Just in case someone gets confused, an orangutang has an IQ of basically zero.
54 is quite retarded, but not profoundly. A person with an IQ of 54 is about what you would expect from an average Down Syndrome person. An adult with such an IQ could learn some basic literacy and numeracy and would get along okay in an assisted living situation.
Obviously the average San doesn’t have an IQ of 54; they could not function as a society, any more than you could dump a load of people with Down Syndrome off somewhere on their own and expect them to keep themselves going. The average San has an IQ of, well, 100, like any other statistically meaningful group of people chosen essentially at random.
It makes no impact because not a one of them has ever spent enough time in the wild to know how difficult it is to survive there without training and experience.
You don’t find a lot of virulent racists among those who can truly rough it. Guys like that usually have learned their tracking/survival skilla either from local tribesmen, or from people who learned directly from local tribesmen.
It’s hard to be a virulent racist when you’ve actually carefully studied the survival methods of traditional tribes.
That kind of undercuts the whole notion that you are trying to present. Your argument depends on a lot of things holding together. One of the things you NEED to be true for your race theory to hold together is that IQ test measure something, this something is usually referred to as g g factor (psychometrics) - Wikipedia If g does not exist then IQ tests don’t do what we think they do and we have to reconsider the validity (and perhaps the utility) of IQ tests. It seems like you are narrowing what the definition of what g is supposed to measure.
I thought that they did, based on their ability to learn new skills and comprehend things.
So how do you explain the IQ gap that seems pretty well documented by NDD?
The San IQ of 54 is laughable not only because it’s so low, but because there is no IQ data on the San. The author of the book NDD quotes did not go get data about the San, he made it up. He guessed. He called it an “estimate”, based on IQ tests of regional neighbors, but even these tests were deficient.
The author, Lynn, had IQ for less than half of the countries he “evaluated”. And for most of the third world countries he did have data for, it was rather deficient- like one test of 40 students used to evaluate the whole country (and neighboring countries).
There needs to be more research into the average IQs of different countries and races. Unfortunately, there are so many taboos against doing this research that only a few men have had the courage to perform it and publish their findings.
The authors of The 10,000 Year Explosion told me they had trouble finding a publisher. Fortunately, once the book was published it received fairly positive reviews. There was not the paroxysm of hatred and anger that confronted The Bell Curve.
Even that has died down, and Charles Murray has become a respected political scientist.
Murray has published opinion pieces in The New Republic, Commentary, The Public Interest, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, National Review, and The Washington Post.[23] He has been a witness before United States congressional and senate committees and a consultant to senior Republican government officials in the United States, and conservative officials in the United Kingdom, Eastern Europe, and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).[23]
It’s refreshing to see you express your own doubts about “black intellectual inferiority”, as well as acknowledge how little evidence there is that supports your position.
The evidence that the Negro race is significantly less intelligent on the average than the white or Oriental race is overwhelming. I have posted some of it. What we need is more research on a country by country basis.
Even then, those who want to believe in the intrinsic equality of the races will reject the evidence, no matter how conclusive it is.
Because that sort of abuse is all you are capable of you are tiresome, and at odds with reality. You are obviously unable to discuss a controversial subject with facts, logic, and civility.
The evidence you’ve posted is pretty much universally weak. It’s either awful research (like Lynn’s book), or doesn’t support your argument (like education and crime stats). There is evidence that African-Americans perform more poorly in school, have lower incomes, and are over-represented (in relation to their population) in crime statistics. But there is no evidence that the “Negro race” (which doesn’t exist- biologically speaking- as we’ve conclusively demonstrated by showing that there are populations of “Negroes” which are closer, genetically, to Eurasians than to other groups of “Negroes” in Africa) is “less intelligent” than other “races”.
If there is “overwhelming” evidence out there, you’ve showed none of it. And conspicuously absent is any genetic or DNA evidence at all (that is, any genes for intelligence/dumbness/criminality being more prevalent in any population group). Zero genetic evidence for an argument about genetic propensity for certain behaviors.
Saying that may make you feel virtuous, but saying it does not make it true. I am tired of posting and re posting evidence of the intractable nature of racial differences in average ability levels and behavior. Where it the evidence that blacks behave and perform as well as whites?
I’m very capable of discussing any topic logically and rationally. You give no incentive for anyone to do so. Step back and consider this please. Ask yourself what about your behavior should give anyone reason to ask you questions or counter your arguments.
Everything I said is true. And the issue is not black “behavior and performance”. The issue, as you have stated it, is whether one “race” is genetically pre-disposed to lower intelligence and criminal behavior. You have not posted any genetic evidence for this at all. And you have failed to acknowledge that the definition of the black race you are using does not make sense in light of the genetic relationship of human populations.
Why? I think this gets to the nub of it. Personally, I don’t care even if there is a difference in average IQ between different populations because:
a) It would just be an average, with a large amount of overlap and outliers
b) The difference is not going to be on the scale of one group averaging an IQ of 54, which is itself a retarded proposition
So I don’t really get why people care so much other than to try to justify their own prejudices and tribal instincts.
And we all know in practice if you tell group A they have a higher average IQ than group B, every moron in group A will consider themselves the superior of the entire set of group B.
What I would accept as the absence of genetic evidence of racial differences would be a significantly large number of blacks, chosen more or less randomly, behaving and performing as well as whites.
