# Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 27, 2012, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236 "2012-05-27T12:28:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/461 "2012-06-08T15:11:28Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Your invective is sufficient evidence of how much you want to disbelieve the importance of genetics in making some individuals superior to others, some nations superior to others, and some races superior to others. Or, of course, his invective might simply be the result of the frustration of dealing with a poster who repeats things over and over when they have already been demonstrated to be false or who simply drops changes to claims he has made regarding his own sources when the sources fail to provide the “evidence” he claimed for them. Your claims about beneficial mutations never being reabsorbed in populations are simply a display of a really poor 10th grade understanding of evolution. Your claims that the exam system could have had an effect on an enormous population in 1300 years based on the the ability to breed animals in a shorter time displays a really poor misunderstanding of the need for rigorous culling and re-breeding, (and an avoidance of the issue of unwanted secondary characteristics from inbreeding), when animals are bred. Your embracing of Rushton, followed by your need to distance yourself from him, demonstrates the cherry-picking you need to employ to make your points. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/462 "2012-06-08T15:15:42Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Of course, the use of “Oriental” allows you to play games with your own assertions, as well. You claim, on the one hand, that there are “three” races," then you shift the claims around to talking about some imaginary “Oriental” population (the one with epicanthic folds) in an effort to limit the discussion to a much smaller sub group than your original claim about there being three “races.” You duck and weave and still fail to persuade. I have said that there are three major races: whites, Negroes, and Orientals. Together these include the vast majority of the human population. I fail to persuade you because you do not want to acknowledge the importance of genes in determining superior intelligence in individuals, and average intelligence among racial groups. You want to believe that in a perfect society, which presumably would be governed by those you like and agree with, people would be much more intelligent, and virtuous. The Soviet Union was based on the assumption that that was possible. The Soviet Union failed after demonstrating that it is not possible. Important aspects of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society failed for the same reason. It has been nearly two generations since the civil rights legislation was signed. Blacks are still characterized by the same social pathologies and inferior intellects that were used in arguments against the civil rights legislation when it was proposed. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/463 "2012-06-08T15:15:46Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > What matters is that during most of human evolution individuals who were most intelligent tended to have the largest number of descendants in every subsequent generation. That is one hypothesis…un-falsifiable and baseless but it is a hypothesis. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/464 "2012-06-08T15:18:41Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Or, of course, his invective might simply be the result of the frustration of dealing with a poster who repeats things over and over when they have already been demonstrated to be false or who simply drops changes to claims he has made regarding his own sources when the sources fail to provide the “evidence” he claimed for them. What I have thoroughly documented is that the different races differ significantly in terms of average intelligence, and rates of crime and illegitimacy. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/465 "2012-06-08T15:19:57Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Your claims about beneficial mutations never being reabsorbed in populations are simply a display of a really poor 10th grade understanding of evolution. Please explain. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/466 "2012-06-08T15:20:59Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > What I have thoroughly documented is that the different races differ significantly in terms of average intelligence, and rates of crime and illegitimacy. Ignoring the fact that you didn’t actually do this, where’s the genetic component? I’m going to continue posting what constitutes genetic evidence and requesting you provide it: > [@SDMB Bigoted Asshole Omnibus Thread](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1002): > > The definition of “race” you use is genetically invalid. But populations do have validity in genetics- so this is the evidence that I would accept: > > First, an identification of all the genes that are involved in intelligence (or at least the most important genes) and propensity for criminality, and exactly how these genes are involved (which ones of them are active when “turned on” or combined with specific other genes, and so on), and how they relate to environment and upbringing. Then detailed, broad genetic testing of various populations (not races), showing that certain populations have significantly varying numbers of these genes. Then detailed, broad surveys and testing that shows that the previous analyses have predictive power. You have a working definition of what constitutes genetic evidence. Care to provide any? ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/467 "2012-06-08T15:22:10Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Your embracing of Rushton, followed by your need to distance yourself from him, demonstrates the cherry-picking you need to employ to make your points. Because I agree with Professor Rushton on some matters does not mean that I have an obligation to agree with him on everything. I agree with him on his assertions that can be confirmed independently. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/468 "2012-06-08T15:24:44Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > Ignoring the fact that you didn’t actually do this, where’s the genetic component? > > I’m going to continue posting what constitutes genetic evidence and requesting you provide it: > > You have a working definition of what constitutes genetic evidence. > > Care to provide any? Racial characteristics that have been noticed throughout all of history can be attributed to genetics. Long before genes were discovered everyone noticed that children resembled their parents and siblings. This was because they shared genes. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/469 "2012-06-08T15:34:24Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Long before genes were discovered everyone noticed that children resembled their parents and siblings. This was because they shared genes. So, that’s a no? You don’t have any genetic studies correlating race and intelligence? While genetics gave us an explanation for why children resemble their parents, somebody had to actually go out and find those genes to prove it. The existence of the field of genetics was insufficient as actual proof (though it served as a reasonable hypothesis until then). That’s called evidence. Somebody went out and proved (NOT ASSUMED) that genes existed that shape appearance and other phenotypic variation. You have a hypothesis. Where’s the corresponding genetic evidence? What makes a genetic hypothesis better than any other hypothesis, including social and economic factors (which YOU YOURSELF already admitted can have an overwhelming effect)? Also, notice that this argument doesn’t satisfy the definition of genetic evidence already provided. > [@SDMB Bigoted Asshole Omnibus Thread](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1002): > > The definition of “race” you use is genetically invalid. But populations do have validity in genetics- so this is the evidence that I would accept: > > First, an identification of all the genes that are involved in intelligence (or at least the most important genes) and propensity for criminality, and exactly how these genes are involved (which ones of them are active when “turned on” or combined with specific other genes, and so on), and how they relate to environment and upbringing. Then detailed, broad genetic testing of various populations (not races), showing that certain populations have significantly varying numbers of these genes. Then detailed, broad surveys and testing that shows that the previous analyses have predictive power. So, where’s the study linking your definition of race (what’s the genetic basis for race?) and intelligence? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/470 "2012-06-08T15:39:36Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > I have said that there are three major races: whites, Negroes, and Orientals. Together these include the vast majority of the human population. I fail to persuade you because you do not want to acknowledge the importance of genes in determining superior intelligence in individuals, and average intelligence among racial groups. > > You want to believe that in a perfect society, which presumably would be governed by those you like and agree with, people would be much more intelligent, and virtuous. The Soviet Union was based on the assumption that that was possible. The Soviet Union failed after demonstrating that it is not possible. > > Important aspects of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society failed for the same reason. It has been nearly two generations since the civil rights legislation was signed. Blacks are still characterized by the same social pathologies and inferior intellects that were used in arguments against the civil rights legislation when it was proposed. I hope you have the fire department on hand in case that enormous straw man goes up in flames. I have made no claims regarding any “perfect society.” I have certainly never claimed that genetics plays no role in intelligence. I have made no appeals to any “perfect society.” You are simply inventing positions to attribute to me so that you can pretend that I am wishing away your purported facts. The reality is that you persistently bring false information and bad logic to the discussion and need to attack beliefs I do not hold to avoid dealing with the problems in your own presentation. Now you are back to talking about “three races” including “Orientals,” but we can easily look at your posts and note that you change the definition of “Orientals” from one of the “three races” to a limited population of people with epicanthic folds depending on what point you are trying to argue. That sort of shifting definition indicates that even you appear to realize that your claims are silly. Both Johnson’s “Great Society” and Bush’s Needy Children Left Behind programs suffered from a lot more problems that simple racial disparities. The Great Society failed as many whites as blacks, (it was never intended to help only blacks and its failures occurred in the white and Hispanic communities as much as in the black communities). NCLB was also intended to help all kids and it has also failed white and Hispanic kids as much as black kids. In each case, both programs were criticized at their inception for being the wrong thing to do and, funding and politics being what they are, even supporters of both programs criticized the ways in which the funds were cut, allocated to the wrong projects, and misspent at the ground level. Both programs can be shown to have failed in remarkable ways without ever even considering the “races” of the people they were intended to help. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/471 "2012-06-08T15:44:14Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Because I agree with Professor Rushton on some matters does not mean that I have an obligation to agree with him on everything. I agree with him on his assertions that can be confirmed independently. I have alreaday shown that you pick and choose what you claim. That you might both agree and disagree with Rushton is all very well, but you have explicitly said that the central thesis that Rushton presents is actually “extreaneous” to his work. You are simply willing to accept Rushton if he says something negative about black people while rejecting him if he is not laudatory of white people even when he is making the same statement. Morte dodging and weaving. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/472 "2012-06-08T15:44:54Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Please explain. Read the link I already provided. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/473 "2012-06-08T15:46:19Z")
What you have thoroughly demonstrated is a remarkably elastic definition of race. I’d like you to clarify some basic terms. What are the characteristics that indisputably place a person into your classification of Caucasian, Negro or Oriental? When people of different races interbreed, which of those characteristics need to be reproduced in offspring to classify the offspring as Caucasian, Negro or Oriental? Or, can you not classify a mixed-race person as Caucasian, Negro or Oriental? After how many generations of interbreeding can we reliably classify an offspring as being of one race rather than another (in other words, how long, if ever, does it take to work the genes of a mixed-race person back to where the person’s considered non-mixed)? Do you consider racial outliers (tall Orientals, blue-eyed Negroes, Caucasians with epicanthic folds, etc.) as being members of different races, or simply acceptable variations within your definition of race? Again, what types (or how proounced) of variations would move an outlier from one racial classification to another? These are just my questions on simple, visible characteristics. Perhaps I’ll have some questions later on non-visible characteristics. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/474 "2012-06-08T15:58:52Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > I explained that the imperial exam system, to which I credit the higher average IQs of Chinese, lasted for two thousand years. From [_The Problem of China_](http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13940/13940-h/13940-h.htm#CHAPTER_II) (1922), by Bertrand Russell: > [@](#): > > 1. I come now to the system of selecting officials by competitive examination, without which it is hardly likely that so literary and unsuperstitious a system as that of Confucius could have maintained its hold. The view of the modern Chinese on this subject is set forth by the present President of the Republic of China, Hsu Shi-chang, in his book on China after the War, pp. 59-60.[22] After considering the educational system under the Chou dynasty, he continues: > > > [@](#): > > > > In later periods, in spite of minor changes, the importance of moral virtues continued to be stressed upon. For instance, during the most flourishing period of Tang Dynasty (627-650 A.D.), the Imperial Academy of Learning, known as Kuo-tzu-chien, was composed of four collegiate departments, in which ethics was considered as the most important of all studies. It was said that in the Academy there were more than three thousand students who were able and virtuous in nearly all respects, while the total enrolment, including aspirants from Korea and Japan, was as high as eight thousand. At the same time, there was a system of “elections” through which able and virtuous men were recommended by different districts to the Emperor for appointment to public offices. College training and local elections supplemented each other, but in both moral virtues were given the greatest emphasis. > > > > Although the Imperial Academy exists till this day, it has never been as nourishing as during that period. For this change the introduction of the competitive examination or Ko-chü system, must be held responsible. The “election” system furnished no fixed standard for the recommendation of public service candidates, and, as a result, tended to create an aristocratic class from which alone were to be found eligible men. Consequently, the Sung Emperors (960-1277 A.D.) abolished the elections, set aside the Imperial Academy, and inaugurated the competitive examination system in their place. The examinations were to supply both scholars and practical statesmen, and they were periodically held throughout the later dynasties until the introduction of the modern educational regime. Useless and stereotyped as they were in later days, they once served some useful purpose. Besides, the ethical background of Chinese education had already been so firmly established, that, in spite of the emphasis laid by these examinations on pure literary attainments, moral teachings have survived till this day in family education and in private schools. > > Although the system of awarding Government posts for proficiency in examinations is much better than most other systems that have prevailed, such as nepotism, bribery, threats of insurrection, etc., yet the Chinese system, at any rate after it assumed its final form, was harmful through the fact that it was based solely on the classics, that it was purely literary, and that it allowed no scope whatever for originality. The system was established in its final form by the Emperor Hung Wu (1368-1398), and remained unchanged until 1905. One of the first objects of modern Chinese reformers was to get it swept away. Li Ung Bing[23] says: > > > [@](#): > > > > In spite of the many good things that may be said to the credit of Hung Wu, he will ever be remembered in connection with a form of evil which has eaten into the very heart of the nation. This was the system of triennial examinations, or rather the form of Chinese composition, called the “Essay,” or the “Eight Legs,” which, for the first time in the history of Chinese literature, was made the basis of all literary contests. It was so-named, because after the introduction of the theme the writer was required to treat it in four paragraphs, each consisting of two members, made up of an equal number of sentences and words. The theme was always chosen from either the Four Books, or the Five Classics. The writer could not express any opinion of his own, or any views at variance with those expressed by Chu Hsi and his school. All he was required to do was to put the few words of Confucius, or whomsoever it might be, into an essay in conformity with the prescribed rules. Degrees, which were to serve as passports to Government positions, were awarded the best writers. To say that the training afforded by the time required to make a man efficient in the art of such writing, would at the same time qualify him to hold the various offices under the Government, was absurd. But absurd as the whole system was, it was handed down to recent times from the third year of the reign of Hung Wu, and was not abolished until a few years ago. No system was more perfect or effective in retarding the intellectual and literary development of a nation. With her “Eight Legs,” China long ago reached the lowest point on her downhill journey. It is largely on account of the long lease of life that was granted to this rotten system that the teachings of the Sung philosophers have been so long venerated. > > These are the words of a Chinese patriot of the present day, and no doubt, as a modern system, the “Eight Legs” deserve all the hard things that he says about them. But in the fourteenth century, when one considers the practicable alternatives, one can see that there was probably much to be said for such a plan. At any rate, for good or evil, the examination system profoundly affected the civilization of China. Among its good effects were: A widely-diffused respect for learning; the possibility of doing without a hereditary aristocracy; the selection of administrators who must at least have been capable of industry; and the preservation of Chinese civilization in spite of barbarian conquest. But, like so much else in traditional China, it has had to be swept away to meet modern needs. I hope nothing of greater value will have to perish in the struggle to repel the foreign exploiters and the fierce and cruel system which they miscall civilization. Say this or that about the imperial examination system, but it was not something you’d want as an IQ test or anything like that. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/475 "2012-06-08T16:25:39Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Say this or that about the imperial examination system, but it was not something you’d want as an IQ test or anything like that. What matters is that men who passed were of superior intelligence, and that they had large number of children they were able to provide well for. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/476 "2012-06-08T17:41:49Z")
Every professor I am aware of who argues that racial differences are largely genetic is either tenured or retired. I have been told privately by college professors that presenting an original and well documented argument in favor of intrinsic racial differences is a bad career move for a graduate student who is competing for a faculty position. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/477 "2012-06-08T17:48:47Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > I have been told privately by college professors that presenting an original and well documented argument in favor of intrinsic racial differences is a bad career move for a graduate student who is competing for a faculty position. Well that’s true for any example of poor science, it’s not exclusive to poor racial intelligence science. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/478 "2012-06-08T18:02:43Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > What matters is that men who passed were of superior intelligence, and that they had large number of children they were able to provide well for. I notice that you are still implying that a few hundred graduates a year would raise the intelligence of the gene pool in a country of millions while ignoring the fact that regression to the mean would have seriously diluted the reabsorbed gene mutations. (And, frankly, you have not provided any credible evidence that the men who took the exam were really breeding at a rate that could have any effect on the majority of the populace.) You need for it to happen to support your prejudices, but you have failed to actually provide serious evidence. ETA: I notice, for example, that you avoid the effect of the plague in China that reduced the cities, (where all the “healthy” men and their children lived), in the same way that it reduced the cities in Europe, leaving mostly the poor farmers of outlying areas with no exam selection to re-populate the country. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/479 "2012-06-08T18:10:41Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Every professor I am aware of who argues that racial differences are largely genetic is either tenured or retired. I have been told privately by college professors that presenting an original and well documented argument in favor of intrinsic racial differences is a bad career move for a graduate student who is competing for a faculty position. I’ve heard proponents of the moon-landing hoax theory, or creationists, state that “presenting an original and well documented argument in favor” of moon-landing as a hoax or creationsim is a bad career move as well. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2012, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236/480 "2012-06-08T18:30:29Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > What matters is that men who passed were of superior intelligence, and that they had large number of children they were able to provide well for. You know, this was annoying, then it was funny, then I fell back into giving a shit against my better judgement, but now it’s just hilarious again. **You** : The Moon is made of cheese ! **Us** : Err, no it’s not. It’s made of rock. **You** : Julius Caesar went to the Moon and he positively identified it as gouda. This proves the Moon is made of cheese. **Us** : There is not a single record of a Roman space program in all of history. Furthermore, while the Roman Empire made many significant scientific and technological breakthroughs and pioneered many technologies, Imperial technology was still nowhere near what would be required even for simple manned flight. The first gouda cheese was pressed in Holland in 1587 in a Jesuit brothel (citation needed), and the word itself traces its etymology back to the name of a town that was founded in 532 (citation really needed, guys, I’m not even joking) many centuries after the life of Julius Caesar had ended so even had Julius Caesar been to the Moon he could not possibly have positively identified its physical structure as gouda. In 1969 the American Space Program and NASA landed a manned vehicle on the Moon for the purpose of scientific exploration and brought back roughly half a ton of rock samples. Due to the temperature, pressure and continuous meteorite impacts on its surface, as well as the various environmental conditions of outer-space, if the Moon had been made of cheese it would have pulverized and broken down into itty bitty cheesy puffs millions of years ago. **You** : Well OK, but what’s important is that the Moon is made of cheese. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/race-differences-in-average-iq-are-largely-genetic/623236.md?page=25)