Hans Eysenck on Race and IQ - Part 1 of 2

[FALCO64125]

The people mad about your study that claims black people are genetically inferior to white people, even though you are not a geneticist, are like the Nazis... what?

[humphriedboswell]

@FALCO64125 Yes, many of them are akin to the Nazis in that they attempt to suppress free thought and scientific enquiry. Eysenck need not be a geneticist in order to be a qualified authority in the field of psychometrics. The heritability of a trait can be determined without identifying the specific genes involved in its production -- adoption studies, studies of identical twins separated at birth, inbreeding depression, etc., etc.

[maxfirepower]

@ecko256 Clocks and rulers are imperfect therefore they have no value and cannot indicate anything of time or linear dimension.

That sweeping remark about "whites" seems lke a racist generalization to me.

And, remember, we are constantly told that there is no such thing as "black African DNA" so y'all can't claim James Watson as a success story while claiming he's a racist.

-just some thoughts

[kubaniski]

@foxlake02 When comparing the results of blacks and whites on IQ sub tests the greatest difference between the two races is on the portions of the test which are most heritable. Although in things like verbal reasoning skills blacks greatly out perform whites, and on portions of the test which are heavily cultural the gap between whites and blacks is very low.

The difference extends to the differences between men and women, as men tend to have better spatial abilities.

[PumpingSmashkins]

@prschuster Lmfao at the contortions you zombies need to use to rationalize your thoroughly irrational beliefs. The reality, obviously, is that until questions about these things can be answered, there's no excuse for suggesting that there are NOT racial differences in intelligence.

The ideologues have been desperately trying for decades every possible angle to explain away the consistent IQ gap. The fact remains that, despite every attempt at removing "cultural" bias, the results are the same

[onlinecashmarketing]

I see that 9 morons cannot handle the truth.

[MaximusRelaximus]

@ecko256 What's interesting is that whites do everything in their power to ignore the obvious reality of inherent racial differences, including viciously attacking anybody who dares mention such atrocious things as facts. Facts that are inconsitent with their insane and detrimental delusions are unanimously derided as "ignorance" or racism. So to be accepted in today's politically correct society, you must accept that knowledge is ignorance, and ignorance is enlightenment.

[wyqtor]

@ecko256 Whites have also proved that Asians are smarter than them and that Jews are way smarter than them. The 10% usage of the human brain is a well-known myth. Please at least find some accurate claims next time you want to disprove the divergent evolution and selection pressures that have shaped current human subspecies (including our brains).

[30below]

Its true all you have to do is look around the world its right out in plain sight this is one subject science wont touch they know they will be treated the same as Eysenck. All race's produce genius people but the average IQ of some races are lower than others I think its due to environmental evolution.

[IsaiahHarper11]

people can't handle the truth

[DeSouzaPauloDeSouza]

@DEFACTO9 Eysenck’s attitude to science was summarised in his autobiography Rebel with a Cause ( ISBN 1-56000-938-1): "I always felt that a scientist owes the world only one thing, and that is the truth. If the truth contradicts deeply held beliefs, that is too bad. Tact and diplomacy are fine in international relations, in politics, perhaps even in business; in science only one thing matters, and that is the facts

[wiseBRILLIANTgenius]

research was published in the journal Nature and ABC Science News reports that we are genetically more varied than what was once assumed.

What the scientists have been doing is digging out deletions or duplications of code among relatively long sequences of individual DNA and then comparing these ‘copy number variations’ across a range of volunteers of diverse ancestry.

[wiseBRILLIANTgenius]

research was published in the journal Nature and ABC Science News reports that we are genetically more varied than what was once assumed.

What the scientists have been doing is digging out deletions or duplications of code among relatively long sequences of individual DNA and then comparing these ‘copy number variations’ across a range of volunteers of diverse ancestry.

[bananito3]

@Entanglement9

well, you have just cared.

[bananito3]

@Entanglement9

racist is just a shallow term used by a pussy racephobes and loud niggers

Educated people (not you) must read that article, its a fair article on black education.

[bananito3]

@DeSouzaPauloDeSouza

hey thx a lot for the article

its a fair view of how different are blacks from mexicans, whites, asians

they just dont want to be educated.

and democrats are the problem

[fabekuso]

Races and individuals are different by nature; I would even go so far as to classify some groups and individuals as superior and others as inferior, but in God's eyes we are all his children, and that is the most important thing. A living consciousness of the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Mankind should forever prevent us from persecuting and denigrating each other. Let us live in peace and love. I know that is not the current reality on this planet but one day it will be.

[fabekuso]

@Adebayo369 Eysenck stood up to the Nazis, who were mad scientists and killed people. He is simply reporting the conclusions of his studies. I'm sure he was aware that the black population in America is 15-20% white.

[GGLebo23]

@HyperBorealOperator Yeah I guess, but you have to realize that white & blk kids DO NOT grow up in the same environments. They never have. Most black kids grow up in single parent homes in low income neighborhoods with bad cultures. You should read the article "All Brains Are the Same Color" by Richard Nisbett.

[edydon]

@GGLebo23 The thing so many people neglect is that "environment" is a relative term.

Your perception of your environment is based on how much more or less you have than everyone else. If you are given less than others around you, you will feel deprived - even if you have "enough" in some absolute sense.

The media portrays blacks as marginal - thugs and criminals - and depicts white as "normal."

[sondano]

@FootSomeGuy That may be true. But show me one scientist who made a major breakthrough and had average IQ.

[FootSomeGuy]

@sondano I"m not a scientist ,therefore I'm not an expert.

My point is,that among scientists there is difference of opinion.

[OutOfTheBoxThinker]

Eysenck is the kind of man I try to emulate in my own modest way : a man who stands up for what he believes in and is willing to go against the current in regardless of how much adversity he faces. I really admire his objectivity and his will-power and only with there were far more people as intelligent and as integrous as he is. The world would be a far better place...

[fashionhistorylover]

@OutOfTheBoxThinker Why does he keep bringing this up? Doesn't he realize that this can lead to black people being assigned to a second class status again?

[OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@fashionhistorylover : Whether blacks deserve first class status or not is a socio-political issue that needs to be addressed by politicians. Whether blacks are more intelligent, less intelligent or equally intelligent compared to other races (eg. whites or east-asians) is a matter of science and should be left to science. Not addressing the issue because some people might use it to harm blacks one way or another is not the answer and in the long run it will actually harm blacks.

[PowerRedBull]

In an idealistic world everyone would be equal.everyone would be the same.etc etc.However, the world is not an idealism. The world is how it is,just unfair and people do not have equal oppertunities in life.You are born smart or less smart. You have the talent of singing or you do not.This does not mean you can not learn it to a limited degreeMen and women are not the same either.The average woman does some things better than the average man and vice versa. However, never call anything INFERIOR

[Debaser11]

@GGLebo23

Again, I'll get to it. You still haven't addressed anything I've asked you. Let alone explained why any of the prominent authors who write in support of race and IQ are wrong. Ad hominems are not arguments either. Now you're telling the twins study is flawed. Yet before, you were telling me to read something from a book that cited the twins study as evidence for a claim about intelligence. Your own sources contradict and you seem too dense to even realize it.

[Debaser11]

I decorate my room. People clean or don't clean their neighborhoods. That gives each a character. People also make their cities and environments. The influence the other way is much less, imo.

"No one says we are equal in intelligence, you just aren't understanding how inheriting some intelligence is different than group intelligence."

I already explained to you my position. Some is environmental. Some is genetic. In fact, that view mirrors Hockenbury's assertions.

[Debaser11]

Why is it that intelligence and race cannot have any correlation?

"The book makes an analogy w/ a flower box that even an 8yr can understand."

I read it. You apparently don't understand my refutation. Again, not my problem.

"Btw ur still not addressing some crucial pts laid out"

You laid no points out. You referred me to a few pages in a book and I responded. If you don't understand, that's not my problem. I will get to some of your other links. But how about your respond to some of my Qs?

[Debaser11]

"Seen the Minn. twin study and the Psych book explains that."

The people who did that study concluded that the twins study demonstrated that inheritance was important. This is far from the only smoking gun on this issue. Why don't you read Pinker's new book on the subject? (See, it's annoying isn't it?)

[Debaser11]

@GGLebo23

African immigrants doing well doesn't prove anything. Neither do Indian immigrants. Neither group's success contradicts the IQ studies, either. It's funny how you cling to studies that show something you like yet reject massive research done over decades that indicates a trend you dislike.

[Debaser11]

"You are not arguing with the important facts/studies I have given to you."

This is not fair. How about I send you a bibliography with Eysenck, Flynn, Murray, Rushton, Pinker, Shockley, Bernstein, Wilson, and Knudson and then ask you for a response? Because I realize that would be childish. I will respond to arguments you don't copy and paste, though.

[GGLebo23]

@Debaser11 I told you that I can wait a week(even a month) for you to read and come back strong. It didn't take me that long.

btw. I have read many of those people and other studies. I am well versed on this topic. I am not like you. I look at all sides of the issue before I make my judgments. You can't learn anything if you are not open to thoughts that contradict your own.

[Debaser11]

@GGLebo23

"I told you that I can wait a week(even a month) for you to read and come back strong. It didn't take me that long."

Well, too bad. I'm a slow reader.

"I look at all sides of the issue before I make my judgments."

So do I. I just asked you to wait. That's hardly dismissing your claims or being closed-minded. You just don't like that. Not my problem. I have to appeal to the fair sensibilities of any third party that I'm not out to duck any arguments.

[Debaser11]

In the meantime, tell me why intelligence can't be inherited?

"While your at it, you might want to read what biologist have to say about race,"

I have. There's hardly a consensus in journals. Geneticists like James Watson and Bruce Lahn weren't just earning their spots in the KKK with their views, either. We can identify the race of a person just examining a person's semen. Sounds like biological basis for race to me.

"...the African IQ study is deeply flawed."

There is more than one.

[Debaser11]

@GGLebo23

"WHY do they commit the most crime? What is leading them to this?"

I answered this. Genetics. Scientists have even identified genes that result in more criminal behavior. We're only going to find more and more differences from here on out. I guess you'll have to keep humming and plugging your ears that much harder.

"Think that over in your head."

No, it didn't. I just don't assume everything is 100% cultural. My allusion to there being no "blank slates" is what went over your head

[Debaser11]

them from going back to Retardistan where all the babes wear pillowcases and know their place.

[GGLebo23]

@Debaser11 And you still haven't responded to ALL of my pts. Like the fact that gays, atheist, & liberals tend to have higher IQs then their opposite groups when they are not related. You also haven't responded to EVERY point in my email. The actually PSYCHOLOGY book(you know the one w/ the EXPERTS) explain why Burakumin & Koreans have lower IQs on avg then majority Japanese in Japan and why it disappears when they immigrate to the US.

[Debaser11]

"They are closely related to sephardic jews though they have been separated(about as close as 4th or 5th cousins), yet they do not share IQ or academic success. Why?"

I already supplied an explanation that relates to this question in my previous post. Furthermore, Sephardic Jews separated from Ashkenazi Jews centuries ago. That's plenty of time for natural selection to affect IQ. Sephardic Jews also have more of an Arab amalgamation to them than Ashkenazis who have a more European countenance.

[Debaser11]

Your comment about their relatedness to dismiss IQ differentials is misleading.

"Why? Opportunities & culture."

That's likely complete BS or severely overstated. The blank slate idea is complete garbage shaped by man's desires for equality; it's hardly an observation of reality. Even mainstream scientists have begun to speak out against this to the horror of PC elites. Ashkenazi Jews are well over represented in the hard sciences, mathematics, and in Nobel Prizes. 

[Debaser11]

In fact, Jews excelled even in a German society (and in an American society) that negatively descriminated against them. Yet, in the U.S., blacks and Hispanics hardly can say the same about their group as a whole even with the reverse descrimination against whites that exists today. The Jews success is likely no accident the same reason it's not accident that blacks dominate the 100meter dash.

[Debaser11]

"-High caste, low caste. Doesn't matter."

Boy, is that ever not true. These represent breeding lines that have been isolated in some cases for over a millenium. The South Asians I know would also take issue with your claim here as well.

"South Asians have about the same amount of genetic diversity as Europeans which is less than Middle Easterners & Africans, while lower than Asians."

This is a complete nonsequitur.

[Debaser11]

why can't you just argue toe to toe with someone? I can just as easily do what you did in that email. It's not impressive. Rushton is also not the only person to have made this claim about cranium sizes. Blacks do not have larger brains on average. That is just simply false.

[Debaser11]

"Rushton was no doubt a biased racist fool who threw out big black brains and small white ones."

No doubt, eh? You just label someone a "racist" b/c you don't like their findings? That type of slander is par for the course when arguing with biological egalitarians like yourself.

[bigby1976]

Surely the discussion should be on the failure's of the IQ system as a measurement tool for genuinely measuring all the wide ranging aspects that combine to make up what it means to be intelligent in modern society. Even the creator of the IQ test made this statement "intelligence could not be described as a single score, the use of the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) as a definite statement of intellectual capability would be a serious mistake" (Binet).

[twk373]

I assume you refer to the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. Wikipedia has a reasonable article on it, but you should really head over to your university library and access the scholarly article.

[hannityforpres]

@87fg So why do blacks vote for stinkin democrats who have people like Robert KKK Byrd?

[87fg]

The Democrats were split between the liberal, progressives, and conservative Southern Democrats. Dixiecrats were racists. It does not matter what party whites were in, a vast majority hated blacks.

[hannityforpres]

@87fg And I can see why.

[ComradeMaelstrom]

Yes, MAOA gene and overly enlarged Amygdalas.

18 more sex hormones and generally more testosteron.

[mcgregor1989]

I would like to see the journal articles from which you derived those statistics, assuming, of course, that you are not making it up. But for arguments sake, let's say that you are right in that blacks are biologically different than whites in some respects. It's possible that their enlarged amygdalas and higher levels of testosterone are an effect, rather than a cause, of their aggressive or criminal behaviour.

[ComradeMaelstrom]

Google is your friend!

I believe youtube has a video addressing the MAOA gene here. No, enlarged amygdalas is not caused by environment but hereditary. You're telling me that Asian men and women has less testosteron thant white men and women and white men and women having less testosteron than black men and women, no matter where they're brought up, cross-culturally, internationally is a cause of their own biological behavior? Does this apply cross-specie as well? Where's your sources?

[hannityforpres]

@mcgregor1989 Of course the races are different ! How can you argue that? Look at Olympic sprinters, Very few whites or asians. Where there is no affirmative action, such as in sports where the only thing that counts is performance, you see huge differences. Or for instance, where intellectual power is the only factor, such as nuclear physicists....Almost all white or asian ..Very Very few blacks.

[ComradeMaelstrom]

"according to your logic"

No!

If twk373 understands the bell curve as well as I do Im sure you've just strawmaned him. The Bell curve doesn't show that every Caucasians or Europoids have a higher IQ than Negroids, but that the average Caucasian or Europoid has. This allow for exceptions to the rule such as Europoids with considerably less IQ than the average Negroid and for exceptions to the rule such as Negroids with considerably higher IQ than average Europoid. The AVERAGE is important.

[ComradeMaelstrom]

It's not the exceptions to the general trend that makes the rule.

It's the general trend that makes the rule despite of the exceptions.

Get it?

[humphriedboswell]

First of all, we are discussing a difference in AVERAGE intelligence between Negroes and whites. To say that Negroes are not on average less intelligent than whites because of the existence of Barack Obama is akin to saying that men are not on average taller than women because you can think of a woman whose stature exceeds that of the average man. Finally, Barack Obama is half white and thus not representative of the Negro ace.

[Pritzstik94]

@humphriedboswell Why the FUCK would you still call black people negroes? Dumb Fool.

[twk373]

Why did you even bother writing all of that? Stop wasting my time.

Focus! All studies that control for environmental factors show that blacks still underperform in school and on IQ tests. Cite even one contrary study.

Address that, or fuck off. I'm not going to play ring-around-the-rosie with a cookie-cutter liberal.

[twk373]

There are differences among individuals and differences among groups. Blacks, as a group, score lower on IQ tests and preform lower academically. Saying otherwise is ludicrous.

You know, I never actually claimed that IQ equals intelligence, or that blacks are "less intelligent." If you could stop being a bigoted dumbass for just a moment, you'd understand why.

[twk373]

What facts have you presented? Tell me. The only thing comment you've made that even approaches factuality is, "Intelligence cannot be measured." Of course, this is not so much fact as it is misdirection.

And maybe you've not noticed, but intelligence research has progressed just a tad in the last 90 years. Stop living in the past.

[twk373]

Yes, but it would be foolish to ignore the fact these failures are over-represented in black societies (e.g., Haiti, Africa). And of course more whites are on welfare; there are more of us. However, the percentage of blacks on welfare is larger.

[87fg]

*succeed

[twk373]

Your point being? Perhaps it's escaped your attention, but I'm discussing aggregated test scores, not cross products. The reason we have statistics is so that we can make the best possible approximations. Why do I have to spell everything out for you?

[87fg]

My point is there is no correlation between race and intelligence. It cannot be measured and if you bothered to think you would realize this. Differences are phenotypical. Genotypical differences come from the chromosomes of your parents. Your agrument lacks cogency.

[twk373]

There is a strong correlation between race and IQ / academic performance, a correlation that does not go away when you control for environmental factors. If it did go away, you'd have an argument. But it doesn't and you don't.

Why don't you actually respond to this point, instead of wasting your time and mine? Tell me, what studies control for environmental factors and show a significant reduction in the race gap? Hmm?

[twk373]

Let them continue debating. In the meantime, those of us in the real world have to deal with the enormous problems caused by black failure: crime, illegitimacy, corruption, and poverty. We also have to deal with racial taboos, racial privilege, and (of course) pay taxes that support black welfare. Sorry, but these aren't academic issues.

Also, your refusal to state your alma mater, degree, GPA, and a/s/l delegitimizes any further comments you might choose to make. Funny how that works, no?

[twk373]

It's only evidence for racism if you can prove that there are no group differences. Many have tried to prove that. All have failed: group differences remain when you control for environmental factors. I'm sorry, but if the most basic principles of statistics and logic elude you, how can you expect to be taken seriously when you babble about neuroscience and psychology? Yawn.

[87fg]

How can I take you seriously when you never finished the third grade. There is errors in statistics. Complete control of environmental factors is impossible. We are talking about the scientific method and its application to psychology.

[twk373]

Stop using absolutist terms; they make you sound boorish and out-of-touch. Error is inherent to all applied sciences; my objective as a scientist is to use the tools at my disposals (e.g., statistical analysis) to arrive at as precise an answer as is possible. Of course there are (not "is") errors. And of course complete control is not feasible.

Nevertheless, we do the best we can. And considering the subject, it's a pretty damn good job.

[twk373]

Of course, being a racist, you would prefer to not even attempt to control for environmental factors, lest your preconceived "ideals" be nipped in the bud. This way, you have an excuse: ignorance.

[twk373]

Good approximations are better than nothing. Unless you're a liberal/progressive, in which case ignorance is better than everything.

[87fg]

racism- "a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others." I have never believed in any such ideology. The fact you believe blacks as a group have low intelligence proves you have racial issues.

[twk373]

How can I be a racist when I judge everyone by the same standard? You, on the other hand, have no standards at all. Despite all evidence to the contrary, you judge that blacks are equal to whites when it comes to academic performance. This proves you are blinded by racial prejudice.

[twk373]

Fraudulent? Is that your response to everything? Just shut the fuck up.

White males? Try reading, fuckface: I explicitly noted that the Asian average is higher than the white average.

And, actually, you haven't stated a single fact. This is a first in my "discussions" with Youtube racists. Most of them can get at least one or two things right.

[twk373]

1) Blacks, on average, underperform on all metrics of intelligence or intellectual/academic aptitude. 2) Many racists explain this by arguing that blacks are handicapped by environmental factors: bad parenting, poor family structure, negative social influences, low income, sub-par schools, and so on. 3) However, studies that control for environmental factors find that blacks still underperform on all metrics of intelligence or intellectual/academic aptitude. Oh snap.

[twk373]

You are just moving the goal posts. The IQ tests we administer have been cleansed of all non-imaginary problems and biases. Your whining is insincere and dishonest in light of the herculean efforts made by progressives to neutralize the race gap.

[twk373]

You refuse to accept IQ tests, knowing that they are as scientific as they can possibly be. And your comment about Asians reflects a pathetic level of close-mindedness. How do you know that Asians only score higher because they study more? You don't, obviously. You are just making this shit up as you go along.

You final comment is a example of sun-worship. Of course we can't measure intelligence. But we can try really hard and get a good approximation. That's what science does, imbecile.

[twk373]

Stop wasting my time with truisms. Do you have something to say, or not? Also, what pseudo-science do I accept? Hmm?

[twk373]

I like how you omit "intelligence of the student" as a factor. Of course, there are no stupid people anywhere! Everyone's grasp of mathematics and logic is fundamentally equivalent! You're a laugh riot. Obviously, dimwit, all of the items you listed are issues. This is why we have "controls" and "huge sample sizes." Why don't you go google "science" and learn something? Oh, wait.

[87fg]

Even the least intelligent can learn. The gifted students will do better on tests. Here is the secret for performance: studying. You accept pseudoscience and this proves how uneducated you are.

[twk373]

Try again, failtard. No one is saying that "all blacks have low IQ." If you were really involved in a scientific discipline, you would be familiar with statistics: specifically, the normal distribution. IQ, like other characteristics, is distributed normally--the issue is that different races have different *mean* IQs; i.e., the distributions are shifted. The Asian mean is higher than the white mean, just as the black mean is lower. If you require further illumination, just ask nicely.

[twk373]

Hiding behind scientific-sounding platitudes only demonstrates that you're a racist asshat. The sample size was 120+ and it was conducted by egalitarian researchers. Either dig up another study that refutes it, or STFU. Now, I'm very reasonable about these things, and there is of course the possibility of experimental error. However, the data is corroborated by 1) all other black IQ scores, and 2) black academic underperformance. Plus I also know that there are no studies that refute it.

[87fg]

Psychology is science. IQ tests don't measure intelligence they measue the individual's ability to take tests. Scientific racism is not science it is myth. theories have to be continually tested and this theory of IQ does not.

[twk373]

So which is it, history or science? IQ test have evolved, particularly since progressives got control of academia. To claim they are "flawed" is laughably clueless, as your side as has a vested interest in rendering them culturally-neutral. (That they have succeeded is all for the best.) And, of course, IQ tests (I repeat myself) correlate very favorably with academic performance, income levels, and so on. That you aren't aware of this is surprising.

[87fg]

These were not conducted as double-blind study. The chance of making an error becomes higher when subjects are aware they are taking tests. IQ used to calculated mental age divided chronological age times one hundred. This formula was obvious wrong.

[twk373]

Are you kidding? I'm laughing so hard I can barely type. You don't need double-blind procedures for IQ tests for the same reason you don't need them in schools. Student: "I scored poorly on the SAT because I knew I was taking it!" College admissions: "You're black, so it must be true. Your application has been accepted." Take my advice: think before you post.

[twk373]

Individual grades are not the subject of this discussion, asshole. This is about the group grade. Stop wasting my time with useless attempts at misdirection.

[twk373]

And that thanks to progressive (i.e., liberal) theories, dumbass. Try to pay attention.

[twk373]

At any rate, I commend your attention to trans-racial adoption studies, most specifically the one conducted in Minnesota in which black infants were placed into upper-middle class white homes. Surprise, surprise! the blacks scored better than the black average, yet still a full standard deviation below the white control. (Yes, some of us know what a "control" is.)

Science is so racist.

[AppleSouffle]

Twk373, what's the name of the study please? Where could I find a lengthy description. Thank you.

[twk373]

@87fg

If *anything*? Really? It's the old liberal trick of begging the question. Axiom: all races have precisely the same scoring distributions on all measures of academic/intellectual performance. Therefore, all contrary data is proof that tests are "biased."

Yawn.

Well, after 50+ years of failed progressivist education-ism, it's high time we revisit the axiom. Or we could just sacrifice another generation of blacks on the bloody altar of high-minded white liberal cowardice.

[87fg]

"educationism" is not a word. I don't think you would score well on an IQ test. Intelligence is something that cannot be measured. Psychologists debated whether or not to study mental processes. Behaviorist excluded it all together.

[twk373]

Neither is "austrolpithucus aferensis," but who's counting? Anyway, no one is claiming intelligence can be measured. Nevertheless, IQ tests are our best shot at it, and it's pretty clear that they do measure something that approximates aptitude at intellectual exercises. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is very childish. Grow up, racist. At any rate, this isn't simply a matter of IQ. Black underperformance in school and college is exhaustively documented.

[twk373]

@87fg

Correct, you said something equally stupid. It is simply a fact that blacks submit tests with scores that are lower, on average, than scores submitted by whites. This has been exhaustively documented by the public school system for several generations and is not a point of dispute. However, because you (like so many others) haven't any intellectual fortitude when it comes to discussions of racial differences, you simply ignore the facts.

[87fg]

No, you just have no understanding of science. Our common evolutionary ancestor is austrolpithucus aferensis. There is no subspecies of humans, therefore racial differences are only minor. Phenotypical attributes are different between populations.

[twk373]

You understand neither logic nor science. Paleontology can only give us a cursory glance into human evolution. It tells us nothing of the minutia, and it is therefore hardly a rock on which egalitarians may build proofs. It is also a red herring, because it's perfectly obvious that the salient data are the test scores themselves. Show me a study that controls for environmental factors, (i.e., trans-racial adoption), if you dare.

[twk373]

@87fg

Political correctness, diversity, and multiculturalism are missing from his work. The data analysis clearly shows racism. Hans Eysenck never explained why he hates black people.

Sorry, but Eysenck's observations are the same observations made by the US educational system. Where do you think the data comes from?

[twk373]

@87fg

The problem here is that you don't know what you're talking about.

[twk373]

<3 u 2

[twk373]

Also, I'm arguing that, on the basis of the three points I mentioned earlier: we need to throw out the progressivist playbook on race and repudiate all the anti-white prejudices/injustices it has created. We need to realistically re-evaulate our expectations of the black community and take a serious look into how the heck we are going to deal with the problems they create.

[twk373]

Well, yes, it seems rather likely that genetics is involved. I just don't see the sense in ruling out some other non-environmental factor that we aren't aware of just yet. The human body is remarkably complicated, after all.

Anyway, the most convincing research is that done on blacks adopted into white families. Look for the Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. Bottom line: adopted blacks still scored 1 standard deviation below the white control.

[twk373]

My argument, which is not really an argument, but rather a collection of facts, is threefold. 1. Blacks underperform on every measure of socioeconomic contribution (education levels, income, etc.) and at the same time have vastly higher rates for things like crime and illegitimacy: in point of fact, blacks are a problem for white societies. 2. Every progressivist attempt over the last +50 years to fix this problem has failed.

[twk373]

3. These progressive ideologies have created serious injustices, such as the taboo on discussion of racial problems, the implicit assumption that any remotely negative portrayal of a black person is racist and immoral, the practice of affirmative action and racial quotas, the destruction of many cities, communities, and schools, the creation of the black welfare class, the promotion of the black racist subculture, and so on.

[twk373]

To what degree, if any, this is an issue of genetics is an open question. But all that really matters is agreeing that non-environmental factors (call it heredity if you like) play a significant role.

[twk373]

@mcgregor1989

Unfortunately, we can. Not on the basis of genetics, but on the basis of all the research and studies tests which demonstrate that blacks underperform even under controlled circumstances. Like it or not, intelligence has a non-environmental component.

[twk373]

@mcgregor1989

No one is claiming that there is NO environmental component to intelligence: of course there is. The trouble is with the claims that intelligence is ONLY environmental, when in fact all the evidence (especially adoption studies) contradicts this theory. There is clearly a non-environmental component to intelligence. The specifics are still an open question, but you can't deny it exists just because we haven't yet found a "smart" gene.

[mcgregor1989]

@twk373

There is a moderate correlation between IQ scores and academic performance. If you actually look ar the correlation coefficient between the latter and the former it is considerably small according to Cohen d's guidlines. That being said, I do agree with you in that IQ tests, by and large, are measuring intelligence or at least, as you said, something close to it. I think we can agree that intellectual development involves a mutual interaction between genetics and environment.

[twk373]

@mcgregor1989

I am not arguing that blacks have less intelligence because of genetics. I am not even necessarily arguing that blacks have less intelligence, although that seems rather likely. In point of fact, it is the progressives who are making the genetic argument, that blacks *are* as intelligent as whites. This is how they conclude that the black community's problems are the fault of white exploitation.

[TheTypicalGirl]

That's not a flaw. It's wholly irrelevant. You're going to have to do better than trot out this hackneyed figure I'm afraid. It derives from single polymorphisms and ignores genetic correlation structure. It also includes "junk-genes" that code for nothing. Lastly, it ignores how tiny genetic differences can result in enormous phenotypic differences.

Humans and chimpanzees are roughly 90% genetically alike using the same measurement etc. etc.

[lampost1984]

You are wrong about junk DNA coding for nothing.

They play a huge role in the development of phenotypes. Just look up epigenetics

[ComradeMaelstrom]

Actually, cats and humans are 90% genetically alike. The fruit fly (Drosophila) shares about 60% of its DNA with humans. Humans and Chimpanzees are 98,5% alike. Genome-wide variation from one human being to another can be up to 0.5% (99.5% similarity). Most people will admit there are huge differences, both physical and mental, between the sexes. Yet men and women share 99.9% of the same genes! Less difference than between the races. Using enough genetic markers and the races ARE distinct.

[TheTypicalGirl]

But, unfortunately, they do not perform better than whites from equal SES. To demand that we discover "the" gene (there are no doubt many of them) before we can ascribe racial differences to genetics is absurd. We have yet to find the genes responsible for variation in height. Therefore... we are unable to say that height has a genetic component? This is absurd obscurantism.

[mcgregor1989]

There are several theories of intelligence(sternberg's triarchic theory, gardner's multiple intelligence, cattell's crystilized vs. fluid intelligence, IQ tests )Which one is a valid measure of intelligence and how do we know? IQ tests are problematic in that they attempt to measure a complex, cogntiive concept with one number. So how can you argue that blacks, in relation to whites, are intellectually inferior when we cannot even define intelligence?Such assertions seem rather premature to me

[twk373]

@mcgregor1989

Disputing the validity IQ tests is pointless; that horse left the barn long ago. IQ correlates positively with academic performance, income, etc. You can't simply brush it aside because blacks don't score as well. The point is 1) that IQ tests seem to measure intelligence or something close to it, and 2) that whatever IQ tests measure, blacks possess less of it than whites.

[rohimbo]

Do you realize what you are saying? This argument always surprises me, it's completely meaningless.

If human beings are 99.7% genetically similar, than that .3% of DNA accounts for the entire gamut of human ability. From the most brilliant to the most stupid. From the most moral to the most wretched. The greatest athlete, to the worst athlete.

This argument doesn't explain away any of the variation in ability at all. It's completely meaningless!

[73elephants]

There were a large number of Asians (of Indian descent) living in Kenya and Uganda, who were immigrating to the UK in the early 1970s due to oppression from the African leadership in those countries.

[loadedh23]

Great video, a fascinating & brave academic.

[Manfred58]

Unquestionably the most brilliant Psychologist of his generation and perhaps of all time. I am a great fan of his work and agree with his views. Writing as one who passionately believes that all Human Beings are created equal in the sight of God, I have a serious concern about the poltically correct people who want to shout the facts down. If, for example, we simply ignore the evidence that black kids do less well in school than whites, then how exactly can we help the black kids to do better?

[strong8action]

Its pathetic how so many people approach this debate with an a priori ideology which purports that every race is the same. It is only those who critically examine the evidence who tend to acknowledge racial differences in intelligence.

[PseudoAdministrator]

It has been a month and part 2 hasn't been uploaded yet. I hope you haven't forgotten.

[AKOBADAGETHXIII]

All this time and yet the environmental stance doesn't have one shred of empirical data to support it.

It's genetic!

[jbz7890]

Thanks for posting this video.

People need to get over their silly belief that all races have the exact same intelligence levels.