We thought that you might be interested in this paper.
Compare poor whites to poor blacks with similar incarceration rates and see if there’s a statistical difference in IQ. I bet you won’t. Your brain tells you that when you’re on the bottom of a hierarchy you’re supposed to act the part. It’s documented neuroscience.
I’ve read more ridiculous claims in this very thread.
How are you selecting these two groups?
You are actually going to cite the work of the guys who invented “IQ” scores for countries by “averaging” neighboring countries and employing scores from tests given dozens of years ago with no controls and other tests (representing entire nations) from tests given to as few as a hundred schoolkids? These guys are outright charlatans. They make Rushton’s “big dick=low intelligence/small dick=brilliant” horseshit look like science. (Not much like science, but closer than what they have published.)
That you would accept their nonsense is silly; that you would try to pass that off as serious support for your position calls into question your entire system of beliefs.
If you’re going to make a snarky comment you’re going to have to be more clear. Are you trying to insult my mother because she’s a teacher?
Lynn had IQ tests for less than half of the countries he wrote about, and for most African countries he only had one or two tests that he “extrapolated” IQ for the whole country. He made up data. He “estimated” entire countries average IQs at mental retardation levels. His study was complete crap science.
To explain the gap in the US, African-Americans don’t need to be a race. There only needs to be some group level genetic differences between them and Whites, which there is. IIRC you’re the one who cited the study that showed African-Americans have on average 20% European ancestry.
Ya, I am going to cite them. You can huff and puff all you want but you can’t blow them away. Dozens of studies, now, have validated L and V’s national IQs (given a margin or error). And dozens of researchers are now working with them or have worked with them. Here is some cutting edge research from Black Africa.
Let’s see what your arguments are:
(1) Claim 1: Some national IQs as estimated by L&V were initially estimated from the IQs of neighboring counties.
But…
(a) Whether the method of estimating IQs was justified was investigated in the paper below. It was found to be so:
**Gelade, 2008. The Geography of IQ
This paper examines the distribution of national IQ in geographical space. When the heritability of IQ and its dependence on eco-social factors are considered from a global perspective, they suggest that the IQs of neighboring countries should be similar. Using previously published IQ data for 113 nations (Lynn, R., & Vanhanen, T., (2006). IQ and global inequality. Athens, GA: Washington Summit Publishers.) the relationship between geographical location and national IQ is formally tested using spatial statistics. It is found that as predicted, nations that are geographical neighbors have more similar IQs than nations that are far apart. National IQ varies strikingly with position around the globe; the relationship between location and national IQ is even stronger than the relationship between location and national average temperature. The findings suggest that Lynn & Vanhanen’s national IQ measures are reliable and adequately representative, and that their procedures for estimating missing national IQ scores from the scores of nearby nations are defensible. (Contains 1 table.)**
(b) In the most recent data set (2012), there is IQ data for every nation with a population > 50,00. And the correlation between the estimated IQs and the newly found national IQs is greater than 0.9.
(c) And L&V are not the only ones who have made national IQ estimates. In fact, the term “National IQ” comes from the German psychologist Heiner Rindermann. L & V’s IQs strongly correlate with the other estimates (>.9), based on the covariance of international assessment tests.
(d) Most importantly, the studies on the correlation between skin color and National IQ typically analyzed the relation between estimated National IQs and determined National IQs separately (See, for example, Templer and Arikawa (2006). The correlations have been found to be statistically indistinguishable, confirming point (a).
(2) Claim 2: Some of the national IQs were based on dated sample.
But…
(a) Whether this produced a confounding effect has already been investigated.
(See, for example, Lynn and Meisenberg (2010).
(b) And more recent data has coming, generally confirming the initial estimates. For example, in the paper below, you can see a list of all of the studies published pertaining to North Africa. Compare the most recent to the earliest scores for yourself.
Al-Shahomee, 2012. A standardisation of the Standard Progressive Matrices for adults in Libya
(3) Claim 3. Some of the National IQs are based on unrepresentative samples.
But…
(a) Many of the National IQs are based on national standardization samples, as you can see in the study cited above. And other are validated by international test results, which are themselves nationally representative (refer back to Lynn and Meisenberg (2010)), So the problem is with poor data for a subset of countries.
And a lot of that “poor” data, now, is from studies like this.
(b) But, restricting consideration to countries for which there is national standardization data and/ or for which there is international tests data, my point about a correlation between skin color and IQ would hold. For all European and most middle Eastern countries there is such data. And not only has IQ been found to correlate with color between these nations but it has been found to correlate likewise with haplogroups, even after controlling for a host of developmental factors.
nuff said.
Come on now, my brother. Proving your crackpot theories on the internet is what you care about more than anything. 
Again, SES statistically explains no more than 1/3rd of the gap by adulthood. And interestingly, Blacks whose parents are from the highest SES strata preform little to no better than Whites whose parents are from thelowest – contradicting your hypothesis.
No, he’s insulting her because she’s a *black *teacher:
Holy shit, I thought you were exaggerating until I read the wiki entry on this guy. There’s no fucking way this is real:
Hahahaa, this is fucking awesome. This guy is like the world’s greatest real-life troll. And he put this shit in a book that some poor fuckers paid for. Hahahahaha I bet Chuck has a copy.
Fucking priceless. It’s like trolling as a performance art.
What the fuck, Chuck? This is your evidence?
Wrong, wrong, wrong. There’s so much genetic diversity among black people that there’s no way to create a group called “black people” that wouldn’t also include all white people. If there’s a gene that causes *all *black people to have below-average IQ, then all white people must have it too.
I am referring to the groups called “Blacks” and “Whites” as defined in the social sciences. Typically membership is defined by self or parental or other identification or a convergence of all three. The extent to which these forms of identification correlate and correlate with genetic and genealogical markers has already been discussed.
This is both inaccurate and irrelevant. As for the latter, IQ differences are thought to be due to differences in numerous allelic frequencies. For example, two SNPs of DTNBP1 influence general cognitive ability. See here. Now check out the ancestral *frequencies *here. The beneficial alleles are more common in European than West African populations. If there are lots of similar allelic differences going in the same direction, we will have our “race” differences in g. Whatever the case, there is no reason that we couldn’t, in principle, have such differences.
The topic of this thread concerns the difference between US Blacks and Whites. Lynn’s National IQs are not directly relevant to that. That said, Lynn’s data overall has proven to be pretty robust (to a degree). Refer to my post above. As for criticism, some is justified, but others not and has been clearly ideologically motivated. Leon Kamin, for example, is a self declared Marxist who has been on the losing end of the war against mental ability testing since the 70s; he originally argued that differences *between individuals * was completely environmental.
Is there a reason you felt the need to put up the same post by Tom twice?
Did you feel Tom’s comments were so brilliant you had to quite them twice.
Also, I asked you the point of your snarky post directed at me earlier.
What was it?
Were you trying to insult her because she was a teacher or did you have some other point?
Please explain.
Translation, you’re not engaging in science, but pseudo-science.
I don’t think this is true. I believe it’s referred to as Lewontin’s Fallacy. It occurs when you look at frequency differences on areas of the genome individually instead of together. When comparing things, a clearer picture of differences will emerge as you add more areas to look at, instead of looking at just one.
Chuck has already probably made it clear that there appears to be a difference in the averages, a difference that doesn’t make it so that all black people are out of the white range. Either way, a single gene? That’s not really how intelligence researchers see the genetics of intelligence. Variations on the phrase “numerous genes of small effect” come up in discussions. As to your point about Africans and Europeans having to share certain variants, that’s not true. There are some recent mutations that aren’t at all shared. But as Chuck pointed out, what matters is frequencies.