and unequal outcomes being the result of white racism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Jason says:

    Wonder,

    The problem is, in order to have a fairly free society with private property, you have to have the right population to begin with . You need a majority that is capable of sustaining such a thing. You can’t establish and maintain the political system you recommend with most populations on earth.

    That requires a general IQ that is fairly decent as well as some traits that appear to be at least somewhat genetic. When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    You can’t impose “freedom” on a people that can’t handle it, as we have recently learned, yet again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wonder
    When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? Where these people acting racially-biologically or where they acting intellectually? Remember that your superior race/tribe thinking killed 100 million people in the last century. How grim is this century going to be with those same “superior/race” types leading the way?

    May we suggest that it was the Christian philosophy that created the conditions that allowed society to metamorphosis into freedom. And Christian philosophy has zero to do with race – it is open to anyone and everyone. Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Same old, same old. Go back some 70 years ago and there were plenty of letters like this published in “Pravda” (Soviet equivalent of NYT) that denounced Mendelian genetics and even mere existence of genes.

    It is sad to see so many good names being signatories to this bullshit slander. But then, nothing is new under the sun – as Soviet history attests, this is nothing unusual. The names are down for the history to judge – perhaps many of them will live to see the judgement and feel ashamed of what they have acquiesced to.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    It does not require a high IQ to be a good neighbor and a productive citizen

    True, it does not. But it does require a threshold of some kind PLUS a few other traits that are only weakly correlated with IQ. In combination, surprisingly many US citizens suck at being good neighbors.

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

    Andrea Ostrov Letania,
    Blacks are actually shorter than whites on average, especially Germanic whites. There are a lot of data on this, look it up. Since whites tend to do better than blacks in weightlifting, strongman competitions, wrestling, or anything that requires outright strength rather than explosive power, I suspect whites are stronger than blacks too. Even heavyweight boxing seems to be dominated by Slavs these days.

    But to repeat, what is absolutely certain according to every study: Whites are taller than blacks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    "Blacks are actually shorter than whites on average, especially Germanic whites. There are a lot of data on this, look it up. Since whites tend to do better than blacks in weightlifting, strongman competitions, wrestling, or anything that requires outright strength rather than explosive power, I suspect whites are stronger than blacks too. Even heavyweight boxing seems to be dominated by Slavs these days."

    Not this nonsense again. Okay, it may well be that the biggest and strongest individual guys in the world are some overgrown oxen Swedes who can pull tractors or lift a log.
    And if we include all African blacks--including Pygmies, Bushmen, famished members of many tribes, and etc--, whites in first world nations may be bigger and taller than blacks.

    But let's look at America and places like France and UK. Most of their blacks come from West Africa, and many such Negroes are bigger, taller, and most importantly more muscular than whites. If you were to randomly pick out a black guy and a white guy in America and make them in fight, blacks will win 19 times out of 20. I know this because I grew up in and worked in 'integrated' neighborhoods for much of my life; this is why I prize Mexicans as buffers between blacks and whites.
    When I was a child in the 70s, there used to be a playground chant that went, 'a fight, a fight a ni**er and white'--shouted by white and black kids alike--, and in most cases, the fight was over before you got there, with the white guy on the floor with bloodied nose and black guys shaking his ass in victory. When black guys threatened 'after school!'--meaning "I'll whup your white ass after school"--, white guys almost always shriveled and got cold feet. In gym class, the fastest and toughest boys and girls were black.
    After gym class, the line at the water fountain was all black in the front lines and whites in the behind because stronger blacks pushed whites behind.

    So, I don't give a shit about some Swede who can pull tractors. Besides, toughness isn't just about brute strength but about coordination, rhythm, flexibility, and etc.
    A whitey and a blacky in a fight is like a dog vs cat. A dog has to be substantially bigger than the cat to win since, pound for pound, cat is much faster and tougher and more flexible than a dog. Why is it that a 300 lb tiger can sometimes bring down a 600 lb bear(closely related to dogs) but the idea of a 300 lb bear bringing down a 600 lb tiger is laughable? A big dog can whomp a cat, but if a cat that is near the size of a dog will kill the dog in less than a minute.

    If you really care about the white race, think in terms of racial rights. Every race has a right to live in safety, security, and with confidence. Co-existence with blacks means social, physical, and sexual defeat and demise for the white race. Wake up and stop with this 'white male pride' nonsense. As for boxing, a lot of blacks now avoid it since they see it as unrewarding. Why go for boxing when basketball and football and drug-dealing are far more lucrative?
    Now, football is a sports loved by all groups in America. All races wanna be football stars, and guess which race totally dominates in power positions? Just look at what them negroes did in the last superbowl. They cuckolded the ball right out of Peyton Manning's ass.

    So, you can choose swallow the pride and face the truth or suppress the truth in favor of empty pride just because some giant Swede can pull a tractor in a 'sport' that no one cares about.
    , @peter johnson
    To Harold: You are probably correct about height, but it seems true (I do not have any formal statistics to back this up but believe it nonetheless) that young black males are on average considerably stronger and better fist-fighters than similar-age white males.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Luis says:

    I don’t know what you are reading from the letter. It is far simpler than a whole discussion about the significance or genetic component to IQ or other speculations in the book. Wade misrepresent their work and what it does/does not support. They do not need to read the whole book to verify that, and naturally, they are pissed. So, the message is, more or less, “if you are going to advance speculations with no scientific support, do not lie about the relationship between my work and your theses.” There is absolutely nothing questionable about the letter. You may think otherwise if you have not read letter, or if you are biased by your opinions on Wade’s theses.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. Priss Factor [AKA "Andrea Ostrov Letania"] says:
    @Harold
    Andrea Ostrov Letania,
    Blacks are actually shorter than whites on average, especially Germanic whites. There are a lot of data on this, look it up. Since whites tend to do better than blacks in weightlifting, strongman competitions, wrestling, or anything that requires outright strength rather than explosive power, I suspect whites are stronger than blacks too. Even heavyweight boxing seems to be dominated by Slavs these days.

    But to repeat, what is absolutely certain according to every study: Whites are taller than blacks.

    “Blacks are actually shorter than whites on average, especially Germanic whites. There are a lot of data on this, look it up. Since whites tend to do better than blacks in weightlifting, strongman competitions, wrestling, or anything that requires outright strength rather than explosive power, I suspect whites are stronger than blacks too. Even heavyweight boxing seems to be dominated by Slavs these days.”

    Not this nonsense again. Okay, it may well be that the biggest and strongest individual guys in the world are some overgrown oxen Swedes who can pull tractors or lift a log.
    And if we include all African blacks–including Pygmies, Bushmen, famished members of many tribes, and etc–, whites in first world nations may be bigger and taller than blacks.

    But let’s look at America and places like France and UK. Most of their blacks come from West Africa, and many such Negroes are bigger, taller, and most importantly more muscular than whites. If you were to randomly pick out a black guy and a white guy in America and make them in fight, blacks will win 19 times out of 20. I know this because I grew up in and worked in ‘integrated’ neighborhoods for much of my life; this is why I prize Mexicans as buffers between blacks and whites.
    When I was a child in the 70s, there used to be a playground chant that went, ‘a fight, a fight a ni**er and white’–shouted by white and black kids alike–, and in most cases, the fight was over before you got there, with the white guy on the floor with bloodied nose and black guys shaking his ass in victory. When black guys threatened ‘after school!’–meaning “I’ll whup your white ass after school”–, white guys almost always shriveled and got cold feet. In gym class, the fastest and toughest boys and girls were black.
    After gym class, the line at the water fountain was all black in the front lines and whites in the behind because stronger blacks pushed whites behind.

    So, I don’t give a shit about some Swede who can pull tractors. Besides, toughness isn’t just about brute strength but about coordination, rhythm, flexibility, and etc.
    A whitey and a blacky in a fight is like a dog vs cat. A dog has to be substantially bigger than the cat to win since, pound for pound, cat is much faster and tougher and more flexible than a dog. Why is it that a 300 lb tiger can sometimes bring down a 600 lb bear(closely related to dogs) but the idea of a 300 lb bear bringing down a 600 lb tiger is laughable? A big dog can whomp a cat, but if a cat that is near the size of a dog will kill the dog in less than a minute.

    If you really care about the white race, think in terms of racial rights. Every race has a right to live in safety, security, and with confidence. Co-existence with blacks means social, physical, and sexual defeat and demise for the white race. Wake up and stop with this ‘white male pride’ nonsense. As for boxing, a lot of blacks now avoid it since they see it as unrewarding. Why go for boxing when basketball and football and drug-dealing are far more lucrative?
    Now, football is a sports loved by all groups in America. All races wanna be football stars, and guess which race totally dominates in power positions? Just look at what them negroes did in the last superbowl. They cuckolded the ball right out of Peyton Manning’s ass.

    So, you can choose swallow the pride and face the truth or suppress the truth in favor of empty pride just because some giant Swede can pull a tractor in a ‘sport’ that no one cares about.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Devil's Advocate
    And the reason American blacks are physically large and mentally stunted?

    Because when they were sold into slavery in Africa by other blacks from different tribes, only the strong survived the abuse, and once shipped to the US to be slaves, the smart ones were disadvantaged in that they would be viewed as a threat, unlike the dumb ones.

    As to the present day, why should they study and work when they can survive on what is given away for free?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Harold says:

    “And if we include all African blacks–including Pygmies, Bushmen, famished members of many tribes, and etc–, whites in first world nations may be bigger and taller than blacks.”

    No, American whites are taller than American blacks.
    American white women are taller than Nigerian men. No need to count Pygmies.

    As for your anecdotes, I’m not inclined to trust their veracity.
    Frankly, I think your whole schtick is an attempt to engender radicalism among white men through humiliation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Wonder says:
    @Jason
    Wonder,

    The problem is, in order to have a fairly free society with private property, you have to have the right population to begin with . You need a majority that is capable of sustaining such a thing. You can't establish and maintain the political system you recommend with most populations on earth.

    That requires a general IQ that is fairly decent as well as some traits that appear to be at least somewhat genetic. When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    You can't impose "freedom" on a people that can't handle it, as we have recently learned, yet again.

    When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? Where these people acting racially-biologically or where they acting intellectually? Remember that your superior race/tribe thinking killed 100 million people in the last century. How grim is this century going to be with those same “superior/race” types leading the way?

    May we suggest that it was the Christian philosophy that created the conditions that allowed society to metamorphosis into freedom. And Christian philosophy has zero to do with race – it is open to anyone and everyone. Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Sure they are. For an ultimate proof, let's teach some hamsters some calculus. Their DNA is not detriment - stop holding those hamsters back, you racist!
    , @Hepp
    "Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians."

    And without tribal thinking, Muslims would've completely expelled or killed every Jew in the Middle East, like they've done to just about every other minority group.
    , @Jason
    You can't imply that those who disagree with you are pushing a theory that killed 100 million. I can just as easily say that culture-only biology-denying regimes killed 100 million (Soviet Union, Red China, etc.). Not to mention the millions killed in Europe over various religious wars.

    The point is, there is ONLY one race that has ever put forward the philosophy and political structures necessary for a free society. When we have handed it to others on a silver platter, it fails.

    Christian theology has not made Latin America a place you want to live. But you would be happy to live in Sweden, despite it's lack of religion these days.

    And it's not a matter of "superior". These are just observations of traits. IF you care about the fate of your children, you would want the survival of fairly homogeneous White countries.
    , @Curle
    "Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? " -------------------------------

    The race and the philosophy were the same. British people behaving according to British customs under new circumstances re-established a form of government mimicking an older order (dispersed power) they had become accustomed to during a period of home country neglect (post English Civil War) and reimposed the old order when the home country sought to reassert control. They used British philosophy to justify this re-established order.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Didn’t East Asians get the most gold medals in weight lifting last olympics?

    Anyway, you fighting a losing battle. You lost the moment the data came out as a temporary average. Now subtract the difference due to environmental effect and the fact that people are mixing more and more now. What you get is a pointless hopeless fight.

    I mean whats the average of say all the middle easterners, mexicans, Indians and other mixed race mongrel people? Its like 90 + environment, possibly 95 even 96 or so right? If you count them mongrels, they are the largest population on earth by far and they are young too. India alone will have worlds biggest pop in 30 years or so. Their sheer numbers would mean they would have more people above 100 than Europeans do. Heck they could have more people over 100 than the entire population of Europeans.

    Black people could just have sex with some nerds and sort the whole thing out in a few years, if it does turn out to be genetic. They banging everyone else already anyway. Jews bang Sub Saharan Africans. Lots of Chinese there now banging them too. Average IQ isn’t stopping that. Even Jim Crow or Apartheid couldn’t stop it.

    Even Lermarckian inheritance is making a come back. The fundamentals of how evolution works is in for some change now.

    A difference in the frequency of the number of people who carry the same alleles is not a big deal to most. More nerds over here than over there is temporary and people wont really care.

    Heck I could just go identify myself as whatever race I want for fun. It wouldn’t even matter if I had genes from another galaxy. I could then tick the black box, or Latina, or even Chinese if I want. Humans are not like mice in a lab, they do not have to accept categories like that, even if they were based on science.

    You’ll never get what you want. It ends in a big fight, thats all. Just give up already.

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

    Since natural selection is a mechanical process based on the interaction of genes and the natural and social environment, as evidenced in number of surviving offspring, it would be shocking if isolated breeding populations in different environments were NOT significantly different in their mental attributes. And that is clearly what the evidence shows. But cultural marxism and wishful thinking has intimidated academics and persuaded many others to ignore the evidence and postulate a fictitious “blank slate.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Wonder
    When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? Where these people acting racially-biologically or where they acting intellectually? Remember that your superior race/tribe thinking killed 100 million people in the last century. How grim is this century going to be with those same “superior/race” types leading the way?

    May we suggest that it was the Christian philosophy that created the conditions that allowed society to metamorphosis into freedom. And Christian philosophy has zero to do with race – it is open to anyone and everyone. Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians.

    Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Sure they are. For an ultimate proof, let’s teach some hamsters some calculus. Their DNA is not detriment – stop holding those hamsters back, you racist!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Hepp says:
    @Wonder
    When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? Where these people acting racially-biologically or where they acting intellectually? Remember that your superior race/tribe thinking killed 100 million people in the last century. How grim is this century going to be with those same “superior/race” types leading the way?

    May we suggest that it was the Christian philosophy that created the conditions that allowed society to metamorphosis into freedom. And Christian philosophy has zero to do with race – it is open to anyone and everyone. Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians.

    “Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians.”

    And without tribal thinking, Muslims would’ve completely expelled or killed every Jew in the Middle East, like they’ve done to just about every other minority group.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wonder
    In Western culture - two wrongs do not make a right - never have, never will. There is a way for things to get better. Addressing valid grievances is that way. The old testament “eye for an eye” is not the way. That is unacceptable ancient technology. Why is the ME returning to that evil?

    No question - Israel has had a big hand in its current situation of being hated around the world. Stating anything else is dishonest.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Wonder says:
    @Hepp
    "Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians."

    And without tribal thinking, Muslims would've completely expelled or killed every Jew in the Middle East, like they've done to just about every other minority group.

    In Western culture – two wrongs do not make a right – never have, never will. There is a way for things to get better. Addressing valid grievances is that way. The old testament “eye for an eye” is not the way. That is unacceptable ancient technology. Why is the ME returning to that evil?

    No question – Israel has had a big hand in its current situation of being hated around the world. Stating anything else is dishonest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hepp

    In Western culture – two wrongs do not make a right – never have, never will. There is a way for things to get better. Addressing valid grievances is that way. The old testament “eye for an eye” is not the way. That is unacceptable ancient technology. Why is the ME returning to that evil?

    No question – Israel has had a big hand in its current situation of being hated around the world. Stating anything else is dishonest.
     
    It's not about two wrongs making a right. It's the fact that without some form of nationalism or tribalism, western civilization wouldn't survive, because non-Westerners in foreign countries and even minorities in the West work towards their own interests.

    To me, the first test of a philosophy is whether civilization could survive its adoption.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Jason says:
    @Wonder
    When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? Where these people acting racially-biologically or where they acting intellectually? Remember that your superior race/tribe thinking killed 100 million people in the last century. How grim is this century going to be with those same “superior/race” types leading the way?

    May we suggest that it was the Christian philosophy that created the conditions that allowed society to metamorphosis into freedom. And Christian philosophy has zero to do with race – it is open to anyone and everyone. Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians.

    You can’t imply that those who disagree with you are pushing a theory that killed 100 million. I can just as easily say that culture-only biology-denying regimes killed 100 million (Soviet Union, Red China, etc.). Not to mention the millions killed in Europe over various religious wars.

    The point is, there is ONLY one race that has ever put forward the philosophy and political structures necessary for a free society. When we have handed it to others on a silver platter, it fails.

    Christian theology has not made Latin America a place you want to live. But you would be happy to live in Sweden, despite it’s lack of religion these days.

    And it’s not a matter of “superior”. These are just observations of traits. IF you care about the fate of your children, you would want the survival of fairly homogeneous White countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wonder
    You can’t imply that those who disagree with you are pushing a theory that killed 100 million.

    Why not – just who and what did the killing of 100 million people – the answer is - Europeans and a misguided European philosophy - communism.

    Clearly you are ascribing superiority to DNA – whereas in truth, it is the superiority of a intellectual culture that loves knowledge and truth that really matters. You cannot ascribe our success to genetic brain power – Asians and Indians that attend Western schools do very very well. It is not our DNA, but our private Christian Western culture that is superior.

    The contest of DNA brings war – the contest of ideas brings a better life for all. Who can deny that?

    You do your children a disservice by promoting the first.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. David says:

    My favorite example of a lazy review of Wade’s new book is from the NY Review of Books. The review states, “Wade generally assumes that evidence of selection reflects adaptation to the ecological environment, whereas some events might reflect the action of other evolutionary forces like sexual selection, in which individuals compete for mates, not for survival.”

    On page 86 of the book, Wade says, “Pale skin may also have been prised in sexual partners, in which case sexual selection… would have speeded the spread of the necessary alleles.” On page 90, Wade describes sexual selection as “a particularly potent form of natural selection.”

    But what I look forward to is all the studies that are going to fill in Wade’s general outline of the effects of genetic evolution on cultural evolution/differences. Just lately, a new study of 1400 skulls spanning 200,000 years seems to show that starting 50,000 years ago testosterone levels in humans began dropping dramatically. This supports Wade’s claim that a genetic change in humans made settled habitation in large groups possible. There will be much more to come.

    http://unews.utah.edu/news_releases/did-lower-testosterone-help-civilize-humanity/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. @Harold
    Andrea Ostrov Letania,
    Blacks are actually shorter than whites on average, especially Germanic whites. There are a lot of data on this, look it up. Since whites tend to do better than blacks in weightlifting, strongman competitions, wrestling, or anything that requires outright strength rather than explosive power, I suspect whites are stronger than blacks too. Even heavyweight boxing seems to be dominated by Slavs these days.

    But to repeat, what is absolutely certain according to every study: Whites are taller than blacks.

    To Harold: You are probably correct about height, but it seems true (I do not have any formal statistics to back this up but believe it nonetheless) that young black males are on average considerably stronger and better fist-fighters than similar-age white males.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Here's something for Harold... and all those who are fixated on IQ differences but remain hush about racial differences that really matter:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/breaking-photos-released-of-suspect-michael-brown-robbing-store-before-shooting/

    The main problem in America is not that non-blacks out-think blacks but that blacks out-fight and out-holler non-whites.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Curle says:
    @Wonder
    When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? Where these people acting racially-biologically or where they acting intellectually? Remember that your superior race/tribe thinking killed 100 million people in the last century. How grim is this century going to be with those same “superior/race” types leading the way?

    May we suggest that it was the Christian philosophy that created the conditions that allowed society to metamorphosis into freedom. And Christian philosophy has zero to do with race – it is open to anyone and everyone. Brains and ideas are superior to DNA and gonads.

    Thinking race/tribe leads to Jim Crow and the evil that Netanyahu/AIPAC is doing to the Palestinians.

    “Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? ” ——————————-

    The race and the philosophy were the same. British people behaving according to British customs under new circumstances re-established a form of government mimicking an older order (dispersed power) they had become accustomed to during a period of home country neglect (post English Civil War) and reimposed the old order when the home country sought to reassert control. They used British philosophy to justify this re-established order.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wonder
    The race and the philosophy were the same.

    People are born with a race – they have to learn a philosophy.

    Race is a biological organization thing – philosophy is an intellectual organization thing. People of one race can have different philosophies – one philosophy can be used by many races.

    No matter the DNA - some philosophies do better than other at promoting freedom and posterity.

    Should we not be talking about that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Galtonian says:

    Ron Unz, if you study the nature of biological traits which are associated with IQ, and the ethnoracial group differences in these IQ-associated biological traits, then I suspect that you will become increasingly convinced of the validity of the Hereditarian theory of ethnoracial group differences in IQ.

    One reason to suspect that biological genetic differences are a major cause of lower IQs in Blacks compared with Whites is that many other highly heritable biological traits which are closely associated with lower IQ are also more common in Blacks compared with Whites.

    IQ itself is highly heritable (about 0.6 to 0.8) and the African American average is about 85 (one standard deviation lower than Whites) and the African average is about 80 (according to the 2010 meta-analysis by Jelte Wicherts et al.) or possibly even lower (about 70 according to Richard Lynn’s studies).

    Here are a list of biological traits and conditions that are all at least moderately to strongly correlated with IQ-type intelligence [and in each instance the corresponding Black White differences are noted].

    1) Cerebral volume correlates about 0.4 with IQ and cerebral volume is highly heritable at about 0.8 to 0.9 according to twin studies. [African Americans have average cerebral volumes about 100 ml smaller than Caucasian Americans, a full one standard deviation difference, significant to p < 0.0001, according to a 2010 Duke University study, see Isamah et al PLoS One, first row of Table 2; while another recent Duke University study points toward Black-race-associated lower cerebral volumes as a major factor in their model for assessing causes that result in lower childhood IQs, see Marcus Jenkins et al. J Child Adolesc Behav. Apr 29, 2013; 1(2) ].

    2) Mathematics ability correlates about 0.7 with IQ and is also highly heritable according to work of Robert Plomin and others. [African Americans score about one standard deviation lower than Whites on SAT-math, NAEP-math and other middle school and high school math achievement tests].

    3) Lower IQ people have a lower incidence of myopia compared with higher IQ people. [Blacks tend to have much lower rates of myopia than Whites]

    4) Lower IQ people tend to have much higher rates of natural cause mortality, especially cardiovascular deaths, compared with higher IQ people. [Blacks tend to have much higher rates of natural cause mortality and cardiovascular death than Whites]

    5) Lower IQ people tend to have much higher rates of schizophrenia compared with higher IQ people and the same genes that are linked to lower IQ may be linked with schizophrenia risk. [Blacks tend to have rates of schizophrenia about three-fold higher than Whites]

    6) Predisposition toward violent crime and homicide is moderately heritable (see work by Professors Adrian Raine, Terrie Moffitt, and Kevin Beaver) and is strongly correlated with lower IQ and impulsivity. [Blacks tend to exhibit several fold higher rates of violent crime and homicide compared with Whites].

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Wonder says:
    @Jason
    You can't imply that those who disagree with you are pushing a theory that killed 100 million. I can just as easily say that culture-only biology-denying regimes killed 100 million (Soviet Union, Red China, etc.). Not to mention the millions killed in Europe over various religious wars.

    The point is, there is ONLY one race that has ever put forward the philosophy and political structures necessary for a free society. When we have handed it to others on a silver platter, it fails.

    Christian theology has not made Latin America a place you want to live. But you would be happy to live in Sweden, despite it's lack of religion these days.

    And it's not a matter of "superior". These are just observations of traits. IF you care about the fate of your children, you would want the survival of fairly homogeneous White countries.

    You can’t imply that those who disagree with you are pushing a theory that killed 100 million.

    Why not – just who and what did the killing of 100 million people – the answer is – Europeans and a misguided European philosophy – communism.

    Clearly you are ascribing superiority to DNA – whereas in truth, it is the superiority of a intellectual culture that loves knowledge and truth that really matters. You cannot ascribe our success to genetic brain power – Asians and Indians that attend Western schools do very very well. It is not our DNA, but our private Christian Western culture that is superior.

    The contest of DNA brings war – the contest of ideas brings a better life for all. Who can deny that?

    You do your children a disservice by promoting the first.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason
    You are just pushing your religion. No different than a Leftist.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. rod1963 says:

    I’d bet that that the scientists who criticized Wade’s work did it out of fear and perhaps a push from their bosses.

    The thing is, we live in a in very nasty PC/MC society where many things regarding race is taboo to publicly speak about. For instance you don’t openly talk about how blacks take to crime like a duck takes to water, their moronic levels of intelligence or their destructive culture(which is probably tied in to being essentially violent morons). Or saying women are biologically different from men, etc. To openly speak of these things will bring trouble down on those who dare break the taboos, often career ending.

    Wade broke some taboos however mildly. Not as bad E.O. Wilson did, but he did and he has to be punished for it.

    Eventually anyone who dares speak out will be punished as well if the Left gets their way, which they will. Because the battle for whole controls society has been won by them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Priss Factor [AKA "Andrea Ostrov Letania"] says:

    “One of their central charges against Wade was that he had claimed that worldwide differences in IQ test results were due to recent natural selection and largely caused by genetic differences. Yet as Wade has now pointed out, he had actually made exactly the opposite suggestion, noting on pp. 192-3 of his book the strong evidence that large differences in worldwide IQ may be caused by environmental factors such as wealth and education, with changes in those conditions sometimes causing relative IQ rises of 10 or 15 points within just a single generation or so.”

    Is Wade back-peddling? Why even make such a point when it’s the standard PC formula that’s been made a million times already? If TROUBLESOME INHERITANCE has any merit, it’s because it has something to say about genetics and ability, be they intellectual or physical.

    Also, why should evolution/genetics only be about ‘natural selection’? Wolves surely didn’t evolve into dogs by NATURAL selection but due to human/cultural selection.
    Depending on the character of the culture, different kinds of dogs were favored for breeding.

    Indeed, evolution could even be directed by forces of class.

    [MORE]

    Look at the Pekinese dog. Where and how did it originate? It is the product of the class preferences of rich Chinese elites who lived their own cloistered worlds. As they lived with privileged enclosure, they didn’t need dogs for hunting or guarding the place. They wanted tiny toy dogs. So, the class preferences of rich Chinese led to the Pekinese.

    But suppose a culture was more primitive and its members depended on dogs for hunting and defense. Suppose they led harsh lives and had no time for effete luxury. They would have had no use for the Pekinese and never would have thought to breed such a dog. Their dogs would have been big, strong, aggressive, loud, and ferocious.

    Or, suppose a culture was into raising sheep and needed dogs with great stamina that ran around constantly and herded the sheep this way, that way, every way. That culture would have favored the kinds of traits in dogs that would led to something like the collie.
    So, culture can affect genetics. If this is true of dogs, why wouldn’t it be true of humans as well?

    Every culture has what might be called ‘smokers’, though some have it more than others. ‘Smokers’ smoke out what is most necessary and desired for selection. ‘Smokers’ can be determined by challenges of natural environment or by the ideals of the culture. In a very cold climate, the smoker would be ability to deal with freezing weather, and such would favor those best suited to survive in the cold.
    But such smokers would also lead to cultural smokers as well. In a very cold climate, not only will those best suited for physical survival be favored but also those who are calmer and more sociable as people must huddle together and diligently work together through long dark winters(without yapping all the time like Joe Pesci in GOODFELLAS). The culture will come to favor certain emotional traits, and such traits will become part of the culture’s values through customs and manners. The cultural values will smoke out those members with ‘ideal’ traits and favor them over people who lack such traits.

    On the other hand, people lacking such traits may be more aggressive and have more leadership qualities, and they might fight among themselves for the right to lead the tribe; thus, it’s possible that most alphas are pushed out by other alphas than by betas. The winner alpha will rule over the docile betas while the losing alphas will be cast into the wilderness to maybe freeze to death. This is one of the paradox of beta-male-centric cultures. Though beta males may sometimes work together to cast out those with alpha male traits, their collective beta-ness may also make them more vulnerable to domination by alphas. If a bunch of timid guys work together to push out a tough guy, timidity will have won over toughness. But if another tough guy comes to invade and dominate, the timid guys may be all-too-willing to submit than fight–like so many peasants in SEVEN SAMURAI, many of whom wanted to just surrender to the bandits than hire samurai.

    Anyway, smokers can be natural but also cultural and idealistic. Suppose there are three hypothetical groups with identical members. But suppose they are isolated from one another and given different cultural ideals. Will their different cultures affect their genetics? Over time, almost certainly.

    It all depends on their respective smokers.

    Suppose group 1 is culturally fierce and favors the warrior ideal.
    Suppose group 2 is culturally laid-back and favors nothing in particular.
    Suppose group 3 is culturally intellectual and favors the scholar ideal.

    Group 1 will bestow most power, prestige, wealth, and women to the warrior types. So, warrior types will have more children with women, and after many generations, it will produce a lot of guys who look and act like Big Boss Man. Its smoker is physical toughness and prowess.

    Group 3 will bestow most power, prestige, wealth, and women to the scholar types. So, scholar types will have more children with women, and after many generations, it will produce lots of guys who look and act like Aldous Huxley. Its smoke is wits and smarts.

    Group 2, in contrast, lacks any particular smokers. Its society is humdrum and has no particular use of smarts or strength. So, even though there are smart and strong people, they are hardly noticed and hardly favored. The group lacks the ideal that smokes out particularly special talents, so no special set of traits win out over others.

    Of course, ideals are not enough. Best smokers are the methods by which abilities are spotted and assessed. If a society prizes smarts but has a dumb way of choosing who is smart and who is dumb, it won’t be so effective in choosing/favoring the best and brightest.

    Anyway, over time, Group 2 will likely remain most in its original state. Whereas Group 1′s cultural ideal favors the warriors and group 3′s ideal favors the smart–and over time both groups favor men with particular traits to have more children–, group 2 would be like the Amish. Every guy, smart or dumb or strong or weak, will do okay and have some kids, and that’s that. No kind of person with special talent will be favored over others. No particular physical or intellectual traits will be favored over others.

    Not all smokers are the same. There are smokers and supersmokers. Supersmokers are far more effective in detecting who has special talents.
    It’s like the difference between checkers and chess. Checkers would be a smoker, and chess would be a supersmoker.
    Suppose a culture prizes smarts and uses the game of checkers to find out who’s smarter than others. Checkers can be played at a high level, but it has limits of complexity. Checkers will choose the smart over the dumb and it may choose the very smart over the merely smart, but it will hardly detect the super-smart over the very smart.
    But chess, a far more complicated and sophisticated game, will identify the super-smart over the very smart and even the super-duper-smart over the super-smart. It is a far more effective smoker, thus a supersmoker.
    So, a culture that uses chess to smoke out the smartest will be more effective than a culture that uses checkers to do the same. The checkers-as-smoker culture will be able to find the smart over the dumb, but the chess-as-smoker culture will be able to find the super-smart over the merely smart. And as chess-as-smoker society will bestow most wealth and women to the super-duper-smart, there will be more super-duper-smart traits in successive generations.

    Of course, such means of selection may not be all that effective in terms of evolution in today’s world. Why not? The ho’s be free and independent. In the past, most women were expected to marry young and have lots of kids. Also, marriages were mostly arranged. So, suppose some Jewish or Chinese geek was found out to be very smart in the past but had little in the way of social graces. It didn’t matter because parents would have matched him with some girl, and the girl’s role in life would have been to produce many kids.
    Today, we have ever more sophisticated ways of finding out who is smartest, but marriages are not arranged. Women have to be wooed, and free women just don’t like geeks very much. And geeks tend to lack social graces, which is why even a billionaire like Zuckerberg married some Chinese chick with legs as thick as tree trunks. But in the past, smart guys in Jewish or Chinese society won the big prizes and were married–often by parents–to some girl who was willing to produce and raise many kids with them. Today, we can tell who is very very smart, but there’s less guarantee that he will have lots of kids.

    Anyway, it’s possible that Jews got smarter than Christians because they had supersmoker ways of finding out who’s smart whereas Christians had mere smokers. Judaism operates as a question whereas Christianity works as an answer(the Messiah has already arrived and said such-and-such), so Judaism encourages more thought and dissension whereas Christianity endorses more faith and ‘assension’. Also, as more Jews were involved in commerce than Christians were–most of whom were either warriors as noblemen or toilers of the soil as peasants–, Jews had a more effective ways of finding out who had wits and brainy skills. It’s like what Cochran and Harpending said.

    But then, how come Ashkenazi Jews are smarter than Sephardic Jews? I dunno, but maybe it had something to do with Messianics and piggerisitcs. According to Christianity, the Messiah had already arrived, and this idea was bound to be more offensive to Jews than the Muslim idea that Muhammad was just a Prophet. So, while Jews might find Islam to be very wrong, they would have found Christianity to be utter heresy. In turn, whereas Muslims saw Jews as corrupted, Christians saw Jews as killers of Christ. So, maybe that led to more distrust between Christians and Jews, and so Ashkenazi Jews remained, genetically at least, more among themselves in Europe than in the Middle East.
    Also, there was the matter of customs and habits. Few things could be grosser to a Jew than eating pork or unkosher meat. But European Christians were eaters of filthy pigs and didn’t use kosher methods to slaughter animals. But Muslims shared Jewish customs in prohibiting the eating of pigs, and the Halal methods of slaughter is very much like the kosher method. So, Muslims might have been seen as less filthy and dirty to Jews than Christians were. Jews and Muslims were agreed on the rule of piggeristics whereas Christian barbarians ate pigs night and day. So, maybe there was more mixing of Jewish and dumbass Arab blood in the Middle East and North Africa.

    Anyway, there are smokers and supersmokers when it comes to physical prowess as well. Consider all the Samoan football players in the NFL. Samoans are big and strong, but they seem to dominate only the linemen positions. They are good at pushing and bashing. But for special skills in running back and receiving positions, blacks dominate.
    How come Samoans are big and strong but in a more simplistic way?
    Maybe it’s because Samoa had smokers but not supersmokers in identifying and favoring physical talent.
    The difference between Africa and Samoa is that the latter hardly has any dangerous animals. So, Samoan violence was usually man-vs-man. When man faces a man, there’s a matter of pride and honor, and they just rush into one another to kick one’s another ass. Since on the Samoan islands, Samoan warriors were the toughest creatures around, Samoans might have gotten used to being fearless and charging into one another to bash one another. So, Samoan physical ability favored the chargers, pushers, and bashers. It favored forward momentum.

    In Africa, on the other hand, blacks didn’t just fight other blacks but had to deal with dangerous animals all around. So, while a black warrior might want to be brave and take on another black warrior, it’d be foolish for him to be so single-mindedly brave when dealing with big animals. Blacks with the ability to run-like-a-mothafuc*a, dodge-left-or-left laterally, jump into a tree, duck and huck vertically, slip and slide, dip and skip, and etc would have been favored when dealing with animals.
    A black warrior didn’t merely have to face other black warriors but had to be alert to a lion that might bite off his leg, a hippo looking to stomp him into a pancake, a crocodile looking to chomp off his ass, a cape buffalo looking to gore his butt, an elephant about to trample on his nappy head, a hyena about to bite off his face, a honey badger about to bite off his penis, snakes all around ready to sink its fangs into their legs, and etc. While a proud warrior might ideally want to charge into enemy warriors man-to-man, even the toughest African warriors knew only a dumbass fool would ‘fight like a man’ with a lion or buffalo or hippo or leopard or wild boar or crocodile. Even the toughest black dude was no match for a gorilla or a pack of baboons. So, blacks had to learn to dodge, run, slip and slide, and etc than just charge forward like a freight train, which was how Samoan and Maori warriors fought.
    If Africa had no big dangerous animals, maybe black warriors would have been more like Samoans and Maoris, but as they had to deal with dangerous animals all the time, blacks had to be not only strong but also more dexterous and agile. Some stats show that there are slightly more black homos than among other groups, and maybe this has something to do with the fact that fruitcakes tend to be more slinky and slanky in their movement. While we associate homosexuality with tutti-fruity effeminacy, there’s also something cat-like and feline about homos that might make them better suited to dodge dangers and move through tight corners. It’s like how the black homo guy in REVENGE IN THE NERDS actually turned out to have an athletic advantage.

    Anyway, cultural ideals and their attendant smokers do(or at least DID in the past before women were ‘liberated’) favor certain genetic traits over time, and so, it’s disingenuous to insist on some iron distinction between genetics and culture.

    Returning to group 1 that favors strength, group 2 that favors nothing in particular, and group 3 that favors smarts, why would they not genetically diverge from another over 1000s of yrs of cultural selection?

    Environment shapes culture, and as every culture has its ideals and preferences, such ideals and preferences favor certain traits over others. In a warrior-ideal culture, the kinds of men who are brashest and most badass are most prized and favored; and in a scholar-ideal culture, the kinds of men who are most diligent and discerning(and self-restrained emotionally)are most prized. If such men are allowed to enjoy more prestige and have more kids with women, why wouldn’t the genetics of the community be changed over time as well?

    Wade seems to argue as much but then recently seems to be back-peddling. Maybe it’s the beta-male wimp genetics kicking into gear. As his ilk in UK had evolved for over a 1000 yrs to get along and be ‘nice’, he can’t stand the pressure.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. Andrea Ostrov Letania and Harold,

    Interesting “discussion” between you. You appear to be in agreement on some basic premises, and yet you end up engaged in a minor food fight (minor by the standards of Unz.com.) Racial identity is evidently important to both of you (correct me if I’m wrong on this), but we end up with this exchange between you:

    Andrea: “Wake up and stop with this ‘white male pride’ nonsense.”

    Harold: “Frankly, I think your whole schtick is an attempt to engender radicalism among white men through humiliation.”

    Harold,

    It’s hard for me to disagree with Andrea, when she says (in effect) that we need to view racial disparities across the board with some dispassion, and that there does seem to be strong evidence of natural selection for strength, flexibility, aggressiveness and relatively low levels of cognitive development among the “Bantus” of West Africa in particular. (It’s useful to view the relative overall strengths of the two groups–European and African–in the context of who, after all, was able to enslave whom.) But the ultimate question is what will allow Mad Max to defeat MasterBlaster despite Blaster’s superior physical capability and Master’s “genius.” Because in the end, the only question is: “Who run Barter Town?” not who is the tallest or who is best in any particular aspect. Is there a combination of traits that, properly nurtured and sustained, will allow “Max” to hold his own and retain his identity?

    Andrea,

    You say, “If you really care about the white race, think in terms of racial rights. Every race has a right to live in safety, security, and with confidence. Co-existence with blacks means social, physical, and sexual defeat and demise for the white race.”

    First, what is the moral/philosophical foundation of “racial rights”? If we agree that natural selection is the basis for racial differences, then where do “rights” come in? (I suppose it’s worth keeping in mind that it wasn’t blacks who invaded Europe or the Americas. It was whites who brought them there.) And what are you proposing to obviate the existential problem you identify in the above quotation? Finally, do you view what appear to be specific cognitive superiorities (in mathematics and other related quantitative fields) among East Asians as a threat as well?

    You are concerned about the future of the white race (and, presumably, of the culture of greater Europe that is associated with it.) Harold, it seems to me, is looking to shore up his white/European identity. Is “racial rights” really the only answer for him?

    If the exchange between you two is any indicator, then I would have to say that the goal of a strengthened and more secure white/European identity, which I believe you share, seems quite unlikely to be realized.

    PS–I composed this before seeing your lengthy comment directly above, Andrea, so you may have addressed some points I made here.

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

    “a game-ending own-goal”.
    That’s over the top and triumphalist, Mr. Unz. The data he collected might show what Lynn believes, it might show the opposite of what Lynn believes or it might be inconclusive. I think you yourself said that your findings don’t seem to apply to Asians. Lynn’s data isn’t a “game-ending own-goal.”
    Peter Frost has done a good job explaining why mining historic data from disparate studies is problematic compared with better controlled studies like sibling studies, twin studies, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. Bruce says:
    @Wonder
    Why all this endless Race-IQ discussion - the truth is that most people of all races can lead a good prosperous life - IF - they live in productive non-coercive mostly private culture. It does not require a high IQ to be a good neighbor and a productive citizen. Our thoughts should be on that.

    Truly what good does this do - why this obsession with race identity and intellectual identity - what is wrong with the intellectuals on the left and the right? Telling people they are inferior or superior does no good.

    Putting people in a hopeless box is wrong - good people do not do this.

    In Western culture how you use what you know is king - not DNA.

    Hi. The main reason is that the hereditarian argument is a (maybe THE) counter-argument to the more-or-less dominant leftist narrative of empirical equality and unequal outcomes being the result of white racism.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wonder
    counter-argument to the more-or-less dominant leftist narrative of empirical equality and unequal outcomes being the result of white racism.

    Let’s face it, we are all racists of one type or another. We are born that way. We are genetic grouping animals – we have natural emotions that support being part of a group. Finding a place in a pecking order, even if it is the last place, is better than not belong to any group. To their shame, the liberal elite use our animal emotions and fears to gain power over us – they promote hate – they divide us, pitting us against each other, thus using our fears to gain political power.

    The argument against them is not more biological genetic separation – it is to take a step up in human attainment. It is to reach above to a higher plane of organization then biological DNA organization. That plane is the intellectual idealism found in private Christian Western philosophy. That is the only place where a measure of peace, freedom, and prosperity has been attained.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Wonder says:
    @Bruce
    Hi. The main reason is that the hereditarian argument is a (maybe THE) counter-argument to the more-or-less dominant leftist narrative of empirical equality and unequal outcomes being the result of white racism.

    counter-argument to the more-or-less dominant leftist narrative of empirical equality and unequal outcomes being the result of white racism.

    Let’s face it, we are all racists of one type or another. We are born that way. We are genetic grouping animals – we have natural emotions that support being part of a group. Finding a place in a pecking order, even if it is the last place, is better than not belong to any group. To their shame, the liberal elite use our animal emotions and fears to gain power over us – they promote hate – they divide us, pitting us against each other, thus using our fears to gain political power.

    The argument against them is not more biological genetic separation – it is to take a step up in human attainment. It is to reach above to a higher plane of organization then biological DNA organization. That plane is the intellectual idealism found in private Christian Western philosophy. That is the only place where a measure of peace, freedom, and prosperity has been attained.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Very insightful. This is precisely why the absolutely venomous, malignant Left fights tooth and nail not just to keep educational attainment of the masses at a low level, they drive it ever-lower every way they can.
    Every federalized top-down "reform" they ever imposed has been utterly destructive, starting with the demented "new math" and "whole language" monkeywrenches, followed by the execrable "multicultural" mind control regime. The final solution looks like the current insanity of the "common core" in which the politically influential teacher's unions help produce another dictatorial regime in which they are told how to do their jobs!
    As I'm sure those frequenting this site are well aware, the liberal elites avoid the public schools for their own like the plague--unless they reside in one of the dwindling number of wealthy locales that have preserved their schools. It's gone without much noticeable commentary but the latest phenomenon that characterizes Silicon Valley is the proliferation of $40K+ per year private academies for the children of the technopolists--as Victor Davis Hanson has observed, coincident with the formerly highly-ranked local public schools turning majority Mexican one after another (California now is just 25% white in the school-aged population) even more striking is the urge for rich Asians to flee their own local schools (which after all were good enough to produce Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak).
    http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_24778240/san-joses-harker-school-students-earn-11-perfect
    The only white person in the article is the teacher!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Wonder says:
    @Curle
    "Was it a race or philosophy that created this free society? " -------------------------------

    The race and the philosophy were the same. British people behaving according to British customs under new circumstances re-established a form of government mimicking an older order (dispersed power) they had become accustomed to during a period of home country neglect (post English Civil War) and reimposed the old order when the home country sought to reassert control. They used British philosophy to justify this re-established order.

    The race and the philosophy were the same.

    People are born with a race – they have to learn a philosophy.

    Race is a biological organization thing – philosophy is an intellectual organization thing. People of one race can have different philosophies – one philosophy can be used by many races.

    No matter the DNA – some philosophies do better than other at promoting freedom and posterity.

    Should we not be talking about that?

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

    ,

    “…the greater part of conscious thinking must be counted among the instinctive functions, and it is so even in the case of philosophical thinking; one has here to learn anew, as one learned anew about heredity and ‘innateness.’ As little as the act of birth comes into consideration in the whole process and procedure of heredity, just as little is ‘being-conscious’ OPPOSED to the instinctive in any decisive sense; the greater part of the conscious thinking of a philosopher is secretly influenced by his instincts, and forced into definite channels.”

    Friedrich Nietzsche, 1886

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wonder

    the greater part of the conscious thinking of a philosopher is secretly influenced by his instincts, and forced into definite channels.” Friedrich Nietzsche, 1886
     
    Of course one’s instinct is to extend one’s future – but given that, what we do is learned.

    We can never know for sure the outcome of some action – but through learning and culture we can have a good guess.

    Given circumstance A and situation B it is my philosophical instinct to take the course of action C. Surely taking action C is learned.

    Socrates (469-399 B.C.) defines philosophy as the search for truth by which to live.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Wonder says:
    @David
    @Wonder,

    "...the greater part of conscious thinking must be counted among the instinctive functions, and it is so even in the case of philosophical thinking; one has here to learn anew, as one learned anew about heredity and 'innateness.' As little as the act of birth comes into consideration in the whole process and procedure of heredity, just as little is 'being-conscious' OPPOSED to the instinctive in any decisive sense; the greater part of the conscious thinking of a philosopher is secretly influenced by his instincts, and forced into definite channels."

    Friedrich Nietzsche, 1886

    the greater part of the conscious thinking of a philosopher is secretly influenced by his instincts, and forced into definite channels.” Friedrich Nietzsche, 1886

    Of course one’s instinct is to extend one’s future – but given that, what we do is learned.

    We can never know for sure the outcome of some action – but through learning and culture we can have a good guess.

    Given circumstance A and situation B it is my philosophical instinct to take the course of action C. Surely taking action C is learned.

    Socrates (469-399 B.C.) defines philosophy as the search for truth by which to live.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Jason says:
    @Wonder
    You can’t imply that those who disagree with you are pushing a theory that killed 100 million.

    Why not – just who and what did the killing of 100 million people – the answer is - Europeans and a misguided European philosophy - communism.

    Clearly you are ascribing superiority to DNA – whereas in truth, it is the superiority of a intellectual culture that loves knowledge and truth that really matters. You cannot ascribe our success to genetic brain power – Asians and Indians that attend Western schools do very very well. It is not our DNA, but our private Christian Western culture that is superior.

    The contest of DNA brings war – the contest of ideas brings a better life for all. Who can deny that?

    You do your children a disservice by promoting the first.

    You are just pushing your religion. No different than a Leftist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Hepp says:
    @Wonder
    In Western culture - two wrongs do not make a right - never have, never will. There is a way for things to get better. Addressing valid grievances is that way. The old testament “eye for an eye” is not the way. That is unacceptable ancient technology. Why is the ME returning to that evil?

    No question - Israel has had a big hand in its current situation of being hated around the world. Stating anything else is dishonest.

    In Western culture – two wrongs do not make a right – never have, never will. There is a way for things to get better. Addressing valid grievances is that way. The old testament “eye for an eye” is not the way. That is unacceptable ancient technology. Why is the ME returning to that evil?

    No question – Israel has had a big hand in its current situation of being hated around the world. Stating anything else is dishonest.

    It’s not about two wrongs making a right. It’s the fact that without some form of nationalism or tribalism, western civilization wouldn’t survive, because non-Westerners in foreign countries and even minorities in the West work towards their own interests.

    To me, the first test of a philosophy is whether civilization could survive its adoption.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. So, let’s say for arguments sake, some genetic/social research has all sorts of politically correct scientists freaking out at the idea it will be misconstrued to bear out White Supremacy in intelligence or whatever. Perhaps their own lack of intelligence is to fail recognizing there are different kinds of intelligence in humans; where the western scientists measure by a yardstick that is culturally biased to the very western science which originated with western (European) mentality or intelligence.

    Ruling out organic cause of intelligence loss, such as childhood malnutrition, perhaps other people’s genetics/social factors are predisposed to an intelligence the European cultures do not know how to measure. Or, perhaps it is a matter of how our brains are organized differently in disparate cultures determines testing outcome (with largely unconscious ethnocentric bias, or determinations, built into the western test models.)

    If this preceding were the case, it occurs to me a (presumably western) ‘education’ would artificially raise the IQ level on account of the test subject would have been conformed to the test model, but in reality the IQ might be as high or higher in the uneducated; were there a close understanding of, and test model built on a non-western cultural markers- conforming testing to the alternative (non-western) cultural norms.

    That said, it further occurs to me the western scientists would be incapable to design the unbiased or culturally conformed (non-western) test…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @peter johnson
    To Harold: You are probably correct about height, but it seems true (I do not have any formal statistics to back this up but believe it nonetheless) that young black males are on average considerably stronger and better fist-fighters than similar-age white males.

    Here’s something for Harold… and all those who are fixated on IQ differences but remain hush about racial differences that really matter:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/08/breaking-photos-released-of-suspect-michael-brown-robbing-store-before-shooting/

    The main problem in America is not that non-blacks out-think blacks but that blacks out-fight and out-holler non-whites.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. UNZ says:
    Although these signatories may be credible experts in their own scientific fields, their participation revealed themselves to be total laughingstocks as public intellectuals, demonstrating that they had not even bothered to read the book they were so harshly condemning.

    This is dubious. There have been several credible, highly detailed, in-depth reviews of Wade’s book, with several weaknesses, and shaky claims pointed out and debunked on the scientific merits. Why on earth do those scientists have to read the book in its entirety to “validate” any negative views they have? How many conservatives have actually read Marx’s sprawling “Das Kapital” – a massive multi-volume work extending hundreds of pages to be able to critique it? Saying “you have to read the book” is a weak argument, especially when there’s no shortage of detailed analyses.

    One of their central charges against Wade was that he had claimed that worldwide differences in IQ test results were due to recent natural selection and largely caused by genetic differences. Yet as Wade has now pointed out, he had actually made exactly the opposite suggestion, noting on pp. 192-3 of his book the strong evidence that large differences in worldwide IQ may be caused by environmental factors such as wealth and education, with changes in those conditions sometimes causing relative IQ rises of 10 or 15 points within just a single generation or so.

    Not quite. Actually the main issue for the critics n the letter was that Wade was MISREPRESENTING their research to support his speculation. They state just that- quote:

    “Wade juxtaposes an incomplete and inaccurate account of our research on human genetic differences with speculation that recent natural selection has led to worldwide differences in I.Q. test results, political institutions and economic development. We reject Wade’s implication that our findings substantiate his guesswork. They do not.”

    To say that the critics charge Wade with saying “worldwide differences in IQ test results were due to recent natural selection” is a strawman. And in his book, Wade engages precisely in such speculation.

    Therefore, I find it very odd that his most strident critics apparently have not bothered to carefully read the book they were attacking.

    It is odd, that busy experts in their field should take time out to read numerous speculations by a non-scientist, many of them questionable, when there is no shortage of detailed analyses and summaries of such speculation done by other scientists.

    One might suspect that the organizers of the vilification campaign perhaps quietly feared that Wade’s views were likely correct and that reading his persuasive book might reduce their zeal in criticizing it, much like the timorous ideological opponents of Richard Lynn had for years avoiding his writings, thereby failing to notice that he had scored a game-ending own-goal against his IQ-determinist theories.

    This is a dubious stretch. Actually they have no such “quiet fear.” What they fear is the raft of misrepresentations, distortions and unsubstantiated speculation being passed off as science, and even worse, speculations and claims misrepresented as being support by their work. And Richard Lynn has no end of critics who debunk his claims on the merits. Indeed, Unz himself quotes a few in his review of Lynn’s work. Far from “timorously” avoiding his work, it has been debunked on numerous occasions using hard scholarship. See for example:
    Wicherts, J. M., et al. Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples around 3000 years B.C. Personality and Individual Differences (2009), SCIENCE

    Lynn’s own goals have long been noted in academia Its the mainstream press and mainstream blogsphere that for the large part has failed to notice such.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. Andrea says:
    The real problem with blacks in the US has much more to do with physical and emotional differences than IQ differences. Fear of blackness has to do with black thuggery and aggression than with lower black IQ. The black problem has to do with the fact that blacks are bigger, more muscular, and more aggressive. Black aggressiveness is made all the more aggressive since they know they can push around other races who are afraid of blacks. Blacks know they can whup the asses of all other races combined.
    ————————————

    Glad you can share your laughable “anthropology model.” But carry on..

    “Black aggressiveness is made all the more aggressive since they know they can push around other races who are afraid of blacks. ”

    ^^Repetition obviously works… lol.. But perchance peaceable white people would be “role models” of “non-violence.” Just ask six millions Jews murdered by such “peacable” folk, or the additional tens of millions murdered by white Josef Stalin during his Holodomor.

    UNZ says:
    In that long analysis and the series of a dozen or more columns that followed, I had provided the overwhelming empirical evidence against what I termed “the Strong IQ Hypothesis”

    Indeed this is so.

    Wonder says:
    the truth is that most people of all races can lead a good prosperous life – IF – they live in productive non-coercive mostly private culture.
    But where has any such culture existed? And can’t people under authoritarian governments live good, prosperous lives? Germans have long done it- since the 1800s, and prior to WW2.

    Jason says:
    The problem is, in order to have a fairly free society with private property, you have to have the right population to begin with . You need a majority that is capable of sustaining such a thing. You can’t establish and maintain the political system you recommend with most populations on earth. That requires a general IQ that is fairly decent as well as some traits that appear to be at least somewhat genetic. When we look around at the last 10,000 years, there is really only one race that has ever created such free, non-coercive societies, at least occasionally.

    Actually it is an open question whether whites have produced such a society. It took until almost the 1970s for white America to finally get around to allowing certain darker citizens to vote, or get a hamburger or motel room someplace without legal harassment, or marrying the person of their choice without being jailed as “criminals,” or exercising their right to buy and dispose of private property freely without government restriction or private agenda acting under cover and color of government law. And since when have whites created non-coercive societies? American society has never ceased being coercive in certain ways, In fact, this is something white conservatives complain bitterly about- how coercive white run government impinges on white freedom. They forecast this coercion to get even worse in the future. Even the famous Sweden Nordic “role model” has run a fairly coercive tax and regulatory regime for decades.

    HAROLD SAYS:
    Blacks are actually shorter than whites on average, especially Germanic whites.
    But to repeat, what is absolutely certain according to every study: Whites are taller than blacks.

    What is absolutely certain is that you are wrong. The various studies depend on the sampling scheme and sub-population. Certain sub-populations of blacks like the Dinka are actually the tallest people in the world, surpassing even the Dutch. Dinka height statistics are often cited from the 1960s, but this ignores
    much improved nutritional conditions overall for East Africans since then. Stats in the 1990s drew from
    impoverished hungry people in refugee camps, hardly a representative full snapshot of the Dinka population. Just as Europeans are not sitting still, neither are Africans ROgers and Bainbridge cited almost 6 feet for the Dinka in 1963, but scholars Eveleth and Tanner using a broader dataset, and Floud et al, report measurements that place the Dinka taller than other populations. And these measurements increase in favorable health and nutritional conditions which are much improved for the Dinka overall since 1963

    ^ D. F. Roberts, D. R. Bainbridge: Nilotic physique. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 1963, p. 341-370

    “..but there seems to be a consistent pattern in all three groups.. Children of African stock are more advanced in growth at all ages than European children unless their growth has been restricted by environmental factors, and it therefore seems likely that infection would have been the main factor responsible for this slowing down in height growth..”
    –Floud et al 1990 Health, Health and History

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  43. Peter says:
    “a game-ending own-goal”.
    That’s over the top and triumphalist, Mr. Unz. The data he collected might show what Lynn believes, it might show the opposite of what Lynn believes or it might be inconclusive. I think you yourself said that your findings don’t seem to apply to Asians. Lynn’s data isn’t a “game-ending own-goal.”
    Peter Frost has done a good job explaining why mining historic data from disparate studies is problematic compared with better controlled studies like sibling studies, twin studies, etc.

    ————————– ——–

    Unz is correct and he is not being “triumphal” at all. He is just stating the facts, and is backed up by numerous analyses in academia debunking Lynn. See Wicherts reference above for example. Unz’s singular contribution is his clear exposition of the facts (as opposed to heavy academic specialist jargon) and how he bolsters his conclusions with solid data. His analysis loses nothing because of its readability.

    Likewise the Asian example does not undermine Unz. East Asians have benefited from several environmental factors- including a beneficial East-West climate axis, and favorable transportation axes (Diamond 1997. The fundamental peopling of China from the allegedly “slower” tropical south (Hong Shi, et al 2008, Chu et al 1998) also undermines so-called “cold climate challenge” notions. China despite lower socio-economic metrics like wealth AT PRESENT compared to lower IQ European areas with higher wealth, China for millennia in the past, until recent centuries was the most advanced technological nation on earth that as late as 1830, despite a fall-off, still produced about one-third of global economic output. So in THE PAST, China was the pace-setting “First World.” Genetics always is in the mix because socio-economic/enviro factors also influence genes. In any event, socio-economic/enviro influences have nor disappeared at all, and can well account for East Asians/areas under heavy Chinese influence/Chinese IQ still maintaining their level about that of some other more prosperous Europeans. And controlled studies are bound by limited samples, and starting assumptions and definitions of the study executors. If some fail to jibe with well established historic data only illustrates their limitations.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Sean
    Maybe a good environment can cause 'relative IQ rises of 10 or 15 points within just a single generation or so.' But the question is whether they are passed on . Lysenko got real improvements. What damned him as a scientist was when he went beyond the epigenetic results, and said the improvements became hereditary. I think Wade's critics understand that improvements can't be passed on, and that is why they deny there are any real differences .

    Environmental effects can be passed on, its called transgenerational epigenetics. They found in mice that even something like fear or reaction to certain smells can be created by invironment and passed on through the dads sperm.

    Its nonsense that environment cant be passed on. Complete nonsense.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Wonder says:
    To their shame, the liberal elite use our animal emotions and fears to gain power over us – they promote hate – they divide us, pitting us against each other, thus using our fears to gain political power. The argument against them is not more biological genetic separation – it is to take a step up in human attainment. It is to reach above to a higher plane of organization then biological DNA organization. That plane is the intellectual idealism found in private Christian Western philosophy. That is the only place where a measure of peace, freedom, and prosperity has been attained.

    How is liberal use of animal emotion and fear any different from hereditarian use of “animal emotion and fear”- including the snarling racist hate that lies just below the seemingly polite surface of some hereditarian types and groups? How are the violent screeds of right wingers that indeed “promote hate” any different? And as for “dividing us and pitting us against one another” this is standard modus operandi for the Gobbel-like propagandists of other hereditarian types. The greatest divider of white people for all time wasn’t a “liberal” but a very race conscious white right winger- an ex-corporal named Schickelgruber. He was responsible for the violent deaths of about 30 million white people, about a third of them children. An estimated 11 to 17 million civilians died as a direct or indirect result of Schickelgruber’s ideological policies, including the systematic genocide of around 6 million Jews during the Holocaust, along with a further 5 to 6 million ethnic Poles and other Slavs (including Ukrainians and Belarusians—Roma, homosexuals, and other ethnic and minority groups.

    And how exactly will the “the intellectual idealism found in private Christian Western philosophy” defeat liberalism? In fact, Christian Western philosophy is roundly mocked by some hereditarians as the province of weaklings. The ex-corporal Schickelgruber indeed dismissed much of Christian philosophy as a product of “Jewish fables.” And numerous followers of said “Christian Western philosophy” went to war to preserve their right to keep millions in vicious human bondage. There were others that opposed such bondage- they were the “liberals” of the day – the Christian abolitionists- and they were scorned and mocked as weaklings. Indeed scholar Mark Noll’s book- The Civil War as a Theological Crisis (2006) demonstrates that few people listened to Abolitionist arguments against racism, even though they invoked Biblical principle. How does your approach propose to turn back the well established disdain of NON-LIBERALS for Christian Western philosophy?

    And how is “private” supposed to solve anything? In politics and even in religion, the private sphere is buttressed and closely interlinked with the public. Hence southern white preachers defending slavery embraced state power, as did segregationists of numerous stripes. Alleged boosters of “free markets” oft became sudden non-boosters when it appeared designated race enemies like blacks might actually get a chance to exercise THEIR free market rights and transactions. Hence despite talking a good game about government non-interference and private property rights, the same talkers moved to invoke and involve state power to bar blacks from real estate free market transactions, and from alleged “across the board” government financing of such transactions.

    In more personal matters, boosters of “private” Christian philosophy welcomed state power deployed to break up interracial marriages – thus Mildred Loving and her husband Richard found their home invaded by police at 2am and they were arrested and thrown in jail for the “crime” of marriage. Many boosters of private Christian philosophy hailed this use of state power to disrupt or destroy private matters. The presiding judge was a genuine southerner and a religious man and he heartily endorsed the use of state power (and divine inspiration) – invoking almighty God as a primary endorsement in his ruling, along with state law.

    Note as regards the IR marriage case cited above, the Lovings never asked for anything extra- no special favors, no unprecedented redefinitions of marriage, but equal treatment- and it should be noted that IR marriages were in several states during the colonial era, perfectly LEGAL, until PUBLIC, state power stepped in to destroy action in that private sphere. The introduction of public power to disrupt a once legal, intimate private transaction was hailed by many Christians at the time.

    So based on the above, how does your approach propose to turn back the well established disdain of NON-LIBERALS for Christian Western philsosphy, and how does your approach propose to overcome the well documented disdain among promoters of Christian Western philosophy for such things as simple fairness and justice? For what was once legal and normal? Be SPECIFIC and concrete as to your approach in your reply, if you will.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. […] letter (Nicholas Wade responds; Henry Harpending responds; Geoffrey Miller responds; Ron Unz responds; Unsilenced Silence responds); […]

    Read More
  47. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Wonder
    counter-argument to the more-or-less dominant leftist narrative of empirical equality and unequal outcomes being the result of white racism.

    Let’s face it, we are all racists of one type or another. We are born that way. We are genetic grouping animals – we have natural emotions that support being part of a group. Finding a place in a pecking order, even if it is the last place, is better than not belong to any group. To their shame, the liberal elite use our animal emotions and fears to gain power over us – they promote hate – they divide us, pitting us against each other, thus using our fears to gain political power.

    The argument against them is not more biological genetic separation – it is to take a step up in human attainment. It is to reach above to a higher plane of organization then biological DNA organization. That plane is the intellectual idealism found in private Christian Western philosophy. That is the only place where a measure of peace, freedom, and prosperity has been attained.

    Very insightful. This is precisely why the absolutely venomous, malignant Left fights tooth and nail not just to keep educational attainment of the masses at a low level, they drive it ever-lower every way they can.
    Every federalized top-down “reform” they ever imposed has been utterly destructive, starting with the demented “new math” and “whole language” monkeywrenches, followed by the execrable “multicultural” mind control regime. The final solution looks like the current insanity of the “common core” in which the politically influential teacher’s unions help produce another dictatorial regime in which they are told how to do their jobs!
    As I’m sure those frequenting this site are well aware, the liberal elites avoid the public schools for their own like the plague–unless they reside in one of the dwindling number of wealthy locales that have preserved their schools. It’s gone without much noticeable commentary but the latest phenomenon that characterizes Silicon Valley is the proliferation of $40K+ per year private academies for the children of the technopolists–as Victor Davis Hanson has observed, coincident with the formerly highly-ranked local public schools turning majority Mexican one after another (California now is just 25% white in the school-aged population) even more striking is the urge for rich Asians to flee their own local schools (which after all were good enough to produce Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak).

    http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_24778240/san-joses-harker-school-students-earn-11-perfect

    The only white person in the article is the teacher!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @Priss Factor
    "Blacks are actually shorter than whites on average, especially Germanic whites. There are a lot of data on this, look it up. Since whites tend to do better than blacks in weightlifting, strongman competitions, wrestling, or anything that requires outright strength rather than explosive power, I suspect whites are stronger than blacks too. Even heavyweight boxing seems to be dominated by Slavs these days."

    Not this nonsense again. Okay, it may well be that the biggest and strongest individual guys in the world are some overgrown oxen Swedes who can pull tractors or lift a log.
    And if we include all African blacks--including Pygmies, Bushmen, famished members of many tribes, and etc--, whites in first world nations may be bigger and taller than blacks.

    But let's look at America and places like France and UK. Most of their blacks come from West Africa, and many such Negroes are bigger, taller, and most importantly more muscular than whites. If you were to randomly pick out a black guy and a white guy in America and make them in fight, blacks will win 19 times out of 20. I know this because I grew up in and worked in 'integrated' neighborhoods for much of my life; this is why I prize Mexicans as buffers between blacks and whites.
    When I was a child in the 70s, there used to be a playground chant that went, 'a fight, a fight a ni**er and white'--shouted by white and black kids alike--, and in most cases, the fight was over before you got there, with the white guy on the floor with bloodied nose and black guys shaking his ass in victory. When black guys threatened 'after school!'--meaning "I'll whup your white ass after school"--, white guys almost always shriveled and got cold feet. In gym class, the fastest and toughest boys and girls were black.
    After gym class, the line at the water fountain was all black in the front lines and whites in the behind because stronger blacks pushed whites behind.

    So, I don't give a shit about some Swede who can pull tractors. Besides, toughness isn't just about brute strength but about coordination, rhythm, flexibility, and etc.
    A whitey and a blacky in a fight is like a dog vs cat. A dog has to be substantially bigger than the cat to win since, pound for pound, cat is much faster and tougher and more flexible than a dog. Why is it that a 300 lb tiger can sometimes bring down a 600 lb bear(closely related to dogs) but the idea of a 300 lb bear bringing down a 600 lb tiger is laughable? A big dog can whomp a cat, but if a cat that is near the size of a dog will kill the dog in less than a minute.

    If you really care about the white race, think in terms of racial rights. Every race has a right to live in safety, security, and with confidence. Co-existence with blacks means social, physical, and sexual defeat and demise for the white race. Wake up and stop with this 'white male pride' nonsense. As for boxing, a lot of blacks now avoid it since they see it as unrewarding. Why go for boxing when basketball and football and drug-dealing are far more lucrative?
    Now, football is a sports loved by all groups in America. All races wanna be football stars, and guess which race totally dominates in power positions? Just look at what them negroes did in the last superbowl. They cuckolded the ball right out of Peyton Manning's ass.

    So, you can choose swallow the pride and face the truth or suppress the truth in favor of empty pride just because some giant Swede can pull a tractor in a 'sport' that no one cares about.

    And the reason American blacks are physically large and mentally stunted?

    Because when they were sold into slavery in Africa by other blacks from different tribes, only the strong survived the abuse, and once shipped to the US to be slaves, the smart ones were disadvantaged in that they would be viewed as a threat, unlike the dumb ones.

    As to the present day, why should they study and work when they can survive on what is given away for free?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Dr. Doom says:

    Some of the lieberals are evil and know they are lying and there are the demented goodthinkers who believe the lies will help the unfortunate morons so keep the lies going. This is simply unsustainable anymore, but they will all die before giving up the truth to those with a future. They know they’re dead already. They just want you to die with them.
    The country is broke and this system just sucks. Smart Whites are being gypped so retards with darker skin can rape co-eds. I don’t know how deluded these fuckers are, but without the possibility of survival, I doubt anyone will be cowed by your threats. It is no longer possible to keep doing this. An opportunity is no longer within the reasonable range to waste on retards. Time has passed you by, where you could rob people anymore.
    When there was plenty you could skim all you wanted, but now that money is scarce due to your stupidity and greed, everyone knows and notices your theft. Bend over and kiss your ass good-bye. This sham is SO OVER NOW.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. Michelle says:
    @Sean
    Maybe a good environment can cause 'relative IQ rises of 10 or 15 points within just a single generation or so.' But the question is whether they are passed on . Lysenko got real improvements. What damned him as a scientist was when he went beyond the epigenetic results, and said the improvements became hereditary. I think Wade's critics understand that improvements can't be passed on, and that is why they deny there are any real differences .

    I recently watched a movie on Netflix, “Twinsters”, it is called. It is about twin girls from Korea who were separated from birth and adopted by Caucasians. One girl was raised in France, one in Southern California. What struck me the most was how robust and hearty the American twin looks compared to the French twin. Physiques, complexions, hair, are totally different. The French twin is somewhat depressed and lacking in confidence compared to the American. The American grew up in a mostly white environment, yet she felt nothing but confidence and love, while the French twin grew up in multicultural Paris and felt incomplete and left out. They both seem to possess equal intelligence though.

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

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Unz Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
What the facts tell us about a taboo subject