The pass has been sold. It’s all over. I hope my grandchildren grow up somewhere else. If ever I have grandchildren.

But where?

I had not realized Pakistanis did so much worse than Indians in the UK. Is that the result of differing immigration selectivity or is something else going on?

One oddity is that in the final Table 4 CAT results Carribean Blacks slightly outperform African Blacks (except for -0.2 lower quantitative), but in your first table of maths results the relationship is reversed and larger.

“I had not realized Pakistanis did so much worse than Indians in the UK. Is that the result of differing immigration selectivity or is something else going on?”

Likely related to the fact that the former, while representing ~3% of the UK population, account for ~30% of the annual reported congenital birth defects in the UK. There are … cultural causes of this biological effect. Look it up.

Good point. I was aware of the cultural practices (though I failed to think of that as an explanation), but not the shocking numbers you gave.

For anyone else who wants to follow up, this article mentions those same numbers: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/children/11723308/First-cousin-marriages-in-Pakistani-communities-leading-to-appalling-disabilities-among-children.html

Do you think less selective immigration for Pakistanis is also in play or is it all down to culture?

Of course there is a valid explanation. Lynn’s data on British Indian IQ is full of shit.

“UK Government: Race Differences in Achievement Must be Explained”

That’s easy: Some races are a lot stupider than others.

I don’t. But British Indian’s have slightly higher median income than white British. It is hard to believe their IQ is 92 as claimed by Lynn.

Thanks for linking back to that. I was surprised by how much even the second cousin case was depressed. Second cousins have an F (coefficient of inbreeding) of 0.0156 per the paper. Why is that F half the size of the coefficient of relationship (r) discussed here? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_relationship#Human_relationships
I am trying to understand how such a seemingly small amount of inbreeding can result in an ~0.5SD decline in IQ given the degree of relatedness already present in the overall population.
Based on that wiki fourth cousins have an r of 0.2% (second cousins 3.13%) with r decreasing by a factor of 4 with every additional “level” of cousin. So if the population relatedness is ~seventh cousin then r is 0.003% which is 1/1000 the second cousin case. That helps put the second cousin case in perspective.

Are similar effects seen in other characteristics (e.g. height)?

I would be interested in a more formal explanation by someone more knowledgeable in population genetics, but I guess the above will suffice for my intuition. Some links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_index#FST_in_humans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-statistics#Definitions_and_equations

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5560808/

My first thought from your inbreeding post/paper was whether there was an artifact from lower IQ people being more likely to inbreed, but the figure 3 results stratified by SES make me think that effect is not important.

There is an interesting outlier in figure 6. A double first cousin case with an IQ of ~120 where the rest are all under 80. Speaks to your response to a commenter in the earlier thread.

P.S. For others, the paper has a number of more detailed figures. Worth checking out IMHO.

Not mentioned importance of location.

Majority of Pakistanis settled in rust belt of UK-but came when manufacturing had not started its decline. Those whose parents settled in London area did well, including current mayor of London (whose father was a bus driver-and two other bus drivers’ children-one who has held several cabinet positions-but is Communities Secretary currently, and another former head of Tory party).

Bangladeshis mostly from Sylhet , so even though based mostly in London area they have less capacity.
Most Pakistanis are from Mirpur-and came to UK to work in manufacturing after being displaced at home by dams.

Most Pakistanis own their homes;but Bangladeshis live in govt housing.

Also, in US 55% of Pakistani Americans have an undergraduate or masters degree. BIG difference from UK! So it appears that where Pakistanis are from and where they settle makes a big difference.

I think in all countries, politicians just feel that it is pointless to say that racial differences in academic performance are related to genetic differences. It is a bit like when you are teaching CPR, you stress the factors that cause heart disease that can be changed by lifestyle more than the factors that cannot be changed.

Everyone actually knows that some racial groups have the short straw in suitability for higher education, but if you want their votes, you probably don’t want to make that much of a big thing of it, and it is better to think of ways to eliminate inequalities that can be changed, rather than to dwell on those that cannot.

If a group starts to think of itself as ineducable, then that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, as has happened with many African-Americans in the US, and success in school may be equated with not being authentically blackity black in the local (neighbor)hood.

“Undergraduate or masters” degrees in what?

Politicians don’t care a lot about votes. Conservative immigration policies go down well with most voters. Politicians (or rather political parties) care more about donors. This is why the Tories and Republicans are pro-immigration – wealthy immigrants and businessmen bribe the political parties into supporting more immigration.

Urban minorities usually end up voting for left-wing parties, yet because some white property developers and rich Chinese and Indian businessmen like to donate to both parties, the centre-right parties support Asian immigration.

Democracy will always fail us… Democracy will always result in popular opinions instead of cold reality. we do not see immigrants accepted into to China, Japan, Russia, at nearly the rates of the Western world. We will soon be outdone. We will be overrun. These people are parasites plain and simple. It’s not hate, it’s just the truth. They offer nothing but violence at their worst and their sassy attitude at best.

Britain’s industrial rustbelt was in terminal decline 50 years ago. The vast majority of the UK’s Pakistani population arrived long after any – claimed – need for them on the shop floors of the North. In fact taxi driving is a very important employer, to such an extent central government ordered local authorities to relax licensing conditions in order to soak up unemployment amongst Pakistani males.

I do not know the why.
I did travel in India, Pakistan, Turkey, Syria and Morocco.
It is long ago, so I do not know if my observations then still apply.
But when one sees that a university graduate is unable to put the nuts on the bolts of a car wheel, one realizes that there is a big difference.
Discovery has a program How It is Made, any time I see it I’m amazed at the knowledge we have.
The last time I was in Turkey I rented a car made in Turkey, it was in fact a Fiat 131, rigid rear axle, dangerous on the bad roads.
I knew the dangers of this suspension, yet on one occasion the whole rear axle went into the air, and the car wanted to go off the road.
What we see in the Netherlands with immigrants that they occupy themselves with small businesses.
Or in simple labour.
Those who conclude an academic education do little else than complain about discrimination.
Racist as I am, what I see that most of them never should have got a degree.

The race differences happened because the mass-immigration of people incompatible with British culture was allowed.

The cult of equality. Sitting there surrounded by immigrants she is unlikely to arrive at any conclusion remotely reflecting the truth. That allowing mass-immigration was a huge mistake and that the immigrants have themselves to blame for their poor performance and lack of integration.

The educational standards in America are lower.

Britain is actually a land of equal opportunity. The immigrants have only themselves to blame. It is not racist but fact to point out IQ differences between the different races, they do exist, and Africa comes out low.

I find the gap of only 5-6 IQ between British whites and Caribbeans/Africans(as well as Pakistanis/Bangladeshis to a slightly lesser extent), as shown in the Quantitive and Non-Verbal sections of that CAT study, highly highly unlikely and impractical, atleast at adulthood. The UK would have to be the sole outlier in the world. The only other possibility is Australia, from which I haven’t seen any data from, but the academic results from another Anglosphere country like Canada, and of course the rest of Europe, are closer to the US black-white gap of 15, if not further in a country like Sweden/Belgium where a large portion of the black population are straight up refugees.

This blog analyzed more academic data from Britain, nearly all adulthood data, all rather recent, and the gaps are much closer to what we’d expect: https://web.archive.org/web/20140903221626/http://occidentalascent.wordpress.com/2012/02/07/partially-falsified/ , most showing around 9-10 between South Asians and British Whites, as well as 10-15 between Blacks and British Whites. Other IQ studies of ethnic groups in Britain also give a gap closer to the American one, albeit they’re rather old.

The black-white PISA gap on math in the UK is around 493-500 white to 460s black, depending on the year, and around 510 to 470s for science/reading, not sure how that converts to IQ. I’d probably trust that number more than GSCEs or any study done by actual British.

I know the Anglosphere countries are known for having more sane immigration policies than their other European counterparts, but looking at some black, Bangladeshi, Pakistani communities in the UK, along with poverty rates and incomes, to me it doesn’t real scream out highly selected immigrants.

The Indian data, while not as surprising due to other examples and a large base population pool of 1.4 billion people around the world, still surprises me. Are they really that selected of a group like Indians in the US? Pretty sure at one point the UK let all the Indian colonials living in Uganda in the 60s-70s to move to Britain, again, doesn’t really scream out immigrants selected for education to me.

Everyone actually knows that some racial groups have the short straw in suitability for higher education

That’s untrue. Many people who grew up being fed anti-racist propaganda their whole lives believe all or most of it, regardless of experience.

One of the possible explanations for the high number of congenital birth defects amongst Pakistanis which rarely, if ever, gets a mention is the very low Vitamin D levels in Pakistani women. The enforcement of “modest” clothing for Muslim women ensures that there is virtually no skin exposed to sunlight…hence the vitamin D deficiency.

This is a serious public health problem which should be addressed.

You are comparing some thousand Indian previously self selected people living in Britain versus 1,1 billion people.
Indeed Indians is a politically construct. RF

Equality is not the guilty, it’s a victim too because this people or don’t understand what this word really mean in real world context or many/most of them are deliberately malignant.

Most Europeans don’t want mass immigration and most Europeans don’t what (((really is going on))). It’s not democracy when people is not heard.

Russia is a third world country with rampant std incidence, social inequality, corruption and yes, immigration: 20 million people specially from ex-soviet republics, namely Muslim-majority ones.

China is a combination between the worst aspects of capitalism with the worst aspects of communism. People has been sacrificed to enrich their rulling-cunning elites, something that is totally unnecessary. No have freedom of speech and standard living is considerably lower than in the west as well quality of life.

Japan?? The next stage of (((globalism))) is to invite east Asian countries to enjoy the wonders of the multicultural country (((non monolithic mode))).

Also we need analyze who are the people more prone to

Cousin marriage
Hardcore cousin marriage

Maybe we also can have a cognitive confound here, poor/poorest people who live in isolated/rural places are more prone to engage in hardcore cousin marriage at least in this places.

It’s can be a result of endogamic depression. We need analyze too if this endogamic depression is stable since a long time suggesting a kind of adaptation on this practices.

What exactly is the author trying to say?

My experience of young people is that they accept the idea that everyone should be treated equally regardless of ethnicity but they do perceive that cultural behaviours are different in different cultures. The problem is that the part of their brain that links perceived ethnicity with perceived behaviour has been neutralised so they cannot perceive behaviour as genetic. And thus will the future be a ghastly remake of the last two thousand years until someone has again the bright idea to abandon cousins for civic duty.

It is over but here’s hoping you have grandchildren. Let’s go down with a fight! (Cheers)

This is what you get from marrying your cousin, or not knowing who your daddy is and end up unwittingly having children with a close kin, maybe even your own daddy.

Since culture is a lot harder to fix, try the easier solution and cull the outliers, that means expelling all those at the top and bottom, the Chinese and the Roma gypsies both have to go, then the curve will flatten out and equality will be achieved, world peace will be restored.

The real story here is that British whites score almost on par with blacks, despite having much higher IQ from the CAT scores. What explains the underachievement of this group? Racism against whites? Or do the smart British whites simply attend private schools? At least that seems to be the excuse being passed around.

I’d love to see the IQ of the Royal family, and perhaps all the Eton and Harrow attendees, there may be some other kind of inbreeding going on among the British upper class.

I find the gap of only 5-6 IQ between British whites and Caribbeans/Africans(as well as Pakistanis/Bangladeshis to a slightly lesser extent), as shown in the Quantitive and Non-Verbal sections of that CAT study, highly highly unlikely and impractical, atleast at adulthood.

As far as I could see from the data, this data set only applied to children in so-called state schools (government schools in US terminology) and did not include children in private, fee-paying schools, which would include a disproportionate number of white children and a disproportionate number of the children with the highest academic ability. So that might account for the discrepancy, or part of it.

I am talking about politicians and people who study educational policy making. What do you think would be the effect of leading politicians publicly saying “this data clearly shows that gypsies are the thickest group of people in the whole country.”

My Mother said, I never should
Play with the gypsies in the wood.
If I did, she would say;
‘Naughty girl to disobey!

Your hair shan’t curl and your shoes shan’t shine,
You gypsy girl, you shan’t be mine!
And my father said that if I did,
He’d rap my head with the teapot lid.

Many people feel that something’s going wrong with the society they live but they can’t become consistently aware.

Mostly sciences, engineering, and medicine.

If youre in a mixed or liberal area move to a white conservative area and literally get ready for war it may not come in your lifetime sadly it may not even come but if it does you and your children need to be prepared, the idaho montana even maine vermont and many other less beautiful places need conservative whites to counter the governments effort to brown these places with refugees ans the liberals that flee the messes they created

Proof?

Nope.

Speaking of inbreeding:

Mainly vIctimology and other such rubbish, I would guessing.

Nice to seeing you straying outside your usual pattern.

With the English population, you have the Chavs, essentially English version of wiggers, only worse, they are as devoted to sucking on the tits of the state as the other groups.

A native English-speaking friend was to visiting 15 or so years ago, working as a teacher in London for six months, it was so ugly, things thrown, refusal to listen, he was broken.

Brexit or not, England and Scotland are fucked in the long term.

SNP, what a joke. ”National’, please to pulling the other one.

From Stockholm to Oslo to Copenhagen to most cities in Germany, to Amsterdam and Rotterdam, to Paris, Marseilles, Lyon, to most of Italy, Madrid, etc., would never wanting to visit now.

I wish I had visited western Europe, say before the end of the Cold War, although, as stating in an earlier post, a colleague was to visiting Portugal, she was saying the only problem was Roma pickpockets and beggars, and she and her husband were to taking adequate precautions against the former. To ignoring the latter was easy.

Words cannot describe how truly loathsome Theresa May is, even by liberal standards.

Nailed it.

UK Government: Race Differences in Achievement Must be Explained

Yeah, how come blacks are achieving more in sports in and in colonizing the wombs of other races?

Why are white wombs being colonized by African seeds?

How come black males are over-achieving in beating up white males?

We need an explanation, damn it.

This is next to the markers, the scope of the article.

But then, is above group measuring in any way of importance? Where society, a sophisticated one, should step in is fishing the uppermost talented, at the youngest age possible. A qualitative society, eugenic breeding and genetics, needs before anything else an elite in any field, not just or even “milionaires”, “high-income”. The way economics and war measure “succes” and “talent” is a brute force one, and has been hijacked by an elite not up to par.

Too much may-be, but(again), it is hard to contest that high-talent tasks, and the few, are the ones that make a difference, bulk paints the canvas. Now since human blobs, contrairy to computers (the internet, serially connected processors on and of the motherboard), are not easily chained, macons may multiply outcome by augmenting the participating numbers of workers, but high-level tasks are single individual jobs, and need other high-talented individuals to understand and use the acquired building blocks.

Convention has it wrong, in using education systems to fish out the lucky few that can make a difference, eugenics in breeding and genetic analysis and manipulation, universities that fall back on raw judgement of talent, at the price of being not understood, should be taken for granted.

Even nano technology, and building machine logic interference into and useable by a human brain stands a better chance of stepping up cognitive power of modern societies. All in all, it must be that the advancement of man, should go through this phase of deconstructing radically our concepts of what is progress and where progress is to be made, what lays at the basis of progress.

Qualitative society is not something bigger numbers, of anything, but better brain individuals can achieve, convention, education, war, economics, politics, sociology are stone age tools in achieving a new level op “prosperity”, starting by defining it.

To say it mildly, our elites are not up to par, never were, and will hold us back as a species, to outright destruction. Focus, ignore the few points of ignorance between groups could be of essence.

British whites do not score almost on par with blacks. An A-C grade level range(C only supposedly the lowest mark whilist still being a pass) is awfully broad, and as the author of this article pointed out, British whites get a little over double As that of African blacks and a little over triple Caribbean blacks. I don’t really know anything about GSCEs but if the suggestion is that C is solely a passing grade then it really doesn’t mean much. I also wouldn’t call private schools an excuse, but I would want data of whites actually being over represented in them and private schools making up a decent sized portion of the overall student population before making that argument.

The British white-black gap is also attested with international PISA scores.

Good point, I didn’t think of that. I have heard it’s quite common to send people to private schools in Britain, similarly to the US and Canada, as opposed to countries like Sweden or Germany where they’re almost non-existent and the only option is a public school.

The pass has been sold. It’s all over. I hope my grandchildren grow up somewhere else.

One of Canada’s first nations leaders remarked a while ago: “We should have killed them all when they first arrived.”

That may not have been a realistic possibility. Still the sentiment was wise. Those who won’t fight for their country won’t have a country or any posterity. And indeed there is no need even to fight the immigrants, merely the dopes and traitors, the Thereason Mays, the Corbyns and Blairs, the Heaths, and all the rest, including, at the price of being labelled by James Thompson a conspiracy theorist, the controlled opposition, the Nick Griffins, the Tommy Robinsons, and the Nigel Farages.

Some races are a lot stupider than others.

They just have more children than the white British, which proves that bollocks baffle brains.

We will be overrun.

Have been mate:

RIP this Britain: With academic objectivity, Oxford Professor and population expert DAVID COLEMAN says white Britons could be in the minority by the 2060s – or sooner

And that was the objective.

No good railing against the immigrants. They’re just doing what every living creature does, doing for themselves the best that they can. The real enemy is not the immigrant, it is the traitors in the pay of the globalist Money Power. Your only means of revenge is via the cradle.

There you are, James, more conspiracy theory for you, as originally set forth by non other than Bill Clintons’s revered Georgetown University history mentor, Carrol Quigley. If people wish to understand the conspiracy by which they are being manipulated, they would do well to read Quigley’s works, which though for many decades suppressed, are now readily available on Amazon.com, etc., presumably because the globalist elite consider it to be game over.

He pulled that out of his ass. I haven’t seen any direct numbers on education achievement of Pakistanis in the US, but given all together Asian Americans(which of course includes Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, etc which theoretically should have higher rates than Pakistanis) have a 53.9% rate of having Bachelor’s degrees or higher, and 21.4% having advanced degrees(https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p20-578.pdf)

Another figure making his claims highly unlikely is Pakistani Americans have an average income(not household income, which isn’t as good an indicator of success because of differing household sizes and divorce rates among ethnic groups) of $26,739, compared to an average Asian income of $34,399, an average white income of $32,910, with various European ethnicities going over 40k(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_per_capita_income)

Add on that Pakistanis are mostly concentrated in the largest metropolitan areas of the US where people get payed more for the same jobs as rural areas because of higher costs of everything, the numbers become more dismal for Pakistani Americans.

Reminds me of the “higher educated than white American Nigerian immigrant” myth, when the average Nigerian income is similarly only around 26k.

Most Europeans don’t want mass immigration and most Europeans don’t what (((really is going on))). It’s not democracy when people is not heard.

Correct.

Opinion polls in Britain for many years have shown 70-plus% opposition to mass immigration. Even many immigrants oppose mass immigration. So, no, Britain is not a democracy. What is called democracy is a system of bullshit and distraction under which traitors in office do as the Money Power that owns them demands, while the media fabricate the propaganda to persuade the masses that they’re getting what they asked for.

Here you are: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/indian-immigrants-united-states#Age_Education_Employment

idaho montana even maine vermont and many other less beautiful places need conservative whites to counter the governments effort to brown these places with refugees

Same in Britain.

Institutions like the university in my home town of Exeter, all white when I read there in the library during school vacations back in the 50′s and eary 60′s, is now deemed too white.

Whiteness is to be exterminated.

Innocents like James see such thoughts as loonie conspiracy theories. I guess that’s what university psychology professors are employed to “prove.” But the globalist goal is clearly to destroy the nation state. How else institute global governance?

So how to destroy the nation state?

Simple: destroy the nations, particularly the powerful nations of Europe.

And how to destroy the nations?

Easy: genocide by suppressed reproduction, aka sex “education” that teaches that reproduction is the only sexual perversion, combined with mass immigration.

As for the IQ of the immigrants: who gives a damn? In what way could it possibly matter to the globalist elite who actually dictate your fate?

Why are white wombs being colonized by African seeds?

Because whites are stupid, obviously.

Or more exactly, because whites have been brainwashed into a state or paralysis that closely resembles stupidity, and appears to amount to a state of terminal helplessness.

The European nations are being genocided, and folks stand idly by discoursing on trivial differences in mean academic achievement among the occupying races.

It would be funny if genocide were not such a dirty business.

death by gullibility

“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.

“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:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jLXBCwn-IE

Re:

death by gullibility

“Naturally, the common people don’t want [war] to be victims of genocide*; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship…

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is … denounce the [pacifists] patriots for [lack of patriotism] their racism…. It works the same way in any country.”

Herman Goering, at his trial at Nuremberg.

———
* Italicized text substituted for original text in square brackets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAV0bFNjXwo

> 2030: Sharia Europe implemented. A lot of intersectional shutting-up occurs. Liberals aghast. Female liberation movement declares victory, then is no longer allowed to leave home.
> 2040: Black Africans shoaed by Caliph’s decree. A short smoking of stacks occur, then further immigration is disallowed. Trans-Saharan voyages are rendered difficult as large regions are sterilized by lacing them with radiocobalt 60. Liberals even more aghast.
> 2042: Liberals gassed.
> 2045: Society breaks down as knowledge to run the machines is either lost or becomes inaccessible. Some leftover AIs try to keep things running, then give up.
> 2050: In a reverse Operation Dandelion, China depopulates Europe by using a flesh-eating nanomachine. Europe becomes an archeological paradise and sought-after holiday resort for Asian glitterati. “Kraft durch Freude” socialistic holiday programme is resurrected, only in another language.

THE END!

Except there’s nothing about actual degrees earned in what.

Fail.

Keep at it.

The British are not using their brains by letting in third worlders.

I chime in my two cents.

I’d like to have the narrative in the future from the Chinese perspective, instead of “Euro-centric” perspective.

1. I want to label Chinese IQ as normal, not “high” IQ. In this case, all other races IQ will become subpar IQ, depending on where you look at it.

“High” IQ is not a compliment, it has a subliminal message that White IQ are normal whereas the rest of the IQ are categorized as necessary.

2. Slanted eyes are not abnormal. If it’s assumed “normal”, White people eyes will be stereotyped as “Beady” eyes or “Gouged” eyes.

Now we all can make stereotypes and bash one another.

The bottom line is, he who has the narrative, wins the argument.

Government interventions are going to have to be early, very early. By 21 weeks differences in head circumference are apparent. Not 21 weeks of life, 21 weeks of gestation.

Ha! The conclusive proof of racial differences in intelligence, a difference in head circumference.

LOL

Did Einstein have a big head? Um, well probably not. On autopsy, his brain was found to weigh no more than average for a man of his build.

Then there was Carl Gauss, his brain on autopsy was also found to be quite normal in size too. So normal, in fact, that some geniuses began to wonder whether Gauss was perhaps not the genius everyone had supposed — as if some nincompoop with a tape measure determining the circumference of someone’s head can make a better assessment of that person’s mathematical talent than all the math professors in the world.

And is there any real evidence evidence of racial differences in brain mass? Here’s what one anthropologist had to say:

A critical review is given of those factors which may be accompanied by variations in brain weight, viz. sex, body size, age of death, nutritional state in early life, source of the sample, occupational group, cause of death, lapse of time after death, temperature after death, anatomical level of severance, presence or absence of cerebrospinal fluid, of meninges, and of blood-vessels. Valid comparisons between the brain-weight of human populations should take all, or several, of these variables into account; however, published studies have not done so, despite claims to the contrary. The ideal sample is from subjects who have died suddenly without prior disease: while three such samples are on record for Europeans, none has been recorded for Negroes. The brain-weight of healthy Negroes is not known. Most published interracial comparisons are invalid. The histological, chemical and functional counterparts of big and small brains in modern man are not known. Published interracial comparisons of thickness of the cerebral cortex and, particularly, of its supragranular layer, are technically invalid: there is no acceptable proof that the cortex of Negroes is thinner in whole, or in any layer, than that of Europeans. It is concluded that vast claims have been based on insubstantial evidence.

Has anything changed since Tobias wrote that in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology?

The British are not using their brains by letting in third worlders.

But they’re not letting in Third Worlders, or First Worlders for that matter. Its the treasonous scum in Parliament justified by the propagandists at the BBC and the rest of the media, who are letting them in. Not because its good for the British, but because it will destroy them as a racial and cultural entity: a genocide undertaken in the interests of the globalist elite, AKA, the Money Power.

This data destroys a fair amount of the IQ fetishism of WNs (except regarding blacks, where it is in fact true).

Pakistanis are considerably more Caucasoid than Indians, yet Indians outperform them in the UK, the US, etc.

So Islam was obviously the biggest factor here, and supercedes genetics as a factor (otherwise Pakistan would be to India what Spain is to Mexico, in terms of economic performance).

On IQ, there is a higher likelihood of inbreeding among those who adhere to a strong Islamic culture, which is probable among Pakistani immigrants. On culture, in America at least, it’s generally observed that 2nd-generation Hindu Indians assimilate and integrate unproblematically; this may have to do with greater Aryan heritage and/or the relatively liberal, pluralistic Hindu cultural attitudes. I have had a number of Hindu male friends in the U.S. who speak in an absolutely fluent surfer-dude or stoner-dude American tongue.

What would be the point of finding those data for you? You’ll just dismiss any evidence that proves you wrong.

A WN retard like Wally never gets out of his mother’s basement. Everyone (even people who hate Indians) know that Indians almost exclusively pursue medicine, engineering, or finance as professions. Whatever their other flaws, this fact about Indians living in the West is not in dispute.

Wally can’t even write a comment more than one line, because his IQ is too low. He reminds us that White Trashionalists have Negro IQs.

IOW, as I demonstrated, you can’t find data to support your false & very stupid argument. LOL

I win again.

Re. the events in 2042: what kind of gas do you suppose they’ll use?

Also, many Pakistanis were recruited from narrow areas in Pakistan for industrial work. By contrast, many Indians are a self-selected elite since they were established as traders in Uganda and elsewhere before coming to the UK.

For example, the Patel caste stereotypically runs retail shops in the UK.

Blockstack?

In Australia,

http://www.slang-dictionary.org/australian-slang/Wally

“Definition Of: Wally
australian slang Australian Slang
1. someone who keeps making mistakes; not a very clever person; 2. wallet”

“Definition Of: Wally
australian slang Australian Slang
1. someone who keeps making mistakes; not a very clever person; 2. wallet”

Wow. Pwned!

Wally is actually claiming that Indians study easy fields (despite this, they are the highest-income ethnic group in the US, and are doing pretty well in the UK). Of course, Wally, being a WN wigger, cannot explain why he thinks this, despite overwhelming evidence that Indians study STEM with a higher incidence than any other group (even Chinese).

what kind of gas do you suppose they’ll use? – Laughing gas?

You may be right about some groups of politicians paying more attention to donor’s policy preferences than those of voters – which is how I understand your first sentence, but it is too broad a generalisation. For example the Liberal Party of Australia (think centre-left Republican or Tory), especially in its principled heartland of Victoria (capital Melbourne) used to have very strict rules separating individual MPs and candidates from the donors in contrast to the Labor party’s iron discipline which meant expulsion if an MP voted against the party line which would usually be that of a party conference dominated by tbe big donors, viz. the trade unions. The fact that the Liberal government has just brought in an extra tax on the major banks suggests that attention to donors’ wishes isn’t as close as would be prudent.

Hence during times of drought a typical government TV ad would say “Don’t be aWally with Water”.

There’s definitely something going on with the selectivity, as I get the impression that the gap between Pakis and Hindus is much narrower in the U.S. There’s also the issue of inbreeding in Muslim culture. Finally, a lot of the lowest caste Indians converted to Islam when that religion established itself on the subcontinent during the Moghul era, in order to escape discrimination.

Right or wrong, banks are hated in Australia.
The Labor Party have been calling for a Royal Commission into banking. the tax is just Liberal politics, while trying to keep the banks on side.

Never heard it said in Australia before Minder, where Dennis Waterman often used it.
Real meaning: short for wally woofta = poofter = sleazy homosexual [Cockney rhyming slang]

So where’s the stats & “overwhelming evidence” for degrees that I asked for? LOL

You are dodging & weasel wording, and you know it.

You talk because you have a mouth.

I win.

“Its the treasonous scum in Parliament justified by the propagandists at the BBC and the rest of the media, who are letting them in.”

Who elected them???

I guess they did.

By the way quite obviously cranial capacity is similar to engine displacement in naturally aspirated piston engines produced in the same year. A larger engine will typically be more powerful, but there are other factors that determine the final output, so that it’s quite possible for a smaller engine to be more powerful. However, on average, larger engines will average higher power outputs.

By the way I’m sure you actually understand this, so you shouldn’t use fallacious arguments like “Einstein didn’t have a large brain so brain size cannot have any correlation to intelligence at all”.

But why by the black race? It’s because as Pop Culture reminds everyone through TV sitcoms, rap music, advertising, movies, and sex industry. Negro men got bigger dongs, and white girls are raised with that trope as topic of their conversation.

IQ has nothing to do with Caucasoidness per se.

I am talking about politicians and people who study educational policy making. What do you think would be the effect of leading politicians publicly saying “this data clearly shows that gypsies are the thickest group of people in the whole country.”

That’s a false dichotomy. Politicians could evade talking about the subject, or they could make meaningless noncommittal utterances with no followup. When a politician really doesn’t want to do something, he has six ways from Sunday to avoid doing it. The fact that these words are followed up with forceful policy changes means that they really want to do it.

By the way, I didn’t find your assertion that politicians know the score quite persuasive. They are watching the same propaganda TV shows and don’t think much about the subject. They are also at least as isolated from the problem (or any other problems of society) as your typical liberal, but probably even more. So, no personal experience either.

Why?

I will not debate with a Chinese hasbara version….

Exactly.

Other supposed aspect of democracy is the duty of intellectual classes to inform other classes in very correct ways. We don’t have this, otherwise is absolutely expected. Of course I’m saying about a ideal form of democracy because even original/greek version it was not what many people today believe it must be or always was.

Not just whites but seems most people without their elites, for their not so well being, mostly, will act in this errant ways. Why “white elites” are traitors??? They ALWAYS were, because they always were attracted to power and not help “their own” people. When “white elites” forge war worlds in XX century it was a huge traitor act against European people’s. Europeans as well most other human populations has been selected specially to be a breed of natural workers instead a breed of thinkers firstly/too. The markers of psychological castration/domestication is there, always or specially since the rise of complex societies.

They were persecuted by Idi Amin’s government, which found them a useful scapegoat. Indians dominated much of what urban business life there was in Uganda, especially in Kampala. Possibly as a group they were better educated than indigenous Ugandans.

Oh yes. I put forward a near-treatise once on the fascist aspects of the political system in Turkey. Wally (what a beautiful name, especially given its British English colloquial meaning!) dismissed it in one line, namely that I allegedly don’t know what fascism is. Still, he does have his Holocaust denial template which pads out most of his posts. No doubt that was written by someone else.

Or the brain drain in Pakistan is higher than in India.

IQ is important both to those of us who wish to preserve our states and those who wish to destroy them. IQ determines to a large part a states success. And Its a barrier to those who would like to control that state.

But its more important than just that because we are watching two types of leftism negotiate, the old school communism, which failed at class redistributionism in the high IQ productive west because it was a hard sell until they found their cultural marxist side projects of destabilization like feminism, immigration, race politics, all were doing so well and they switched from class to racial/gender redistributionism in europe they didnt have the slave meme to work, but then developed the colonial excuse. (europe did better with old commism because it transitioned from serf ag to industrialization worse)
Now this new iteration of old school communism also found during this transition that they had to have a capitalist frame work to parasitize, but that the Caps were all too happy now that the commies were not out to destroy them to partner with the commies on immigration and globalism thus we have the soros clinton gates bobo etal billionaire bolsheviks phenom. CapComs if you will or globalists
But we also have the other leftism the one developed specifically for the High IQ western european born in the American leftist revolution and the Anglo political philosophers, thats the leftism we call classical liberalism in america. Democracy for short.Now this sort of leftism has a half life it sems of about 200 years before it devolves from republicanism to democracy to populism to fascism to anarchy and hopefully to war and restoration. This leftism hopes because it sprouts from a people of high IQ but also of singularly different people from the rest of the world people who are outward non tribal we organize around ideas not blood and soil, we are co opertive altruistic because we are high trust -worthy an so complex capable sociologically. We thought and it can be argued may have been right that leftism demotism within these populations was possible.Of course it was always a gentleman’s agreement dependent on a morally supreme people. as it seemed to succeed we expanded the franchise to include more and more of our co ethnics including our women, its probably somewhere in here that we hit the laffer curve of classical liberalism. But we argued since it was an aristocracy of merit things would be ok. Unfortunately all these high principles we counted on are next to impossible to make hard laws of and to a great extent require the aristocracy which was morphed nto one of merit to continue to enforce standards mostly socially this didn’t happen, one reason was capitalism it turned out as any king or bishop might have told you was not particularly right wing more self interested in a single minded way.And it turned out the old aristocracy wasn’t any good at capitalism without the closed system abolished as america exported its leftist revolution back to europe. non anglos began to assert interests through capitalism and socialism, they had interests that were more ethnic than the grand experiment of this anglo high leftism. the wasps and their acolytes held on to their ideals for a while though in the end most betrayed us for (((filthy lucre)))

So you have whats left of this other leftism and it doesn’t realize that what it thinks of as conservatism is really them trying to conserve a certain period of a leftist revolution and the commie left is in reality simply the continuation of that revolution. They dont realize you cant lock that early american anglo revolution in place at 1690 1820 or 1950 or where ever you think was the sweet spot because you dont have those people anymore and if you did you need them to maintain that system socially, yet it was always going to be a legalistic system eventually because muh enlightenment, see the inherent contradiction. well follow along then. we start with nietzsche’s slave morality of christianity its non morbid as long as its demotism accrues only to fellow europeans historically geographically and later economically isolated, in that environment its a net positive and actually genetically selects for the high trust raits of euroman and sets the stage for the enlightenment that too works great in that high trust high IQ genetic environment, america exports the revolution designed by the anglos who actually already had a few glorious revolutions of their own before hand,america sends it to france and it gets a bit out of hand with the gauls, then it gets into the murderous hands of the jews in russia and all hell breaks loose, now in fairness this was bound to happen as we transitioned from the social order of serf agriculture to industrialized capitalism or at least some pains were to be expected and surely europe lagged america because of this.and inter eiro ethnic interests became a player. Now heres the rub.

So now we see both the right and the left are left though they dont understand themselves that way they both proceed fromthe absurd assertion that all men are created equal which of course proceeds from the far leftist christian theology.
But now these two lefts are vying for supremacy and the righter left is hung up on reason and merit which they don’t understand why the lefter left doesnt get. Heres why. the lefter left understands perfectly what they have convinced the righter right (through alinsky’s rule of “hold the enemy to its own principles”) what they can never think let alone utter, the lefter left knows perfectly that all men are not created equally at all that women are not men’s equals that africans will never in a million years equal the achievements of european men.This is why affirmative action ( seems like youre about to learn about that) white privilege etc are instituted the left knows meritocracy is in no way in the interest of its constituents.Its constituents are stupid useless mouths the average african IQ depending on tribe is 55-65. In other words the anglo leftism of reason and merit will only work within those countries but then who would pay for the rest of the revolution.and the right can defend this from its classical liberal christian principle of all men are created equal and are our brothers in christ. this is why communism infected the west through christianity first then through democracy both are leftist ideologies.

Until white men understand that defending christian and classical liberalism is defending leftism they are helpless against further leftism. They need to defend themselves as a people a culture and as geographic nations of the specific ethnic people and nation or in the case of much of the anglo diaspora a generally white ethno culture. They probably if they manage to do this and survive rethink democracy particularly gender equality. they had better at least have a good reason to think if they pursue it again why it wont replay as it did ths past time.

No doubt you are rigjt when you imply that the Liberal Party has put politics (and the Budget) first but I think the assumption is that the banks don’t have anywhere to go politically.

Hated? I wonder. I recall hate circa 1990 when stressed banks were hardnosed with customers. Now I would have thought a large number of retired people and others saving for retirement value the large dividends that the banks are relied on to pay.

By the way quite obviously cranial capacity is similar to engine displacement

Obviously. Obviously? Obviously!

A more “obvious” analogy one might have thought would be with integrated circuits, the smaller they become the more powerful.

I said, incidentally, nothing about cranial “capacity.” I spoke of cranial circumference, which is a poor proxy for cerebral volume.

Human IQ can now be increased by genetic technology.

Simply selecting the one embryo among ten with the highest
polygenic IQ score would lead to a 1 SD in IQ. This strategy
could be used generation after generation for the next many
centuries.

Why is this conversation focused on what was and not what will be?

cranial “capacity.”

Why the scare quotes?

How the Hell do you measure the IQ of an embryo?

Integrated circuit is not a very good analogy, since the technology is still not very good, so there’s still plenty of room for improvement. With humans, there’s probably also some room for improvement, but not nearly as much. It’s not for nothing that our brain volume has increased so much since our common ancestor with the chimps, while that of chimpanzees not so much.

Apropos, what is your theory for why humans have the largest brains among primates? Actually, humans’ encephalization quotient is the highest among mammals. Are we the dumbest mammals? As I’m sure you’re aware, brain tissue is probably the most expensive tissue around (at any rate, one of the most expensive ones), both in terms of building (raw materials needed) and maintenance (like oxygen or blood sugar intake) costs, not to mention the fact that birth is so really hard (and early!) for humans because our heads are so big already at birth. If we had smaller brains (and hence, heads), we could spend more time in our mothers’ wombs, which would make it possible for fully functional human babies (like babies with the capacity to walk, as with most other mammals) to be born. So there must be a reason why we have bigger brains. If evolution could get away with smaller brains, it most definitely would.

So what is your theory why humans have such big brains?

Hundreds of genetic variants associated with IQ have already been found.
There are thought to be tens of thousands.

Genotype the embryos.
Select the embryo with the highest polygenic IQ.

Increasing IQ by 1 SD renders the entire conversation mute.
Apparently 100 SD increases (i.e., 1500 IQ people) are also possible.

This technique would be effective for any race, nationality or lifestyle designation.
In the 21st Century none of that will be relevant.

The brain drain data gives 2010 5 year emigration rates for total/low/medium/high skill as:
India: 0.45% 0.14% 0.17% 4.97%
Pakistan: 1.09% 0.63% 0.62% 7.47%

Pakistan has double the emigration rate but it is less biased towards high skill (~12x) than India’s (~30x).

2010 UK total male immigration stock for total/low/medium/high skill were:
India: 267839 121334 13683 132822
Pakistan: 166950 102389 8034 56527
and women:
India: 279556 151772 11104 116680
Pakistan: 153482 111436 5334 36712

So both countries have large proportions of low skilled immigrants in the UK, but Pakistanis are worse (especially the women).

For comparison, the 2010 numbers for US men:
India: 778907 36157 76155 666595
Pakistan: 126191 10976 24212 91003
and women:
India: 678733 62466 87042 529225
Pakistan: 103166 14834 25283 63049

The US is getting a much more skilled mix of immigrants from the subcontinent.

P.S. Data at http://www.iab.de/en/daten/iab-brain-drain-data.aspx

What a silly article –as if money is measure of everything. A low paid cleaner may well contribute more usefully than a high paid accountant with tax avoidance ‘work’.

Apparently 100 SD increases (i.e., 1500 IQ people) are also possible.

I once worked close to a bunch of breeders. They manifest a kind of nuttiness and general intellectual fatuity of which your remarks strongly remind me.

But what would give you or anyone else the right to breed humans with any traits you or they deem desirable? Are humans just like poultry or swine, to be bred according to the whim of self-appointed human animal scientists?

What a silly article

Hey, you. Talk like that is like laughing in church. We have a hierarchy to be rigidly maintained. IQ is the basis of the new aristocracy. Unless you have an IQ of about 200 you’d better shut up.

So what is your theory why humans have such big brains?

Actually human brains are not so big. The African elephant’s brain is about six times as large, birds have an encephalization ratio several times greater (so much for bird brains), and a shrew has an encephalization ration four times greater — and with such a tiny noddle, impulses must flash across its cortex many, many times faster than across yours. So no need for a theory as to why human brains are so big because they aren’t so big in either absolute or relative terms.

Funny how other on this site (usually WN retards) argue the opposite.

They say that only 1% of Indians have an IQ above 100, and all of those have come to the US.

That is completely false, of course, but WNs are never interested in facts (and they don’t do math either).

You are the one who claimed that Indians don’t study STEM. So it is your job to support it.

Whether people like Indians or hate them, everyone agrees they all study STEM, Finance, or Law.

I understand that as a WN wigger, you have a negro IQ, so you don’t know how to read statistics. But you still have to back up your statements.

Yes, exactly, the conversation is no longer about if, only when.

All the positive reinforcement for the idea that IQ is related to group membership needs to be
corrected at every opportunity: Reinforcement replaced with punishement.

Breeders probably exude a certain nuttiness to others because they have achieved modifications in animals that others are largely unaware of. Hens that lay an egg a day? Doesn’t that seem somewhat odd to you? There has never been a wild hen that laid an egg a day. Breeders created extreme traits in animals decades ago. You do not need to look far in your local supermarket to see many genetically selected food items. I suspect many would be truly surprised to see a natural strawberry or blueberry.

Extreme traits will now be introduced into humans.

A wide range of human traits including intelligence, height, other behaviors etc. are also highly polygenic. A 50 foot 1500 IQ person with double muscling? Get ready for real human diversity to appear. I don’t expect that progressives would regard others favorably who did not openly embrace such diversity.

The nature of human genetics is such that there is not a great deal of point in arguing about it. A very large number of SNPs involved in IQ and other traits are very common (20%+ MAF). There had been some expectation that very rare variants would account for much of the variation. This is apparently not true. The variation in human intelligence results largely from differences in a great many common variants. Human polygenic traits are, in fact, highly egalitarian. The differences that exist in human populations today only represent a sliver of the variation that is possible.

An operant conditioning program that removes outdated classist, racist, and other assumptions
would now probably be of much value.

Any randomly selected person could use low tech methods such as embryo selection to greatly increase their children’s IQ. If CRISPR or some other high end technology were required, then there might be a reasonably effective way that a high IQ world could be prevented. Alas, no. We will simply have to live in a world in which the color of one’s skin or place of national ancestry has absolutely no predictive value for anything.

By the way, I didn’t find your assertion that politicians know the score quite persuasive. They are watching the same propaganda TV shows and don’t think much about the subject.

I don’t know. I suspect that politicians generally have very busy lives and don’t have time to watch TV themselves, though I am sure that they have people who give them summaries of what the media is saying.

I say this because I am usually very busy, and very, very rarely had time to watch TV over the last 25 years since the Internet arrived, unless I am in a hotel room or airport or something, and I would think that for politicians it is even more so. However, since many or most voters probably do watch TV on a daily basis, politicians have to give the impression that they are just like the voters, even though they get their news from other sources.

Of course Donald Trump is an exception.

A 50 foot 1500 IQ person with double muscling? Get ready for real human diversity to appear.

As I said, breeders or advocates of [human] breeding exude a certain [rather scary] nuttiness.

Never interest in facts???

But you are using recent immigration waves??

At some level we are all breeders.
Our species needs to reproduce in order to continue to exist.

This leaves us only with the choice of whether we will be intelligent breeders or non-intelligent breeders. After a brief survey of humanity, it should be clear to all that we have up till this point not been intelligent breeders.

This will be all the more obvious once examples of intelligent breeding manifest. As you mentioned, there is a certain scary nuttiness in the ineptitude of human genetic engineering to date. I fully agree. However, a highly rationalized genetic engineering technology will allow us a very different future.

Given that we now permit people to make very unwise genetic reproductive choices, it would seem counter-intuitive to suggest that people would somehow not be permitted to make very good reproductive choices. Such choices reside with the individuals involved and are fundamental inalienable human rights.

The ability of intrusive state power to control the roll out of genetic engineering will be weak. CRISPR is not required. Simply selecting embryos will be sufficient.

Further, considering the extreme demographic weakness that now exists in almost every advanced nation, it does not seem reasonable to expect that governments or other powers could withhold this technology from the many citizens that could benefit from it. If they chose to do so, then a severe demographic collapse could ensue quickly afterwards as people sought other more progressive nations to reside.

A trans-racial, trans-class political alliance that advocated for a future for our children not based on the genetic structures that have existed for the last few thousand years would be unbeatable. It is now abundantly obvious that there are inherent genetic flaws in all humans. In so many respects, it appears that the genetic technology that now exists will soon completely upend our societies.

Pregnant women are now routinely given ultrasounds, and they are then informed whether the fetus has Down’s syndrome. Some parents subsequently decide to have the fetus aborted. What do you think about this? Would it be a good idea in the future to extend these practices to fetuses who are at high risk for mental retardation (IQ<70)?

After a brief survey of humanity, it should be clear to all that we have up till this point not been intelligent breeders.

Bollocks. What do you think sexual selection is all about?

Your ridiculous pronouncements confirm that those lusting to breed humanity on scientific lines are totally insane and are intent on a totalitarian program to the detriment of the mass of the people.

As I said in the comment, the data was from 2010. That is the most recent they had.

Let’s Break a Taboo

Endless argumentation would seem futile. This is an unstoppable wave. The technology involved is very low end. The forces that could stop this are weak. Certain nations appear to already be preparing to make this widely available.

We can see all too clearly what happens to a societies that fall 2 SD behind others in IQ. Those who reject this can have a first hand experience of how devastating that would be. Probably be best to be on one of the first emergency airlifts out of nations that refuse to comply with international human rights laws. It would then be transparently clear how severe bad policy choices could be for such nations.

Interestingly the true totalitarian forces have already lined up to create a global moratorium on gene editing. How can that be understood to uphold human rights?

The recent research from Iceland found that dysgenics is occurring and will have profound long term consequences if it were to continue.
Applying genetic engineering technologies to preserve our species and our humanity seems unavoidable.

Wally hasn’t even mention Indians before this post, he responded to a post claiming -Pakistanis- have a high rate of advanced degrees in the US, which is untrue. For some reason when asked for proof of Pakistani success in the US, anon linked to the education attainment levels of Indians in the US.

Also, Indians are not the highest-income ethnic group in the US, they’re 9th(not that it isn’t impressive). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_per_capita_income

If the idea of Indian success in the US(and the UK, Australia, Canada, etc) isn’t because they’re simply a selected group of smart people, allowed to migrate for their merit, from a population pool of 1.3 billion, how do you explain the actual state of India itself then(not only economically, but IQ and academic results)?

If you’re going to claim nutrition and upbringing at an early age, you’ll have to explain why rural poor Chinese, Vietnamese, Mongolians, Siberians, Eastern Europeans outperform India as a whole.

If you really think Indians in the US are successful because they aren’t in post British colonial ruined impoverished India, you are a very deluded individual, with a seemingly irrational hatred of WNs ontop of that. If your people are really that equal(or superiour, as a lot of you ethnocentric Indians like to claim), what do you have against WNs? Surely if you’re so smart you should be an Indian nationalist, whose goals shouldn’t come into conflict with WNs’ goals.

It says Indians are first over here :

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

This list is household income, while yours is per capita. Indians have a low divorce rate, so more households have two earners.

First of all, I am a white American, not an Indian.

I have a hatred of WNs because they have none of the traits that made the other 80% of whites successful. The males among the loser tier are WNs, the women become fat feminists.

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

UK Muslims are mostly Mirpuri Pakistanis and Bangladeshis (sort of Pakistani I suppose). The ones from Lahore and other cities regard them as embarrassing inbred hillbillies and yokels.
US gets the top of the crop, whatever that counts for.
UK Indians are “Ugandan Asians” (thanks, Idi Amin Dada) and invariably SWPL-ites if not outright monarchists and coat & (regimental) tie-wearers, along with Sikhs and other fairly high status groups. Not a lot of South Indians.

Its not true that Einstein had a brain just like an average human’s, however. There were differences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein’s_brain

Still, if our choices are between mechanical or biological singularity, the biological aspect is slightly more appealing.

Wikipedia still insists on humans having by far the highest EQ, with birds usually having lower EQs than mammals. So do you have a source for your numbers?

(The obvious caveats apply: one number cannot describe something very complex very well, neither EQ, nor IQ, nor any one number. These are just useful as rules of thumb.)

Also, humans have the largest brains by any measure among primates, having tripled our brains over the last few millions of years. What was the source of this increase, which resulted in difficult and dangerous childbirth, underdeveloped babies being born (unable to walk or do basically anything), and a consumption of 20% of our bodies’ oxygen intakes and some 10-20% of our bodies’ calorie needs? Surely a brain third of the size would be better, provided it could still do the same things. What is your theory for this tripling in size in humans over the past few millennia?

Still, if our choices are between mechanical or biological singularity

Screw your “choice.” We have to destroy the techno-fascist bastards before they destroy humanity.

Its not true that Einstein had a brain just like an average human’s

Did I say it was? Obviously not. I was responding to the idiotic notion that you can measure a person’s mind with a tape measure.

But IQist seem to understand nothing at all, which is not surprising since acceptance of the notion of rating the intelligence of Jesus Christ, Hitler and the average reader of the Unz Review on single a linear scale is itself a pretty good indication of severe intellectual incompetence.

I agree, though the 1500 IQ people 50 feet tall sounds like a parody.

Nope. To them, ideology > facts

“A wide range of human traits including intelligence, height, other behaviors etc. are also highly polygenic. A 50 foot 1500 IQ person with double muscling?”

You have quite the imagination.

Usually people’s views of “racism” etc. forms early on. I was an anti-racist by age 10, or earlier. It was influenced by schools, movies, and TV shows, all of which condemned it. I guess it works similarly for politicians. They were indoctrinated early on, and by the time they had no more time to watch TV shows etc., they no longer needed it. Actually, I was very much interested in evolutionary biology, and that’s how I came around (first in Nicholas Wade’s Before the Dawn, then of course I started to dig deeper…) the idea that human racial differences are real – around age 30. Most people that age don’t read things like this. Had I not read this, I’d probably still be vaguely anti-racist. I doubt anyone not deeply into evolutionary biology would encounter any such information, and I don’t think politicians are reading such things.

Do you have any reason to think politicians either

A) have never been indoctrinated to begin with, unlike the vast majority of the rest of the population, or

B) they read evolutionary biology and HBD blogs to overcome that indoctrination (as was the case with me)?

tripling in size in humans over the past few millennia?

Should read:

tripling in size in humans over the past few million years?

IQ doesn’t measure everything. It’s similar to height and basketball ability. There is a lot of correlation, but of course it won’t always be the tallest person who will be the best basketball player. Actually, it will probably never be. But on average, the best basketball players will tend to be taller in any group than the group average. By increasing the height of a group, ceteris paribus (like no similar increase in other groups) you can increase one group’s basketball ability relative to other groups.

I thought you understood that. You seem to be fighting with a straw man.

“A wide range of human traits including intelligence, height, other behaviors etc. are also highly polygenic. A 50 foot 1500 IQ person with double muscling?”

You have quite the imagination.

He has the imagination of a techno-fascist. People to be made in accordance with the needs of the state.

So do you have a source for your numbers?

I gave you one if you’d bother to use the link I provided.

Dear CanSpeccy,

Your link leads to a blog by a certain CanSpeccy. The blog’s statements on encephalization ratio’s of humans relative to birds or shrews, for example, are totally unsourced. So can you maybe tell me where the blogger CanSpeccy got his numbers?

Or you can provide any other source.

Thanks in advance,
reiner Tor

Daniel, exactly.

The unstated here is that many want to continue to live in a homocentric universe with all the implications that has for maintaining power, social structure etc. .

Yet, this conception of reality is attacked on all fronts. Technology is offering us multiple routes to
homo sapiens being on the periphery. A $1000 computer within the next ten years with human equivalent computational power? Would not that displace our place in the universe?

There would also be less ethical angst in making a 1500 IQ 50 foot gorilla. For those who wish the future would just go away, would they really want to have to report to a big, hairy and might I say UGLY primate?

What will it be? Genetic selection technology is very simple; it is fairly clear that in the near term
it will roll out. Denial and attacking the messenger is not an effective rebuttal.

Humans can either engage with the future or they can choose not to be part of it.
It is their choice.

Notably, while others on the thread have called the 1500 IQ 50 foot humans a parody and imaginative, none have of yet dismissed such a possibility as impossible. This is a very large
shift in what the future might hold for us. The future will be what we can imagine it to be.

Those without such imaginations can continue to live with the primordial world.
Others might want to experiment with a 1500 IQ lifestyle. Some might be interested in being
50 foot tall; others might want 100 SD of happiness or longevity.

Or you can provide any other source.

The blog post provides a source, for Christ’s sake.

Notably, while others on the thread have called the 1500 IQ 50 foot humans a parody and imaginative, none have of yet dismissed such a possibility as impossible. This is a very large
shift in what the future might hold for us.

Yes, as I discuss here, it’s a shift to a technology based fascism, which is to say an end to individual liberty at any level. What you are advocating is an unbreakable technological totalitarianism, under which human DNA will be selected from, modified, and remixed to create a biological appendage to a system that ultimately will most probably be ruled by artificially intelligent robots. What you are promoting is the effective extinction of mankind, and certainly an end to any kind of human self-determination, independence, democracy or freedom.

Where? Wouldn’t it have been simpler to just provide it here? This part in particular has no sources at all:

“But then it has been argued that what matters is not the size of the brain but the ratio of brain to body weight, the so-called encephalization ratio. On that basis, humans with an ER of 1:40, beat elephants, with a ratio of 1:560, massively. Remarkably though, birds come out ahead of humans with an ER of 1:12 — so much for bird brains. But the creature with the highest brain to body weight ratio of all, at around 1:10, is the tiny-brained shrew. “

Phil,
And the mentally disabled with IQ 90,100,120,140…?? I mean, irrational…

But basketball ability never was only about be taller…

Even about Jews?? And race mixing??

My bad. The encephalization quotient is different from the encephalization ratio, the latter is probably (I guess) the same as the brain-to-body mass ratio. I thought you were writing about encephalization quotient, as I had been before.

So yes, the shrew has a very good brain-to-body mass ratio, but its encephalization quotient is not nearly up there.

What can we do to stop an elite from altering their own progeny? Some of them are already practicing embryo selection. Growth hormone use is rampant. Etc.

Why not?? IQ based on modern standards (literacy, numeracy) maybe useful to speculate about ancient civilizations.

Yes and supposedly I’m a well paid hyper nationalist who defend my marvelous country against any even a slight criticism-hasbara…

But they has been the “winners” in the past.

Today hypocrisy and self entitlement make any high IQ idiot suck access fool.

Yes but I’m talking about total number of Pakistanis and Indians who has immigrated to Briton’s. Seems you showed this data too in your comment.

I gave a link to a page that gave a link to a source. Is that too hard for an IQist to understand?

Or you could have just done a Google search.

Genius in physics or any other area has never only been about having higher IQ. Higher IQ was never only about having bigger brains. There’s correlation, but it’s a stochastic function. We can easily measure brain size, but not so easily other, elusive factors (how the brain is organized etc.) that go into IQ; or we can easily measure IQ, but not the other, elusive factors (like specific talent for physics, or persistence and determination, etc.) that go into being a genius.

What page? When and where did you provide it? I only found your blogpost, which had no citations for the statements regarding the shrew’s brain. Would it not have been easier by now to just provide the frigging citations? We could have clarified the misunderstanding on my part.

Because, by the way, you don’t need the citations, since I now realized you were writing about the “encephalization ratio”, which I guess is exactly the same thing as the “brain-to-body mass ratio”. I know that the shrews have large brain-to-body mass ratios. Of course, I referred to the encephalization quotient.

So humans have I think the largest encephalization quotient among any animal living ever.

People has been sacrificed to enrich their rulling-cunning elites, something that is totally unnecessary. No have freedom of speech and standard living is considerably lower than in the west as well quality of life.

Pretty bullshit but otherwise I do agree that democracy is suboptimal given its obvious results. A good thing that China does not follow that particular cult.

Look.

In #105 I mentioned the encephalization quotient.

To which you replied in #111 with the blogpost claiming that the encephalization “ratio” (an entirely different thing) was larger for shrews. I did a search for shrews, and of course I realized that you’re probably mixing up something.

So in #133 I gave you the Wikipedia page to prove that humans do indeed have a higher encephalization quotient than any other animal ever.

In #143 you insisted you have already given a source.

In #144 I asked you again, reminding you that your blogpost has no sources (I specifically had shrews and birds in mind, the latter of which Wikipedia in #133 explicitly mentioned as having smaller EQs than humans).

In #146 you still insisted the blog provides the source.

I was still sure that you’re mixing up something, so I asked again in #148.

In #152 (before reading any of your replies) I realized the problem: I misunderstood, and thought that encephalization ratio was encephalization quotient. (Which it was not.)

So here we are. Now back to #105. Humans have the largest encephalization quotient on the planet. Why?

“So what is your theory why humans have such big brains?”

It’s not for IQ. John Skoyles believes it’s for expertise capacity, not IQ.

http://www.human-existence.com/publications/Skoyles%20Human%20evolution%20expanded%20brains%20expertise%20not%20IQ.pdf

I extended this to human races, noting that Arctic peoples use more tools, and therefore need more expertise, which further expanded their brains (along with the climate).

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

This hypothesis explains Lynn et al’s so-called ‘outlier’ in regards to Inuits having only a 91 IQ yet heads the size of East Asians. Tropical peoples use fewer tools; Arctic peoples use more tools. Tool use is related to brain size… etc etc. I think it’s a better hypothesis than the cold winter/IQ stuff, but I may be biased.

Tell me what you think.

Herculano-Houzel disproved the EQ:

It is further proposed that, if such neuronal excess does provide for improved cognitive abilities, then the total number of excess neurons in each species—here dubbed the neuronal index—should be a better indicator of cognitive abilities than the encephalization quotient (EQ). Because the neuronal index is a function of both the number of neurons expected from the size of the body and the absolute number of neurons in the brain, differences in this parameter across species that share similar EQs might explain why these often have different cognitive capabilities, particularly when comparing across mammalian orders.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ar.20598/full

However, the notion that higher encephalization correlates with improved cognitive abilities has recently been disputed in favor of absolute numbers of cortical neurons and connections (12), or simply absolute brain size (13). If encephalization were the main determinant of cognitive abilities, small-brained animals with very large encephalization quotients, such as capuchin monkeys, should be more cognitively able than large-brained but less encephalized animals, such as the gorilla (2). However, the former animals with a smaller brain are outranked by the latter in cognitive performance (13).

http://www.pnas.org/content/109/Supplement_1/10661.full

And my personal fave:

Overall brain size, and not encephalization quotient, best predicts cognitive ability across non-human primates.

http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTE1OS8wMDAxMDI5NzM=/10.1159%40000102973.pdf

So here we are. Now back to #105. Humans have the largest encephalization quotient on the planet. Why?

The answer is obvious: because it puts Man on top of the animal kingdom. EQ is disproven.

Maybe we can predict them. Determination is a personality trait. Intellectual independence too.

Another hasbara Chinese… People who choice to defense their government than their people.

No. On a lot of science.

The correct insult is “wumao” btw. And I just happen to live in reality and actually have a clue about the country you’re rambling about.

Yes, so much for bird brains. Corvids and parrots have a primate-like number of neurons in their forebrain.

Thus, large-brained parrots and corvids have forebrain neuron counts equal to or greater than primates with much larger brains. We suggest that the large numbers of neurons concentrated in high densities in the telencephalon substantially contribute to the neural basis of avian intelligence.

http://www.pnas.org/content/113/26/7255.full

All of the data I gave was from 2010. My understanding is the emigration rate is a five year window (2005-2010 here) percentage while the immigration numbers are the entire population of that group at that moment in time.

Also, humans have the largest brains by any measure among primates, having tripled our brains over the last few millions of years. What was the source of this increase, which resulted in difficult and dangerous childbirth, underdeveloped babies being born (unable to walk or do basically anything), and a consumption of 20% of our bodies’ oxygen intakes and some 10-20% of our bodies’ calorie needs? Surely a brain third of the size would be better, provided it could still do the same things. What is your theory for this tripling in size in humans over the past few millennia?

Read the previous references I provided.

Now think about when brains began increasing. It’s when the modern human body plan began. Nariokotome boy had human-like growth patterns. This implies that, of course, the advent of full-on human bipedalism was a huge factor in brain size increase. Know what else was? Endurance running.

Erectus had our gait:

http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTAxNi9qLmpoZXZvbC4yMDA2LjA1LjAwMQ==/10.1016%40j.jhevol.2006.05.001.pdf

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/323/5918/1197.full

Now couple this with aerobic physical activity and the brain hormone BDNF (Brain Derived Neurotopic Factor).

Controlling for body mass in humans, extinct hominins and great apes, Raichlen and Polk (2012) found significant positive correlations with encephalization quotient and hindlimb length (0.93), anterior and posterior radii (0.77 and 0.66 respectively), which support the idea that human athletic ability is tied to neurobiological evolution

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/280/1750/20122250

With all this in mind, now think of endurance running. Large heads mean large pelves which then would impede endurance running. So there was obviously something to our ‘big brains’ which selected for them.

http://www.human-existence.com/publications/Up%20from%20dragons%20skoyles%20Big%20Heads%20running%20evolution.pdf

res linked to a paper by Hofman that stated that human brains have the ‘possibility’ of getting to 3500 cc. That’s ridiculous! We have problems birthing babes with large brains now; imagine if our brains doubled in size. The brain/head size we have now is ‘just right’ in regards to pelvic width which allows us to run run run the way our species does.

https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/03/18/man-the-athlete/

It is odd to see you translate language like “It is further proposed that” and “might explain why” into “disproved.”

Then there is using this:

And my personal fave:

Overall brain size, and not encephalization quotient, best predicts cognitive ability across non-human primates.

To argue:

The answer is obvious: because it puts Man on top of the animal kingdom. EQ is disproven.

Eliding away the “primates” qualifier in the first part to draw a conclusion about the entire animal kingdom.

This whole “disproved” rhetoric is misguided IMHO since what we are really talking about is models which have better or worse fits (and not by large margins AFAICT) to the observed data.

So here we are. Now back to #105. Humans have the largest encephalization quotient on the planet. Why?

Oh, so since humans don’t have the highest brain to body weight ratio we have to consider some BS encephalization quotient. Sounds like bollocks to me. You might as well just stick to using a tape measure and measure the circumference of people’s heads. I am sure that will prove whatever nonsense you want to prove.

As for why humans have a larger cerebrum than apes, that’s obvious: language.

Language is highly resource demanding. People don’t understand words based on definitions. Most people don’t know the definitions of most of the words they use. What they do know is the context in which they have heard or seen particular words used: often thousands of contexts, contexts that include visual, auditory, olfactory and tactile sensations.

Such knowledge takes a lot of memory, but it is worth it because it allows humans to share experience across families, tribes, and generations, and now across the globe with the Internet.

Shared experience increases success in exploitation of the environment and thus pays back the metabolic cost of more brain tissue. But a larger cerebrum does not make humans more intelligent than other animals. Chimps are smarter than humans in many ways. But they don’t have our knowledge gleaned through language use.

Simply selecting the one embryo among ten with the highest
polygenic IQ score would lead to a 1 SD in IQ. This strategy
could be used generation after generation for the next many
centuries.

Because ‘what will be’ (lol) is a huge pipe dream:

https://digest.bps.org.uk/2016/09/12/its-now-possible-in-theory-to-predict-life-success-from-a-genetic-test-at-birth/#comment-9122

In the case of the individual, the original cells are totipotent; in spite of the same genes, they have the same potential to become any kind of differentiated cell for a particular organism. In the French Flag model, every cell has the potential to develop as white, blue, or red. Indeed, recent advances in the laboratory prove that it is possible to change virtually any type of cell into another cell type—to recover their potential for diversity. This epigenetic reprogramming, in which a developed specific potential is turned back to become a totipotent cell. (http://www.eurostemcell.org/ips-cells-and-reprogramming-turn-any-cell-body-stem-cell) (Richardson, 2017: 156)

Indeed, most labs admit that any generalization about quality made from grading embryos are rather inaccurate. As one site puts it: “We see some cycles fail after transferring 3 perfect looking embryos, and we also see beautiful babies born after transferring only one low grade embryo.” The best test of egg quality in fact seems to be female age. Much the same applies to sperm quality. (Richardson, 2017: 156)

What parents tend to worry about, of course, is “genetic potential”—usually for critical functions like brain and cognition. Thanks to the kind of hype and publicity mentioned in chapter 1, these parents are mostly convinced that the potential for desireable qualities like intelligence, or special talent of some sort, resides and varies in the genes. And they think of it already residing in the egg, in that homunculus state mentioned earlier. (Richardson, 2017: 156-257)

As we have already seen, though, what is assumed to be genetic is really the manifestation of whole developmental system. So, with the exception of rare disorders, the anxiety is probably unwarranted. And there is certainly no test for the genetic potential of eggs or sperm from different individuals, however much the idea inspires pipe dreams from behavioral geneticists. (Richardson, 2017: 157)

Pipe dream. Keep dreaming.

This paper is also relevant on individual differences.

http://cyber.sci-hub.bz/MTAuMTAxNi9qLm5ld2lkZWFwc3ljaC4yMDEyLjA4LjAwMg==/10.1016%40j.newideapsych.2012.08.002.pdf

True. I do use strong language (a lot, gotta work on that).

HH does, herself, not take to EQ and uses total neurons as a better predictor (because there are problems with EQ as shown).

The capuchin monkey/gorilla EQ difference is explained by neuronal count, not EQ. This relationship is also seen in other ways as well.

HH et al have shown that different mammals’ brains follow different scaling rules. So to use just gross size/body size is extremely misleading. Using her and Lent’s isotropic fractionator allows one to see how many neurons are in that brain, and by doing so, her and her team showed that neuronal count—not EQ—is best predictor for intelligence between species.

RaceRealist, I was unsure about your quote when you posted it previously.

My interpretation is that this has more to do with selecting an embryo that will result in a healthy
child than it has to do with specifically selecting for a specific genotype. If this is the intended meaning, then I would completely admit that this would be true.

Perhaps a good way to re-frame the discussion {away from talking exclusively about IQ} is to consider the result from the September 19th blog about predicting height. The article referenced was able to predict human height within a few centimeters using genotypes alone. This is a very impressive achievement.

Using the embryo selection idea, we have now already crossed over into a new genetic era with respect to height. Selecting embryos on the basis of polygenic height score should mean that substantial increases in population scale height is possible at this time. I would not understand an argument that attempted to refute this assertion. This might soon have real world confirmation if we start to see a generation of very tall Chinese.

The article went on to note that they were also able to explain the genetics behind 9% of the variation in educational attainment. I would also be unclear if it were now asserted that what applied to height somehow might not now apply to EA/IQ. We are all anxiously waiting for the 1 million person Oslo EA GWAS which could further amplify the EA/IQ genetics question.

Ok blue blood…

Hopefully my comments will re-orientate the discussion away from focusing on the divisions that divide us and towards the unities that unite us.

Obsessing about the 4 point IQ gender difference or the 15 point or less race differences is not reasonable in the context of the over 1 thousand points that will separate us from a genetically optimized humanoid. Current differences will soon only be considered rounding errors.

Anyone big enough to bury the hatchet and have a kumbaya sing along?

Thanks for the compliment. I really am.

Yes, the average Black IQ is literally less than that for the White. But is it meaningful?

In Rushton’s raw data for South Africa, at the 11:00 mark, it was clearly shown that the IQ for the Black was bimodal. Let us tentatively take the ‘dip valley’ between the two Black clusters as the cutoff for smart fraction. By inspection the average IQs of the Black and White fractions were the same, about half way between the cutoff and the top of the horizontal IQ scale. The vertical scale is frequency. Yes there are more white by percentage in the smart fraction but the average IQ of the two smart fractions are about the same. Thus the meaning of average here is different from that for the overall ethnic groups because the distribution was bimodal. The use of average is meaningless in this case.

Now look at the chart more closely. At the right hand end, the IQ distribution for the White was on a downward trend while that for the Black was on an upward trend and hit the ceiling. If the test was a bit harder the Black might have a thicker right hand tail than that for the White. Just think about that.

By forcing a unimodal bell curve, the contribution from the Black smart fraction was eliminated.

The answer is simple, the Indians who came to the UK are the intellectual/mercantile elites while most of the Pakistanis are the descendants of lower classes. Most of them Pakistanis are Mirpuris who came after the building of a dam in Pakistan and the British government ‘for some weird reason’ took in the village peoples displaced by the dam. Most of the Bangladeshis in the UK are descendants of Syletti (from North Bangladesh) peasants. Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in the west who are descendants of intellectual/mercantile elites perform exactly as the Indian populations.

By my experience, as far as brown immigrants are concerned, the educated elites behave like Jews, out competing local average Whites, have low ‘low level’ crime rates but high amount of nepotism and ‘white collared crimes’. The peasants from these brown countries behave like gypsies at best and their neighbourhoods end up looking like gypsy neighborhoods with high street crime (but at a lower rate than blacks) . This is true for Hispanics, Middle Easterners and Subcontinentals and even South East Asians up to some extent. Akarlin called India a country of Gypsies rule by Jews. That is one of the best, most accurate description of Indian society I have ever come across and I am Indian.

Obsessing about the 4 point IQ gender difference or the 15 point or less race differences is not reasonable in the context of the over 1 thousand points that will separate us from a genetically optimized humanoid.

Does it actually make any sense to talk of IQ’s of more than one thousand? I thought IQ was a ranking on a standardized test. Presumably, those who are very bright answer every question correctly, which means they have the maximum possible score. Would that equate to an IQ of 1000, or is the notion of an IQ of one thousand nonsense?

Also, why is it deemed desirable to breed a race of humans vastly superior to the present human population? How much do these IQ obsessives hate us? And why bother breeding IQ 1000 humans assuming that it means anything to talk of people with an IQ of one thousand? Why not just exterminate all humans and replace them with robots equipped with IQ 2000 AI?

There is, I suggest something verging on insanity among the IQ crowd, which could well manifest itself in genocide of those they consider inferior. That is not such a stretch when you remember that (a) the Nazis did actually slaughter mental defectives, and (b) many British and American intellectuals were thinking along the same lines, until Hitler gave the idea such a bad name. But that idea could, it seems, be well on its way back.

Malla, From your description, India sounds like the kind of multi-culti Hell that Thereason May, following in the footsteps of David Camoron, and Tony Bliar have worked to create in Britain.

Perhaps, rather than worrying about trivial racial differences in IQ, folks here would do well to focus on the shattering of the cultural unity of the European nations by importation of people with mentalities, cultures and life-styles so contrary to the tradition of the European world.

But that is what is coming don’t you think? I already think of the alt right like the escapees in brave new world living outside in nature, although nature has become the internet.

One think i perceive

More IQ-obsessed people tend to be, less they understand about intelligence.

They are similar to ”diversity”-obsessed…

Psychological traits are not normally distributed.

http://www.hrma.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/rb-the-best-and-the-rest.pdf

Sensory acuity, reaction time, memory word usage, basal metabolic rate, resting heart rate, and sentence lengths aren’t distributed in this way either. See Buzsaki and Mizuseki’s work.

Physiological traits aren’t normally distributed. So if ‘g’ is physiological (it’s not), then it doesn’t fall on a normal distribution either.

less they understand about intelligence.

Whatever that is. Ask 50 people what “intelligence” is, get 50 different answers.

The last quote was the most important:

As we have already seen, though, what is assumed to be genetic is really the manifestation of whole developmental system. So, with the exception of rare disorders, the anxiety is probably unwarranted. And there is certainly no test for the genetic potential of eggs or sperm from different individuals, however much the idea inspires pipe dreams from behavioral geneticists. (Richardson, 2017: 157)

It’s the whole of the developmental system (which is itself an intelligent system). Genes don’t direct development. Intelligent physiological systems use genes as slaves, genes are not the masters of human development.

Using Dawkins’ gene/replicator body/vehicle analogy, the vehicle came before the replicators! Do you know what that means?

If you don’t know what intelligence is whatever that is, how you debate/write/think about it*

get 50 different answers

Because intelligence is basically the [succesfull] behavior applied into a multitude of different evolutionary contexts and at priori, it’s basically the capacity to adapt, but intelligence concept as well many others concepts, can and evolve, it’s expansible, following evolution. For ALMOST nonhuman animais intelligence is the capacity to adapt, but for humans the highest levels of inteligence is the capacity to think in abstract ways, and the highest PRACTICAL levels of intelligence is the capacity to think in abstract ways and applying in minimally correct ways our judgments/conclusions in the environment we are. Humans are the first who are capable to reach the ideality of behavior while for other species the ideal is not the ideal, but what they have available in their evolutionary contexts, for them ideal is always contextual.