Not on the MCATS, it hasn’t, where the gap is still enormous despite four years of equivalent educational opportunity. I’ve posted that link for you before but I guess you forgot.
Ditto the LSAT.
Ditto any number of post-graduate exams.
Ditto the Connecticut firefighters.
It’s fine by me if you personally choose to attribute that difference to genes; we’re all entitled to our opinions, after all.
But you enter the territory of the unscientific when you persist in falsely claiming that science definitively confirms your attribution. Hell, at this point you’ve pitched camp and built a stockade in the territory of the unscientific.
You are the one who has chosen to ignore or discount the reduction of differences while insisting that only the complete elimination of differences counts as evidence against your hypothesis. You are the one who has arbitrarily decided to equate “sincere and focused efforts” with “adequate efforts” to eliminate nurture differences. You are the one who is constantly cherry-picking the data to insist not just that your preferred hypothesis might be right, but that it must be right. And consequently, your claims are unscientific.
The “hope” issue is irrelevant to me personally, because I personally am not “opposed to this idea that genetics are responsible for the differences among us”.
I think that idea is an interesting hypothesis, and I look forward to seeing results of ongoing scientific research that will give us more information about the truth or falsity of that hypothesis. I don’t see any particular need to “hope” anything about it one way or the other.
What I am opposed to, on the other hand, is the abuse of science that you indulge in when you try to pretend that this “idea” is already scientifically established and only the silly idealists fueled by “hope” are still attempting to dispute it. That position is, not to put too fine a point on it, a lie.
Controlling for family income and/or level of parental education does not normalize for nurture, and it’s frankly ludicrous that you think it does. So long as black American culture is significantly different from white American culture, normalizing for nurture amongst black and white American subjects is virtually impossible.
At this point you’ll say that I’m making my thesis that racial IQ differences aren’t genetically based unfalsifiable, and that I’m accepting it on pure faith.
But I’m not. First, like most people arguing against you, I won’t completely rule out the possibility of genetically-based IQ differences between races, so it’s not even the case that I hold the idea of racial IQ equality to be demonstrably true. But I do think it more likely than not for the following reason: large genetically-diverse populations categorized by largely social criteria are unlikely to have any widespread genetic similarities. Where widespread genetic similarities are found, they call out for an explanation. So long as no plausible explanation is put forth for how smart European genes failed to penetrate African populations despite there being no reproductive isolation between the groups, my expectation in the absence of significant evidence is going to be that IQ differences between racial groups are likely to be cultural in origin. That’s not hope, or faith, or political correctness. It’s just the most parsimonious explanation. And of course, it might be wrong.
Finally, there have been a couple studies that really tried to isolate genetics over nurture that haven’t found any racial IQ differences - the Eyferth study of illegitimate kids of GIs in post-war Germany being the most famous. These results haven’t been widely duplicated, though, so can hardly be taken as conclusive.
OK; thanks.
I will just remind you that at the time of this study, GIs were selected for based on mental aptitude tests, so it was not a general population; it was a subpopulation already selected for with formal cognitive testing…
As to whether it’s more ludicrous to postulate that blacks are culturally underperformers in academia the world over, in every social and political system, or to propose instead that since parental education and wealth don’t explain the persistent difference–well; to each his own decision about what is more reasonable. I am still waiting for any sort of study that addresses those cultural differences instead of musing about them. I take it your opinion is that educated black parents encourage their children to underperform in school, or something?
Since there are genetic differences at the level of race, including those examples I’ve mentioned above, and since the diaspora of humans occurred out of Africa and not back into it, and since as an example proof of that there is Neandertal admixture found only in non-sub-saharan populations, I am unclear why you imply there has been “reproductive” penetration between sub-saharan blacks and whites/asians. This notion of yours is not born out by either traditional out of Africa migration theories or by genetic studies…
What reduction of differences, again? (CP, in addition to being a liar, is too cheap for a NYT subscription)
Certainly not SATs:
“Despite the small overall improvement of black SAT scores over the past 17 years, the gap between black and white scores has actually increased. In 1988 the average combined score for whites of 1036 was 189 points higher than the average score for blacks. In 2005 the gap between the average white score and the average black score had grown to 204 points.”
Certainly not massive differences in MCAT scores. And I could go on, but it would just be piling on.
Perhaps we can come to an agreement: I’ll live with “lies” I’ve posted, along with the cites to support them, and you can enjoy living in Fairytale Land, always hoping Prince Charming will come along with some actual data showing that someone, somewhere, was able to equalize black/white-asian performance differences by simply getting rid of those obvious and peskily-interfering Cultural and Social Variables.
I’m saying it is, please educate me.
I think the post to which you are replying was written tongue-in-cheek.
However, if you are looking for a broad overview of some of the controversies, many of the types of issues discussed, along with some references, are in a Wikipedia article linked here: Race and intelligence - Wikipedia
No, I’d muse that their peer groups are likely to be more different than their levels of parental encouragement. But the truth is, we don’t know. What sort of study would you propose that would allow us to examine group test results is isolation from group culture? Perhaps we should kidnap children of all races at birth and raise them in a group setting in complete isolation from our race-conscious society, just so we can assuage my liberal guilt once and for all?
Also, have you any evidence that there was no IQ gap in the US Army? Or are you just supposing that to be a likely explanation for a result that doesn’t agree with your theory? Given that an army aptitude test is generally meant to assure a minimum threshold rather than ensure group equality, I find your idea here rather hard to swallow in the absence of actual evidence.
I’ll also note that there have been a couple other similar studies done that I know of only because Wikipedia cites them. (link) These seem to also be pretty slim as evidence, as one has a very small sample size and another was testing at a very early age. Still, you wanted “even a single study” that shows no IQ gap, and here’s 3.
Chief, please seek therapy. It’s not that expensive and even a man of your collossal, Neanderthalic intellect isn’t too good for a little couch time. Maybe they’ll even prescribe you something.
While of course I’m not psychiatrist, it is beyond obvious to me that you have an unhealthy fixation with blacks and their IQ. The only way you know how to argue is to ascribe absolutist positions to your opponents, so you can create an opener to talk about The Blacks some more. In addition to your Rain-Man like fascination with the NBA, this tendency of yours is the epitome of dumb and racist and crazy. So why in the hell should anyone be persuaded by anything you have to say?
Seriously, sometimes when I get bored, I think about things you’ve written in the past and I laugh out loud. Then I feel bad, because I’m laughing at a crazy person.
Given your predictability, I already know how you are going to respond to this post. You’re going to continue to demand that I provide evidence for an argument I’ve never made. Eventually you’re going to bring up the motherfucking stupid NBA for the 6 millionth time, like a sad little retarded person who paints the walls with feces. Then you are going to, once again, make an ass out of yourself by pretending you have the slightest idea how confounders are controlled for in a practical setting (saying “normalize for nurture” over and over again doesn’t demonstrate knowledge, sorry ). And of course, you are going to talk about other people’s agendas, as if you are the objective one in this eternal debate, although your position is about as antithetical to science as religion is. And you are going to assert shit that can’t be supported with any reputable cites. But rather cop to that, you will produce some cites that do not support what you say at all. Because this is what crazy people do. They look for evidence to support a pre-conceived belief.
This is a rundown of your history on this board and it’s a forecast of everything you’re going to say and everything you are going to do here. Go talk to someone. Your behavior is bizarre.
The same way sprinters, marathon runners, and NBA players (just for you ywtf :D) aren’t selected from “their” general populations but are a sub-population selected, often self-selected, by performance testing?
CMC fnord!
You make me chuckle, too.
I’d probably just give you a big ol’ hug if you lectured me in person, b/c you are so darn cute.
I probably needed the rant, though, to help me chill out.
Thanks.
It’s not so much an obsession with relative IQs as it is an obsession with being right and forcing a point. I admit surprise no one has posted crap for evidence for a position opposite mine and yet so many posters keep talking about my position as if it is an outrage. I mean, it’s one thing to disagree with a conclusion that racial differences in intelligence and test scores are genetic because they have proved so immutable, but it’s quite another to pretend that it’s ridiculous or unsupported for me to take that position while at the same time failing to post a single worthwhile cite to the contrary.
You have an obsession with blacks and IQs. Telling yourself (and us) that this is all about you needing to prove you are right just puts you even more in the crazy column.
Aside from the ridiculousness in saying that racial disparities and test scores are immutable when the very opposite has been shown in this thread (once again I must reiterate that you are riding the delusional crazy train, please seek therapy), you seem to think proving a negative is feasible.
It’s like every other sentence that comes out of your keyboard is grammatically correct foolishness, and the fact that you can’t see that after upteenth iterations of this conversation tells me that you need some cognitive behavioral therapy or something.
Here’s an observation–in threads about race/IQ studies, you never see white guys getting all up in arms about studies showing that Asians are on average smarter than white folks. But the black folks carpool over to repeat the standard liberal douche talking points.
Like all the other untrue stuff you say, this is untrue.
Hee! That kills me.
Question for Chief Pedant and his fellow travellers:
Do you agree with this specific claim?
Your “proof” gets more and more laughable. For example, baldly stating “there is Neandertal admixture found only in non-sub-saharan populations” is completely ridiculous. There is no proof that there has ever been any Neandertal admixture with modern humans, let alone only with the “white” ones. Sure, some scientists debate the possibility of whether some Neandertals might have mated with homo sapiens and left descendants. But it’s definitely Chief Pedant’s standard operating procedure to ignore that this is a theory with no proof, and then spin it as much as possible towards his position, make up shit to elaborate on your “proof”, and then falsely assert that it’s simply “proof” that supports him.
Also, it’s ridiculous that you state that there has been no reproductive penetration between sub-saharan blacks and whites/asians just because of the out of Africa hypothesis. Assuming Out of Africa is true, that just means humans originally evolved there. It does not mean that there was never any reproductive penetration/mixture between Africans and other populations after the initial migration. Individuals and even small populations continue to move around, having sex, and spreading their genes. Gene flow has continued between Africa and the rest of the world.
Edited to add: Also, you misstate when you say that post-Out of Africa “reproductive penetration” between sub-saharan blacks and other populations has not been borne out by “genetic studies.” Off the top of my head, and IANAGeneticist, mitochondrial and Y-chromosome DNA studies most definitely have shown that many individuals who appear “white” have DNA recently linked to African populations, and many “black” individuals have DNA linked to populations elsewhere in the world. Google. the Genographic Project by the National Geographic Society to interesting info, I don’t have time to add it to this post before my edit times out.
Wrong on multiple points as well as irrelevant.
The first really blaring error is the lie that the “blacks” are “carpooling” over to express their anger. There are a couple of black posters who participate in these threads, but many black posters do not, and the overwhelming majority of the participants on both sides are white.
The issue of Asian test scores does not tend to make it into these threads, for the fairly simple reason that the majority of threads on ethnicity and race tend to focus on Africa and black Americans and pretty much ignore Asia. The threads (and the hijacks) are not started by posters wanting to discuss why Asians are so much smarter, but by posters wanting to claim that blacks are so much inferior. When the discussion is looking at who we can throw to the bottom, few people bother to pay much attention to a squabble at the top. However, on the rare occasions when Asia superbrilliance has been championed, it has met similar scorn.
To the extent that there is less uproar over the claims of Asian supremacy over Europeans, it tends to be because the gap is never claimed to be as significant, (Lynn and Vanhanen give an 8 point edge to Asians vs a 20 point deficit to Africans), and, as the overwhelming majority, whites tend to be less threatened by claims that a fairly small minority might have a small edge in average test scores. (Besides, Rushton’s screwy claims still give the white guys larger genitalia than the Asians, so that makes it all better. :p)
Recent findings suggest that Neanderthals interbred with modern humans, so were perhaps a race of humanity. To suggest that Neanderthals were less intelligent than other races smacks of racism.
Please call Chief a pinhead, bonehead, moron, fetishist or other appropriate comment to reflect his odd beliefs and odd fixations.
Chief is the one who introduced Neanderthals and their supposed superiority into this discussion. I haven’t suggested that Neanderthals were less intelligent at all.