A Florida-based BBQ-bats restaurant:

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2012/08/07/158221181/on-the-road-in-florida-hard-times-politics-and-smoked-bat?t=1586550826104&t=1588706931770

Perhaps the US is the real bats-eating superpower of the world?

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2012/08/07/158221181/on-the-road-in-florida-hard-times-politics-and-smoked-bat?t=1586550826104&t=1588706931770

A short interview of Dr Peter Forster on his findings by Dr Yuan, a chemical physicist of The University of Science and Technology of China:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge33OP-8rU4&feature=youtu.be

Well done!

Chieh came to scene here a couple of years ago, likely also in Amren and Stormfront, still too green to identify snake oil charlatans straight way, so Panda can understand, whereas that “anon” (a Chinese mainland commenter if Panda is correct) has been honing his skills arguing with Indian “Mike”s in blogospace for so many years… surely Panda recognises his old style in other forums. So that’s not a fair fight, Panda’s bad! LOL

But he is quite ok without abusing others, with better knowledge. Still it will lend more credential to his words if he could just be forthright about his Indian race.

That’s not issue here. lol. Allow Panda introduce the devil in some, but not all, details to let you get a hang of it:

1. Not that subtle yet always repeatedly deliberate misleading by twisting fixed keywords in order to justify a concept/s that constantly beg for racial acceptance by the Whiteys is one of the major hallmarks of Indian “Mike”s and “Larrson”s in blogospace.

If you are White, you don’t constantly look for acceptance by White, do you, unless you are not white but pretend to be one. Simple & straight.

And If someone tells that [email protected] is not East Asian. Panda doesn’t get angry unlike when they’re called non-White, unless you are not white to start with of course. Also simple ?

2. They like to do so with long posts on the same talking points again, and again, and again, enjoying the kicks that the points they twisted must be so smooth that no one would take notice.

Who said that “Argumentative Indian” is not a good n old specific cultural trait?

3. Of course they sound logical and furious in their own right, because that’s the norm in their standard operating environment. They’re used to it, asthe average Joes in that environment don’t have the mental power to expose them. Yet for the right side of the bell curve particularly armed by some experiences, who in his right mind wouldn’t think that they sound somewhat “funny”?

Since Panda is used to East Asian IQ 105 environment, that’s why by simple deduction their habitual operating environment must have IQ <100 till 80s, depending on when they immigrated to the West, or still posting from their country of origin.

And no prize to guess from where exactly they come from, since non-Western IQ 80s countries that boost quite large online populations who are quite argumentative on any India or China related topics are extremely limited.

Hence Panda coined the phenominon as "IQ 90 Indian Mikes" years ago. It's not black magic after all. LOL

LMAO

Truth hurts that much, eh?

Chill out, tiger. When [email protected] was exposing all those online “Thorfinnsson”s in the era soon after Yahoo was just invented, you probably hadn’t graduated from primary school yet…

It’s obvious to Panda that “Anon” from post 385 has years (likely 10 years or beyond in other forums?) of experiences dealing with online fake Indian account contents & their quite unique way of reasoning- Panda used to make fun of it as “IQ 90 logic” in 2005 or so. It’s as unique as finger prints.

How about you?

Lol, this got to be the Post of the Thread!

Panda had been watching the thread with a great amusement to see who would be the first smart guy who could come up with this “Comprehensive Indian Commenter Guide on Unz Review”. Congrats! ROFL

To be frank, from the very start Panda had been eagerly expecting the appearance of Recman4 and his legendary acclaim that” high caste Indians have avg IQ of > 110″ , which has a long & distinguished history in internet. It was amongst the first dumb internet myths that Panda debunked more than a decade ago… but that’s ok.

What is unusual this time to Panda, however, is the appearance of this hilarious “Thorfinnson” Indian, who, naturally, immediately jumped in reasserting that iq 110 dumb myth among other things…

… sorry “Thorsfinnson”, but game over right there! LMAO, a pretty solid overall IQ 90 show nonetheless. Good luck next time with “Larsson” or “McDonald” perhaps?

So size of hearts as well? Definitely! Thanks for the links, but before you get completely carried away by Abhidhamma metaphysics, use your heart to think what’s the ultimate to measure? Size of balls? Brain dead or not, no balls, no glory, thus no Buddha, as they say.

Yep, Panda can munch bamboo, too, creatively tie them up in lovely bundles with only back teeth, before devouring them with voracious speed and vigour. Can any big IQ genius do that? What’s your point?

Masculinity expressivity traits among macro-races.
Affective / psychological: Self esteem and dominance[or not so]
ON AVERAGE

Nonsense.

The “masculinity expressivity” African Black appear to show in the Western societies is under the sheer goodwill, self-guilt and self-restrain by other civilised major races. In other words, it is indeed mostly based on a sense of pity by others to be honest. They will shrink to their so-called “self-esteem” & “dominance” once seriously confronted or challenged after the leftover goodwill and/or patience wane off.

BTW, the real meaning of Human Masculinity are way beyond the simple degree of violence shown and defined in the wild animal world. e.g. An 80-year-old softy Tai-ji practitioner may exhibit Masculinity in many more perspectives , both range and depth, than a heavyweight mad cow.

Furthermore, the psychological concept and testing of so-called “self-esteem” is severely flawed at some point. It is so retardedly defined in the academic world that starts to annoy Panda. The concept is tested rather on a illusion more often than not. hence it’s better termed as “false self-esteem” in this case.

I am sure that you are aware of the Holocene article that discussed a more powerful genetic effect that occurred about 10,000 years ago. That would probably be about the time that the Asian g edge and M/V tilt emerged.

The only reason Panda could think of : it’s probably due to the Anunnakis or their peer competitors at a time.

The key of g is brain size!

The extra cubics of ultra expansive grey matters won’t be there for nothing, which bring a big present & clear un-answered question by all the IQ-researchers:

What’s the average brain size of Ashkenazi Jews (and, the Jews in general)?

In light of above, perhaps the seemingly Maths/Verbal split ( as Yan Shen talks about here) is also just a feel-good illusion.

…Finding the variants for IQ and selecting for them will be this huge huge moment for humanity. China could publish a 200,000 GWAS for IQ and the total genetic unlock could be within sight…

Not so optimistic…

a human brain is the most complicated machine on planet earth. Don’t think 200,000 GWAS will cut it. Plus, the potential genetic side-effects ought to be, if not equally, enormous, as there is after all no free lunch in either intelligent design or evolution.

Take a hike.

It was behind the IQ of pre-dynastic Egyptian civilisation/s.

Australian aboriginals still can’t figure out the aerodynamics of a stream of piss, let alone a boomerang.

Many sound points made there.

Some examples you raise, however, are not entirely true:

Current state-of-art semicon technologies inside consumer gadgets like some top smartphones don’t loss a bit in their sophistications to any defence tech. Rather, most high end defence tech are rooted on these very semicon tech.

Aerospace is a money-devouring-machine. One of the major reasons, if not the most deciding reason, why US/RUSSIA are far ahead in aerospace is due to 50-years-cold war accumulation of IMMENSE military budgets, R&D personnel and their forced hands-on experiences competing for life-or-death dominance , which neither China nor Japan had. Panda read somewhere that China’s entire national budget for aerospace engine research & production, both tech, material & personnel cost, for the period from 1950s to 1980s were like meagerly 3 million dollars equivalent, which was less than the annual salary expenditure of a small US defence lab… If you add up fruits of earlier industrialisation foundation, US/UK/Japan/Germany were at least 100 years ahead of China in so many fields even at the 1980s…

Without unleashing China’s ultra high IQ intellectual elites who can and will start a new wave of Chinese Renaissance like what European Renaissance did to Europe, China will not become the undisputed world leader by the 2020s or 2030s or 40s.

To become the undisputed world leader, one needs, above all, to have a very uniquely attractive culture and value system for others to model. Without China’s intellectual elites in the driving seat to rejunvenate the real traditional Han culture and carry out deep reforms in national education and industrial revolutions, current China is in no position to be that. Japan is not comparison here, as Japan historically has always been an excellent imitator (copy Han China in pre-industrial revolution, copy Europe in Industrial Revolution), not innovator particularly on a civilisational level.

Xi unfortunately, like his CCP predecessors, have held back the bulk of China’s intellectual elites through varies polices till this day… We’ll see.

How do you explain the fact that with 25% non-chinese Singapore has a lower crime rate and higher IQ than East Asian nations with hardly any muslim malays and hindu indians?

“the fact”? Where said that? LOL

You want to see the crime rate and sheer 3rd-world-alike filth in Singapore? pls visit the neighbourhood called “Little India” there..

It’s average, mind you, averaged up by 75%-80% Han Chinese, who include some recent Han immigrants with very high IQ (>2sd above Han avg)from mainland China, along with some % of very high IQ elite European/American tax-evading expat immigrants.

A great piece, Yan Shen!

Panda’s 2 cents:

1, Panda too, has been arguing this spatial/verbal split for a while (lol) , and particularly doubting the rationale why they’re valued at 1:1 currently in the total IQ scores since it somehow implies somewhere along the line that it takes the same amount of intelligence & energy (or neurons, their connections, speed, general efficiency… etc, lol) in conducting these two sets of very different mental tasks. Of course some try to solve the issue by correlations/multiple regressions, etc. stats tools, yet given the correlations are not perfect, therefore much room left to dig deeper and explain.

2, So as you claimed, some people are excel at both spatial part and verbal part, whereas some others excel at spatial & regular at verbal. To the latter group, Panda however suspects it might not be entirely true.

It’s because one’s brain energy is limited after all. If we assume that people are naturally prone to dedicate more time&energy into where they’re naturally gifted, it’s logical to deduct that some people who have regular verbal scores have actually sacrificed the verbal part by channeling more of their limited time & energy into spatially-related tasks since early-on. So in fact some of them are not necessarily regular at verbal per se at all as measured by the test. For them it’s just a choice, a deliberate or subconscious choice due to brain energy allocation.

Since it’s likely not an 1:1 intelligence & energy imput relationship between 1 IQ point of spatial and 1 IQ point of verbal (with the spatial tasks consuming more) as Panda intuitively speculates, vís-a-vís it’s much less the case for ones who excel at verbal while scoring average spatial to be actually excel at spatial as well due to the choice.

…because detail-oriented manufacturing labor is cheap there.

Nonsense.

By analysing the detailed value-added turnkey high tech parts along the value chains of the leading electronics brands such as Samsung, Huawei and Apple for instance, you’ll soon realise that it’s by and large an East Asian affair nowadays, and in the forseeable future if you look into where the most cutting-edge technological R&D and breakthroughs are made. Even some “American” contributions here largely contain technologies of East-Asian origin. Probably the only piece of European contribution worth-mentioning in the entire value chain is from Dutch tech giant ASML, which is made possible by several critical German turnkey tech suppliers who are increasingly facing the statue-quo competitions from some deep-pocket East Asian start-ups particularly from China.

“The Japanese, who are smarter than the Chinese, were supposed to take over the world in the 1980s. The world didn’t turn Japanese.”

Though you don’t sound rational, funny nonetheless.

Denk, are you by chance a German-speaker?

What is wrong with UNZ.com?

What Panda can not stand in the last several years of this forum has been that:

since it is, or at least was, a self-claimed “open” forum, who the heck you think you are of some self-righterous people labelling different views given by others as “troll”?

What are these new “function” like “agree”, “disagree”, “troll”…?

Is UNZ.com becoming a new breed of WMM? How ironic!

“agree” what? “disagree” what? “troll” what?

Who are the real troll here?

Statistically speaking, you should instead feel proud to be “trolled” by larger brained people if you have any friggin intellectual curiosity after all, since at least you might learn something new from the extra 50 cm3 neurons that you’re clearly not born with.

[email protected]~

But don’t get Panda wrong, my man. Panda has never overestimated your raw charm of intellectual inferiority complex (along with that of your Sergey, Utu, and Canspeccy pals here). Indeed you’re all quite entertaining to say the least. 🙂

“Making refrigerators and TVs? Sure. …”

Sure. http://en.yibada.com/articles/129358/20160606/haier-haier-russian-plant-haier-refrigerator-plant-haier-refrigerators.htm

China’s Haier Invests $55 Million in Russian Refrigerator Plant …Aside from the refrigerator factory, Haier has also begun setting up a TV assembly unit and an R&D center in Russia.

Need a job other than trash-talking, Andrei? Panda may introduce one to you, for free, if you ask nicely. 🙂

A group of scientists just identified 40 new genes linked to intelligence in 2017 bringing the total to 52, and very likely more to come as we go forward. (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/may/22/scientists-uncover-40-genes-iq-einstein-genius)

Yet the experiment was conducted in 1984, according to your link, when they claimed that “intelligence genes are located on chromosome X.”

Are these 2 groups of scientists live in parallel universes, Panda wonders.

And “Children’s intelligence has nothing to do with fathers” is a great news for the black males, yay!

Too bad, that a handful of bollywood female stars can’t meet the demand of 0.6 billion Indian men, can they?

BTW, do those H1B visa holders speak English?

If they happen do = they went to english medium school =top 5% of India, right?

Recent studies have found that the intelligence genes only occur in the X chromosome.

Source please?

All Panda sees here is a self-hating , blindly-white-Jap-worshiping, inferiority complex sufferer who has no clue whatsoever on North East Asia cultural history, core social codes and values, reminding Panda of the complete Nazis-apologiser, that ethnic Indian judge accidentally placed there by his British owner (who perhaps had a heart-attack afterwards by the thorough travesty of this subject), in the post ww2 Far East War Crimes Court.

Are you saying that there aren’t intelligent South Asians?

Hi Chieh, Panda loves when you started with this popular strawman. Were you insinuating that Panda can stop reading all the stuff your wrote afterwards? ROFL

That’s ok.

But when Panda claimed that?

Or has Panda ever come across to you as an intellectual giant who would claim that stupidity?

Of course there’re intelligent , say IQ> 100, South Asians, a lot actually! And many of them are in the US via H1B.

In fact ANY big-sized group has intelligent people. It’s the Bell Curve all about, darn it!

But that’s not the point. For you to catch up to the speed:

Panda’s point was that there’s no established, or logically apparent reason why India’s self-identified “upper castes” have “high IQ ” ( loosely defined as “with average IQ >=100″ by common sense for the sake of argument). Ditto for case of Ibo in Nigeria!

Yan Shen, as most Hindu nationalists, tried to make a point that since there’re tens of thousands “upper castes”Indians in the US who “seem” in general, many of them actually do, have high IQ, therefore their claimed “castes” (i.e. implied meaning of worldwide population, including most of their corresponding IQ Bell Curves residing in India) must have high average IQ as well. This logic is heavily flawed.

With no apparent reason in sight, therefore, Panda had to question Yan Shen’s personal relationship with these “upper castes” in order to justify his view.

Yes, there’re some proofs that India is a heterogeneous place with many different groups, or “castes”, with different average IQs respectively.

However, therefore to claim 1 or many of these self-identified “upper castes” with different avg IQ from India’s “low castes” must all have high average IQs ( again, loosely defined as “with average IQ >=100″ by common sense for the sake of argument) requires a quantum leap of faith, is it not?

——

BTW, contrary to Hindu fanatics and your claim, India never was, and is not, the homeland of Buddhism by any stretch of sensible standard :

e.g. ethnic origin; % of Buddhism population; important defining Buddhism thoughts, works, schools, scholars, leaders, ceremonies, architectures/temples, continuous development path & plans…across time and their impacts to the home nation and the larger world, as one would easily identify in both Islam and Christianity in the ME & Europe respectively.

If India were the homeland of Buddhism, Iran would be the Mother Macca of Christianity, Panda tells ya! lol

“Time to Stop Importing an Immigrant Overclass”

Brilliant!

Import Immigrant Undercalss only please.

India is highly racially heterogeneous with a minority of high IQ upper castes,…

Hahahaha!

Who exactly are these “high IQ upper castes”, Yan Shen?

Any proven biological/physical characters that differentiate among these castes themselves? and them from other castes, and other races? Or “self-identification” only?

Avg IQ how high for each of them? C’mon, at least give some rounded-up numbers?

And what did you mean by “high IQ upper castes”? 80 is high? or 86? or 95 is high? 100? or 120?, 140? 200? … at least choose one if you are making a specific statement on high IQ .

errr… any academic quotations on these respective “high IQs ” of each of these “upper castes”?

or any plain vanilla common sense logic to deduce those numbers without too much of wild assumptions?

or any specific IQ tests on each of these castes? sources?

or any specific quasi-IQ tests? (e.g.PISA? TIMASS?)

None. Zero. Zilch. Nada!

errr… “a minority of high IQ upper castes” as if god-given. LMAO. Love that humour!

—–

BTW, are there these kinds of “high IQ upper castes” in Germany? Canada? China? Russia? Iran? Japan? Spain? Belgium? Morocco? United Arab Emirates? Vietnam? Hungry? … if no, why not by the very same logic of yours ??

——

Again, is your wife or relative an ethnic “high IQ upper caste” Indian, Yan Shen, Panda wonders?

Yan Shen, Panda is very disappointed by this post of yours. The way you argued here is terminologically, hence logically, very messy by seeminglessly jumping back and forth amongst 3 concepts of “Asians”, “East Asians” , and “Chinese and Indians”( as if “Indians” is an obligatory term that must be attached whenever the word “Chinese” appears).

On top of that, the absurdly stubborn way you stick to the claim of “high IQ Indian casts” with no apparent logical reason has made Panda already in awe…

Panda thus wonders, Yan, do you have “high caste” Indian wife? or gf? or boss? or biz partner? who would castrate you if you speak a “wrong” word they are not used to, or something?

lol

is his name mikey cohen?

Why do you think high caste indians who claim to have high IQs are contradicting themselves?

?

Where you put them in that Line? choose a place there, then see is that place “high IQ” enough to you?

Oh? in video games?

Ancient “Indian”= Modern Indian?

Remember, all of East Asia had to borrow their religion from India

Really? Sorry, but Panda doesn’t remember that.

As someone who has studied Indian thought I have zero doubt India has a supremely capable intellectual caste

.

Then try to answer Panda’s 6 related questions in post 21. Piece of cake, right?

In fact, Panda doesn’t see any miracle or major achievement, economic, intellectual or otherwise (not even indoor-plumbing has been tackled properly yet), coming from a supposely supremely capable intellectual caste that has enjoyed the allround supreme treatments in India’s caste-based society where there has been no Mao/ Soviet/NK – style communism or massive all-out wars in almost a century.

Where could go wrong Panda wonders? This supremely capable intellectual castemust have been hiding under a huge rock meditating a secret form of Yoga meantime, eh?

130-140 IQ seems to me to be more of your normal smart person.

Perhaps this basic assumption of yours is overdone. Try lossen it a bit to 120, or even 110. Don’t look down on 110 which, for instance, is almost 1 SD above American mean.

By my own experiences, Panda can train almost any normal 110IQ person into a bit sophisticated junior investment banker within half an year from scratch, regardless his major in uni. Panda sees that a person with IQ in the 130 range could be sufficient enough to be a regular STEM professor, or most social sciences, in a regular university… a regular law, auditing, talk show, editor, stats, or social science-related profession with a decently high social statue, however, requires way lower than 130 IQ range.

Many other issues as well such as net income or social fame is not correlated that high with IQ. Panda sees even many public company CEOs have IQ WAY lower than 130, let alone directors, managers, team leaders, etc ..

All these make your “normal smart person” threshold , 910,000 figure, severely underestimated.

The numbers don’t add up if you ask me.

Hence can’t see why the numbers don’t add up.

In the objective reality, either the number must add up more or less, or we are facing a major breakthrough in finding an entirely new major race of humanity, no other explaination, and Panda doubts it’s the latter.

Yep, used to hear a lot about them and Beverly Hills… lol

Actually, Panda’s best guess of avg IQ of Indian “high castes” ( literally means the average IQ of these ” high castes” Indians in both America and India) could be somewhere between mid/high 80s to low 90s, about somewhere >= the Iranians to <= the Southern Med Euros.

The point here is what-Panda-called Rushton’s 3-point-Line:

Negroid and Mongoloid are at the 2 sides, with Caucasoid in between yet somewhere closer to Mongoloid.

(australoid may be somewhere closer to Negroid, yet it doesn’t matter, really.)

It’s a powerfully predictive line, because not only IQ, but also almost all the major physical characteristics and personal traits of these 3 groups fall into this line.

The problem for the claim of “High castes High IQ Indians” is that no matter where they put them within that Line, they’re self-contradicting themselves.

The only chance that they could self-claim as such would be to completely destroy JP Rushton to start with.

Heterogeneity of ethnicities does not necessarily imply the existence of huge IQ gaps per se, does it?

It alone can not be taken as a sufficient proof that avg IQ of self-claimed “high castes” are so much higher than so-called “low-castes”.

Indian’s “high castes” at their “purest” by looks are about likes of the modern Iranians, who have avg IQ of about 86.

If one day, the US changes her foreign policy and lures the top 1% or 5% of Iran’s bell curve go to work in the US via H1B1, wouldn’t these Iranians become the newest “high IQ caste”in America? Or we would be deeply puzzled that how to reconcile these brilliant Iranians talents with Iran’s avg 86 IQ?

How else would you reconcile India’s abysmally low performance on national IQ tests or PISA with the clear and obvious fact of elite Indian talent, particularly in America

Quite easy to reconcile: top 0.1% or 1% of the right side of the bell curve of 1.3 billion are a huge number, pretty straightforward really.

Actually if you take the top 0.1% or even 1% (de facto implemented by H1B1-alike visa policy) of any country with a sizable population (e.g. Vietnam, Russia, Nigeria, or even Germany, Poland, let alone India) , regardless her population average IQ, this group of people would be IQ-ready to excel compared to the average of almost any host country, as long as the former country has a reasonable indegenious culture of emphasising on learning & education. That’s just simple maths.

The question now are :

1. will Vietnam, Russia, Nigeria, Germany and Poland all have “high IQ castes” as well a-la-India-standard?
2.And what race/s are they?
3. e.g. How much richer and more eliter, will Russian Americans be, compared to Indian Americans, if the former must also be on H1B1, aka top 1% or so.

The underlying racial rationale is also straightforward:

There’re 3 major races in the world. Pretty sure that almost 100% of “elite Indian talents in America” don’t fall into Negroid or Mongoloid categories.

Unless a new race is discovered (Indiaroid?) , these people are either Caucasoid or some kind of mixed, which by definition have average IQ somewhere below the European standard 100 for sure (assuming JP Rushton is not completely BSing his data in Race, evolution, and behavior) , except, of course, that these Indians are actually East Asian-European mixed whom they don’t look like.

Simple.

Therefore, Panda wonders which standard we’re talking about, given that “castes” of average IQ somewhere below 100 are defined as “high iq castes” here?

On the legendary claim that

“Indian Americans are the richest (have the highest avg income) people in the US, hence these Indian high castes have avg 120+ IQ” :

Just curious, does the US also keep average income list of, for instance–

Norwegium Americans

Belgium Americans

United Arab Emirates Americans

Sierra Leone Americans

Andorran Americans

…

to compare apple-to-apple with that of Indian Americans, even assuming that most of these people are also on H1B1 Visa hence highly-selected?

We resolve the paradox of low average IQ scores in India partly by realizing that there are probably high IQ castes from which high achieving Indians are drawn from.

Can’t believe that you also seem to buy into this Hindu Nationalist BS of high IQ castes in India… LOL

1. What are of these castes?

2. Where they came from? (i.e. racially speaking, they’re Mongoloid? Caucasoid? Negroid? or new-found Indiaroid? )

3. How big are their underlying total populations respectively in India?

4. What are their avg IQ respectively? (e.g. any IQ studies done there, or just again the legendary claim that “the richest and the most successful people in the US, hence avg 120+ IQ” ?)

5. Why they are high? (e.g. are they “cold-selected” populations? They have unusally larger brain sizes than Mongoloid or Caucasoid? What are their corresponding maturation rates, personality traits, reproductive rates, etc.. all kinds of “JP Rushton measures” that fit in with their claimed IQ range? …)

6. How they are high? (e.g. they’re high on verbal? or spatial? or both? compared to which standard?)

…

Panda sees that Hindu nationalists are pretty successful on propagating the “high IQ castes” from India BS (compared to whom? to avg 82?), without even trying to present clear answers to any of above basic questions or the underlying rationale. Before that happens , high my paw! lol

Look Talha, you’re abusing the phrase “black swan event” to such a degree that they’re becoming pink. One person alone can not change a society for such a long time. You need the support of the underlying widespread grassroot people in order for the change to happen and maintained. Without the underlying people (aka avg IQ), nothing is possible and long-lived in the long run. In this case, if the underlying Chinese people were as dumb and as lazy as fuck, there would be no legacy left even came along a 900-IQ-E.T., not to mention Confucius.

This talk drags for too long…Panda doesn’t have sufficient time here to take your points down one by one, lol, just too many issues shown…

Prove this and prove that…just read the relevant moutained-sized reproducible significant stats for goodness. The evidences are all over the places as long as you’re intellectually honest and look around you.

Gonna go, excuse Panda.

Hence we agree to disagree.

I don’t think you get the idea of a “black swan” event; one is all you need. If a Confucius-type figure didn’t arise in Sub-Saharan Africa, where are they supposed to find these ideals? Would the Chinese civilization have been the same without him?

{sigh} , it appears that Panda does understand “black swan”, my man.

Yet the question in hand is not “black swan”, but “black swanS“, which cast heavy doubt on your assumption that “Confucious is black swan event”, because, as Panda repeatedly said, a single Confucius is FAR FAR away from switching China into Confucious state and maintain as such for 2,5oo years without shaken. let’s start from the beginning:

1) you need at least another scholar who understood the importance of Confucious ideals and reported them to the cultural miniter, now that was a critical “black swan” event, was it not?

2) you need a miniter who understood the importance of Confucious, and referred his ideals to the emperor. Here you got another “black swan” event?

3) you need an emperor who saw the value of Confucious, hence decided to impliment the ideals in the end. So definitely emperor “black swan”, yes?

4) you need generations of Confucious deciples to write down his ideals and keep treaching… another groups of “black swans”!

5) you need the whole society, for countless generations, wholeheartedly believe in Confucious ideals and study further in order to impliment and maintain them… don’t tell Panda they are no “Black Swans” in your definition.

…

When you got all these countless “black swans” events, Panda would sincerely suggest you call them “Black Bears” events instead.

On the contrary, assume that Confucious had been born in SS Africa 2,500 years ago in a village there:

it is a fair assumption since he could have equal chance being born anywhere on earth if it were a “black swan”event, huh?

Then in all honesty do you really have a shred of doubt that Confucious himself, let alone his ideals, would survive his 25th birthday? Mostly likely he would be cut by machetes and eaten alive.

Can you really imagine that an Africa scholar then would have reported his ideal to the Pan African Cultural Minitry, then to an African emperor to impliment them?

And millions of Africans for the following 2,500 years would have read and studied Confucious ideals in their mud-made windowless, balcony-less (Confucious loved balconies, Panda tells ya!) classrooms in order to have made SS Africa, and maintained it, as a Confucious region instead of China? …

Seriously? If you can imagine this from time to time, Panda would suggest you go to Hollywood tomorrow and start schooling George Lucas on sci fi.

On Mongolia, Persia thing:

Persia then ( at her high civilisation) was not “Persia” now aka Iran. Panda suspects largely different people, different elites, different values… no contradiction of IQs there.

Mongolia has had at least 5 IQ point diff from China back then and now. Their poor geography fitted their normad lifestyle well. They couldn’t change it even they wanted to at a time, cuz there’s thing called “the Great Wall of China”!

Later when Mongolians did get the chance to conquer almost the whole Eurasia(they got sufficiently high IQ to have done that with many Made-in & Invent-by China weapon systems and techniques btw), and established Yuan Dynasty, they did try to change from their normad lifestyle, as their elites were eager studing Confucious, writing Chinese poems, dressing in Chinese suits, adopting all kinds of Chinese systems, trying to be the Chinese… the rest is history. Again, no contradiction of IQ here.

The claim that IQ isolates and measures innate cognitive ability…

Who claims that?

IQ highly correlates with innate ability – that’s the claim.

The power of IQ, and any scientific statement, is correlation and prediction.

IQ doesn’t need to isolate, as nothing can be 100% isolated strictly speaking. Yet that doesn’t affect us at this stage to make some resonable statements, as any scientific experiment does. That how science progresses.

Panda saw the hidden assumption you mentioned. In fact anything (even 1+1=2) has one, or numerous, hidden assumption/s. Yet that doesn’t prevent us from making scientific statments, does it? Any deducible or meaningful scientific statement (as you admitted that there are) must operate under assumption/s to make predictions with resonablely high degrees of re-producible accuracies. IQ-related statements do exactly that. Where is the problem?

On motivation:

We know that it is impossible for “all humans, at all times, have the exact same desires, motivations, and wants, and are willing to make the same sacrifices, exert the same effort, towards the same goals.”

However, we also know that according to stats IQ highly correlates with life-long success results and a whole host of other important issues with some being as critical as survival or extinction.

— since we can reasonablely assume that all humans during our life-time, at all times, have our utmost desires, motivations, and wants that each of our individual brains can gather together, willing to make the utmost sacrifices, exert the utmost effort, towards the ultimate goals of to be alive, to survive and to survive better, regardless how “dumb” or how “smart”he/she could be , can’t we? ,

— therefore we can reasonablely deduct that IQ can be highly positively correlated with motivations in the very first place. It makes measuing motivation on a standalone basis more or less irrelevent in the context of both IQ test and innate ability.

In short: your “motivation”, “creativity”, “emotional ability”, “personal skills”, and whatever that comes out of your innate grey matters, unless they hide and grow inside knees of course(still innate though!), will be ultimately reflected at their utmost in your survival grande finale to be a successfully living and breathing organism. And that finale is highly correlate with IQ. End of story?

They merely exclude from consideration all variables they cannot control for.

The possibility that no one, even the god, can exclude all variables doesn’t mean nothing is deductible and nothing is meaningful.

Tell me, Panda, why must we exclude motivation from consideration?

1. define motivation (needless to add that you would insist taking consideration of all external variables when defining it, wouldn’t you? lol)

2.how do you know that motivation is not excluded from consideration?

The appearance of men like Confucius (who may or may not have been a Divinely-guided figure from our perspective) are black swan events that change the course of history for mankind. Adherence to his advice for running societies and putting the right kind of people in positions of authority to produce benefit for the people, could easily have been the catalyst for the results you see today that sets East Asia apart from the world.

But it seems that China has just been full of “black swans”, all the time, for 2,500 years, to not have ditched Confucius ideals, out of thousands others, but maintained them instead, whereas SS Afirca has not had a single “black swan”, in the contrary, to have built a single non-mud 2-story building with a balcony in the said period? Why is that?

Oh btw, perhaps you may want to have a word with AaronB on what are “black”and “swan” after all? He has a strong opinion about them.

Panda, in your zeal to win the approval of Westerners you neglect the rich and subtle thought of your ancestors.

Horse, in your zeal to win the approval of Panda you neglect the rich and subtle thought of your ancestors – don’t run on the wrong side of the river! lol

Why do some make an exception for IQ? The answer is clear – it is not science, but a political device our elites are quite happy to utilize.

But didn’t you say that “science” can’t be clearly defined, nor can “political device” and “elites”, let alone “happy”?

Who just stated “similarly with IQ, we can only observe it when it is conditioned by other factors, like motivation, mental state, physical conditions, etc.”?

So how do you know the “science” you referred to is true or false?
the “device” is a real thing?
Define “political”?
there are people who are “elites” and you’re not one of them when you’re sad instead of “happy”?
And what is “people”, btw?

and how to define “sad” as it is not “innate”, which of course is another “puzzle” altogether?
or can “puzzle” really be a form of “mental state”?
what is “mental state” anyway? …

yeah, now you are starting to get it?

or are you sure you are “you”?… lamo

“Innate ability” can never be observed, hence it cannot be measured. Science can observe, and measure, only “manifested ability”.
.

rofl

Then we don’t know the innate ability of water, ice, wood, oxygen, and {whatever elements and living organisms in nature you want to plug in here} , only know their manifested ability, right?

If you play this kind of words game, then the humans know nothing, and can not say anything, let alone formulating any natural law or theory, right?

In your logic, the very word “human” itself is in deep sh!t as well, as the innate ability of human ( “we can’t measure thus don’t know”as you stated) could actually be 100X lower than wild monkeys, which by definition makes you innately non-human, right?… is this what you try to argue?

IQ first of course, then culture.

Panda, for one, is a living proof!

Sorry but who could resist it? lol

Higher IQ people, on average, possess and exhibit more intellectual curiosity hence have stronger motivations to stick around a subject in hand, in order to satisfy the higher demand of stimulus of our larger and more efficient brains. This is pure physical.

Larger and more efficient brains in turn make it natural and easier to highly concentrate on a subject/an activity of interest for a sustained longer period of time, aka diligence.

Confucius ideals of s ceaseless self-cultivation, life-time motivation, and studious diligence, were born, and have been maintained as the core social values for millennia in China-centred East Asia instead of Sub-Sahara Africa for a reason, after all. Enlighten Panda what that reason might be?

Asian parents tend to believe more in nurture than in nature, or in other words, they value effort over ability .

Wrong.

East Asian parents tend to believe in nature the most, with nurture as an indispensable part to either compensate a little bit or safeguard the former.

The Chinese value the final ability the most regardless how one gets it.

Yet more often than not, the ones with high natural ability show even more personal efforts (e.g. motivation, diligence, etc) than the ones with low natural ability.

Towards someone who obviously lacks natural ability yet shows much personal efforts, however, the Chinese culture values and appreciates it over someone who has apparent high natural ability yet shows little efforts to better oneself . In this case, value something over another thing is entirely a different proposition from natural ability or the lackof. The Chinese indeed are valuing humbleness & diligence of the former over the underlying arrogance & laziness of the latter.

Fascinating? Now you compare those from say Budapest, Copenhagen, Genoa and Marseille, not only they speak different languages by all means, not even dialects for Maria’s sake, but even look differently. Still everyone considers himself European, or “White”. Errr…repellently enchanting, isn’t it?

The notion that “Han Chinese are formed by 2 quite distinct clusters of Northerners and Southerners” is lazily misleading hence largely wrong. What is “North” and what is defined as “South”?

Many good studies have strongly suggest that Han Chinese population is clearly characterized by a continuous genetic gradient along a north-south geographical axis, rather than a distinct clustering of “northern” and “southern” samples.

This quite fits with the fact of constant large waves of Han Chinese migrations towards the south and integrations among themselves in the last 2 millennia, so much so to such a degree that there’s no much difference among the average Northern” Han from north most point of Heilongjiang province today, “Southern” Han from Sichuan, and even more typical “Southern” Han from southern Hunan province where Chairman Mao came from. (for instance, does Mao look like a “Northern Han” or “Southern Han” to you ?)

Thus Han Chinese are indeed quite homogeneous in most Han heartlands except China’s far southern frontiers noticeably 3 regions – Guangxi province, Guangdong Province (mainly by Cantonese, Hakka, and Teochew people) and mountainous Fujian Province(mainly by Hakka people, etc).

Traditionally both Guangdong and Fujian are have been 2 single largest sources for perhaps over 95% of overseas Chinese populations around the world in SE Asia(inc. Singapore), North America and Europe, who have given the world the first, yet a bit misleading, impression that they are the average (Han) Chinese. Genetically they are defined as Han Chinese , yet the least typical.

So Duke and Qin is quite right. You are also right, if you define “Southerners” mainly as people speaking Cantonese, Hakka, and Teochew dialects originally from Guangxi, Guangdong and Fujian provinces (note that we’re talking about average here, so even in these 3 provinces, you still can easily find nowadays many very “Northern” Han – both genetically and by looking – since their forefathers just haven’t had enough time to intermingle with the average locals yet).

Panda just can’t believe so much BS here. Current artificial intelligence is primitive to say the best.

There are no rules in the real world where AI isn’t operating in, except the rule of self-seeking and maintaining energy sources in the most efficient way possible to eliminate the both ends of the extreme, which the current AI has absolutely no clue of.

Another proof that the Chinese are the God after all. With 1.4 billion, we do have our fair of share of stupidity.

It seems that Rushton in his late years(and/or Lynn? )has revised the avg of American Black IQ from 85 to 78, since they had overestimated the race-mixed portion.

Meso 85 vs Negroes 78 perhaps makes more sense from the way how they collectively build a society.

Haha, Fred Reed is, as always, fish-baiting:

there’s no stupid after all,

only stupider…

as this thread has shown thus far, and will show when afroarmy arrives. rofl

Several points from Panda:

1.

…Byron’s lament:

When one subtracts from life infancy (which is vegetation), sleep, eating and swilling, buttoning and unbuttoning – how much remains of downright existence? The summer of a dormouse.

Right, yet based on many downright assumptions. As sciences progress, many currently seemingly a total “waste of time” and “inactivities”of brains may be proven wrong. e.g. brains really “sleep” while doing nothing constructive?

2. A key aspect of the ultimate process of man vs machines (e.g. masters vs alphaGo) is the competition of energies, hence it is an one-sided unfair game to even start with.

Machines theoritically can use unlimited energy(imagine how further it can go if plug AlphaGo into the world’s #1 supercomputer in China?), and cost-free…

…whereas as a natural system human brain of a Go master commandd energies that are 1) limited, and 2) cost dearly

It’s like putting a v12, or V-whatever-unlimited, engine hoursepower Ferrari and a 1.15 litre 60 hp Renault Twingo on a race track, a very fair comparison?

3. Machines such as AlphaGo, or any man-made machine, can not be truly called intelligent if you look from the angle of the rules of the system. Machine programming requires many rules and boundaries set by the human programmers as we all know. So from this angle, ultimately it will still be a comparablely dumb machine if it can not automatically ignore programming boundaries set by humans.

However, if, for whatever purposes, machines themselves eventually jumping beyond the pre-fixed programming boundaries becomes a fact (including self-seeking energy sources for survival – pretty hauting huh? but crucial! ),

then 2 things happen: 1) machines can then be truly called intelligent (in the sense as intelligent humans) , and 2) being a comparablely redundent species humans will loss our evolutionary edge and cease to exist, or at best at mercy of these machines…

…this 2), on the other hand, seems to be a quite unique phenominon in its own right, and against nature by default, doesn’t it? hence Panda doubts it could and will happen. Does nature have any precedence where one species deliberatedly set up another species to eliminate themsevels just for the purpose of , errr… self-entertainment? So it most likely won’t happen. If that were the case, then for one reason or another, humans will not allow machines to make this decision in the first place by setting the boundaries, which by definition means that these machines will never achieve the human-like intelligence after all, won’t they?

4. Take Go as an example, under its game rules, it largely tests memory (quantity , accuracy, etc) and calculations (logic, speed, etc). Of course humans gonna loss against AlphaGo eventually (if the programming are decently done), as we fought that out at the dawn of the first computer decades ago. Now here is the gist, if this win proves something intelligent, as people are all talking about, then prehaps we’ll have to be forced to take a more serious look at the current contents of IQ test, because AlphaGo’s win represents an obvious logical dilemma here:

Can a less intelligent (proved by IQ test, and Go) being such as humans design to make a more intelligent (proved by Go, and hence most likely IQ test) being such as AlphaGo? In other words, can ants design to make humans? If this is not a logical case, then current IQ test must have missed something, as Panda suspects long ago, something that won’t affect too much the general of the IQ findings(becasue those finding are statistically significant) but still crucial, something that goes beyond the parts of both verbal IQ and spatial IQ!

#13th got to be “Sweet & Sour Orion Penis with two StarEggs”

You’re way too pessimistic. American avg living standard is still very high and you don’t realise it: even for the average masses, you have very cheap daily expenses ( food, clothes, etc) + clean air + generous avg household living space… in comparison ,for instance, to the the East Asia(let alone others):
do you know how hard and how long hours average East Asian people work everyday in thier entire life in order to afford a tiny living space, a space their American counterparts would consider a basement corner where they put their suitcases & an old bike from childhood ? A blue collar American worker who got C or less in entire his school years spending much of his time partying enjoying life would earn, quite easily, about the same as an East Asian white collar, who studied so hard & got A in his school years going to a top East Asian university working & saving like no tomorrow every day. Do you think it’s fair? Do you know that in Japan, for instance, even simple fruits like watermelon are so expansive that are sold mostly in carefully-cut small pieces so that avg people could afford, whereas in the US people buy those for dogs?… What causes such differences?

As Panda mentioned previously, the problem of the US is not wealth, but the way to use it, and fairness of the distribution of it. US elites, as the richest group in entire human history, have been squandering unimaginable wealth for decades when the US was the sole superpower. You just can’t blame others for your own mistakes. Let’s be honest, US wars are not for charity purpose so that China or others could take a free ride, but for world-domination – pure sporting urge for power – due to their obvious nature in controlling even more natural resources and questing insatiable geopolitical & economical advantages. Both US elites and the mass profit from them directly or indirectly: e.g.

well-oiled trillion dollar defence sector + the freedom of printing wealth 24*7 for luxurious public spending that others can only dream of or have to work extremely hard for. For starters, these are all the benefits for being #1 setting petrodollar system… heck, just imagine what kind of natural advantages and (potential)wealth of even a disadvantaged American of 80IQ with barely any education would have vís-a-vís an 105IQ study-hard work-hard middleclass East Asian? At least the former could teach English aboard in a kindergarden, as many are doing, easily earning the same as the latter, if not more, while sporting much better and relaxed lifestyle. That could be the economic bottom line for the entire far left end of US IQ curve, a pure luxury compared to the rest of world, isn’t it? Why? It’s the #1 position that sets English as the langua franca of the business that the world at large ought to spend a wealth to learn. And you’re still complaining…

wow, classy!

Yet you’re premitted by Panda to cry your grey matter out.

Panda doesn’t know if the IQ level…errr… to understand that there’s no such a thing as perfect market info and flow.

Perhaps what’s s even more funny is that the prosperity happens when government is restrained, yes, restrained, restrained, restrained, not eliminated, superman.

Panda isn’t arguing for or against the article, but only on politically-charged words such as “central planning”.

I don’t think the US is keeping anybody down in terms of living standards,

Hehe, really? Perhaps you should revisit some geopolitics textbooks.

A few Switzerlands, Singapores, UAEs here and there don’t matter two hoots to the American elites obviously. The keywords are “major economy”, since those are the ones could have, in the own words of every US presidents & senators, “threaten our way of life” (aka petrodollar system).

Has it ever occurred to you that world’s #2 economy, no matter which colour that is,
somehow has always been threatening “American way of life”, and through “unfair means”, and “steal American technologies day and night” of course, not to mention that their currencies were/are “manipulated” and all that crap…

Japan? Why not read up “Plaza Accord”?

Muddled up crap? brilliant! now kindly allow Panda turn on the fan:

Congrats, you got it well that the human brain is about the equivalent to the central planning organ of a state in the analogy. Certain degrees of central planning at any time is critical for healthy development and survival both as a state and as an individual.

Sorry, but Panda doesn’t have such romantic imagination, perhaps as you do, that earlier hunter gatherers left themselves to the “market force”, or Trump got Melania through “invisible hand”, ok, afterwards perhaps, not before.

FYI, Panda coined “voodoo economy” to both extremes of the curve obviously: tendency towards , 100% market economy (which only exists in the la-la land) and 100% central planning(which Mao & the Soviet found out in the hard way).

Are you 85 IQer, or American economy is 85 IQ? Do not try to argue for it if you’re not.

…At night, Chinese would transfer knowledge from Western factories to copy cat Chinese factories…

hahaha…thanks for the chuckle!

The evil Chinese must have done that at night in full acknowledgement that they’re dealing with a bunch of big nose retards, right?

China’s current “Central Planning” is not a-la-Marxism/Soviet.

Indeed being the primary function of brains, Central Planning literally has been working in the entire evolutiuonary history of mankind. Everyone uses it in fact. Whenever the West uses it though, MSM would prefer phrasing it like “long-term strategic planning”, what a beauty!

On the contrary, so-called leaving it to the “market force”, or more voodoo style “invisible hand”, sounds a bit funny from time to time, yet enough to get through those 85 IQers nonetheless.

It’s not a question that whether Japan’s average living standard could match that of the US.

The problem of the US is not the wealth (as it still can print all the wealth it wants), but fairness of the redistribution of that wealth.

The world’s IQ =86 sounds fair enough:

for instance, in the almost absence of 1.6b East Asian, 0.6b SE Asians and another 1.6b Middle Easterner+South Asian commenters, this comment section, as the numbers grow, generally reflects the average of about 1.6b 100 IQ Euros + 1.6b 75 IQ Afros worldwide, errrr… about 86 isn’t it?

Sorry, bad article. Bad comment. Economically illiterate. As was the case in the halcyon days of Japan’s rapid economic growth, China’s growth reflects a high-IQ people operating in now semi-open markets who are quickly adopting technologies that were already developed elsewhere (and, granted, have done some innovation on their own)..

Agreed. But Japan’s success has a limit capped by its owner – the US; whereas theoritically speaking China’s has no such a limit , because as a historical statue-quo power China can operate, and have been operating, both inside and outside of the current US global system. That’s why most US political elites are panicking.

China’s average living standards are still below Mexico’s.

FX rate derived- so called “living standard” of non-traditionally industrialised western countries reflects the power of greatly maneuverable mainstream narrative, sometimes to the degree of being funny, of petrodollar system guaranteed by aircraft carriers and ICBMs.

Anyone who has been to China and Mexico, for instance, can testify how absurd that “living standard” is per face value.

Japan’s average living standards never matched those in the US. .

In fact countries like Japan will NEVER match the living standard of the US. It has nothing to do with intelligence, innovations, organisations, etc, but because

1/Like all other major Western economies, Japan basically is a client state (albeit in the higher rank of the pecking order whenever US national interests are called upon) in the US-led petrodollar system backed eventually by a giant barrel of nukes that simply won’t allow it happen that clients live better than their owner, and

2/Japan’s natural resources per cap is vastly less than that of the US. Nothing can change that except major redistributions of natural resources through large scale wars which are impossible in the era of nukes.

– https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/09/05/worldwide-iq-estimates-based-on-education-data/

One of countless proofs of the epic mental retardation of the Afroerectus. Thanks for the laugh!

There’re some severely misleading results on those govt stats to the degree of being retarded. ROFL

What is (A* to C) standard? LOL

Though having some degrees of correlations with standalone A*, A, B and C, (A* to C) is deliberately blurring the boundaries, meaning, for instance, that 8 A* + 2 C have the same achivement as 2 A* and 8 C. WTF?!

If that were the standard used in the Olympics selection, elite sprinting countries such as Jamaica could be outshone easily by population-wise larger country such as North Korea or Thailand, or even population-wise much smaller countries such as Estonia or Andorra, since the equivalent (A* to C) would be % of all who can (run 100m between 9.7 sec to 15 sec). LMAO

I don’t know about IQ, I don’t think it’s relevant, IQ is not a thing in the real world. But there clearly are economically and educationally successful subsaharan subpopulations.

Translation: I don’t know about what is smart and what is stupid, I don’t think they’re relevant, Being smart or stupid is not a thing in the real world. But there clearly are smart subsaharan subpopulations.

Welcome to Planet of the Apes 2.0

Of course you will not. ROFL! that was an order, not a debate, which is only appropriate among you Brazilian hasbaras.

“China…No have freedom of speech and standard living is considerably lower than in the west as well quality of life.”

Do not try to trash talk something you absolutely have no clue of.

watch:

“Asian” Americans include Filipinos, who are the 2nd largest group of “Asian” Americans, most of them being non-ethnic Chinese. The average IQ of Philippine is 86. So the average “Asian” income you cited has been watered down a lot.

ROFL! Good response! … didn’t read your other related posts on this thus lazily took you as a rookie, Panda’s bad.

So if we assume you’re right that “different batteries of tests produce different g’s that not necessarily correlate well with each other” for some reason, what’s the point you try to make from there?

@ James Thompson

Is the Mean Annual Temp (MAT) graph in the OP from today’s world?

Do you have eastimated MAT info for at least 5,000 years ago?

Hey, you sir! How dare you use facts and logic ?

Let alone BLM, do you genuinely comprehend the degree of psychological trauma you’ve just caused by playing piano to a wood log?

@ James Thompson

“Cold winter-harder long term planning” aside, is there any study done on absolute tempreture effect to effectiveness of a functional brain as an biological organ in the field of Medicine, professor?

OF course to use g as a sort of be-all-end-all thing is incomplete, Panda would not say it’s “fraudulent argument” though.

Furthermore, kinda of universial “g” does somehow exist just by common intuition, doesn’t it? If it’s not called g for the moment, it would be called “x” or “y” or “z” in the future as sciences progress.

Most importantly, the current g in most common arguments is not the g itself, rather, it’s g’s 2 layers of underlying meanings that embody:

1/ thus far the best common correlation power with all other measures, and

2/ thus far the best common predictive power.

in short, g is prediction.

@ Daniel Chieh

LOL! Don’t you think it’s such a waste of your time, despite perhaps some wicked faint pleasure of entertainment, to engage into an argument with some primitive axe-grinding sapiens here when things called logic and fact don’t usually register in their small brains, which, evolutionarily speaking, seem only to have just reached the level of being capable of filling discussion threads with endless pages of nonsense?

It’s so nice for Panda to see that the thread here has quickly turned into an exuberantly lengthy should-rubbing party of HBD-deniers, errrr… give Panda a ring when the after-party of Afro IQ Supremacy starts, will you people? lol